As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2016.

Registration No. 333-

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

_____________________________

FORM S-1
REGISTRATION STATEMENT
UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

_____________________________

Rennova Health, Inc.

___________________________________

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

400 South Australian Avenue, Suite 800

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

(561) 855-1626

___________________________________

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number,
including area code, of registrant's principal executive offices)

_____________________________

Seamus Lagan

Chief Executive Officer and President

Rennova Health, Inc.

400 South Australian Avenue, Suite 800

West Palm Beach, Florida

33401 (561) 855-1626

_____________________________

(Name, address. including zip code, and telephone number,
including area code, of agent for service)

_____________________________

With a copy to:

J. Thomas Cookson, Esq.

Akerman LLP

Three Brickell City Centre, Suite 1100

Miami, Florida 33131

Tel: (305) 374-5600

_____________________________

Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to public:
As soon as practicable after this Registration Statement becomes effective.

If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933 check the following box: o

If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE

____________________

The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this Registration Statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or until the Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as the Securities and Exchange Commission, acting pursuant to Section 8(a), may determine.

The information in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed. We may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell securities, and we are not soliciting offers to buy these securities, in any state where the offer or sale is not permitted.

[●] Shares of Common Stock

We are offering [●] shares of common stock.

Our common stock is listed on The NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “RNVA.” On May 18, 2016, the last reported sale price of our common stock on The NASDAQ Capital Market was $0.60 per share.

Investing in our securities involves a high degree of risk. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page 6 of this prospectus for a discussion of information that should be considered in connection with an investment in our common stock.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

We have granted a [●]-day option to the underwriters to purchase up to an additional [●] shares of common stock solely to cover over-allotments, if any.

The underwriters expect to deliver the shares to purchasers in this offering on or about [●], 2016

___________

The date of this prospectus is [●], 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

_____________________________

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus. Neither we nor any of the underwriters have authorized anyone to provide you with information different from, or in addition to, that contained in this prospectus or any free writing prospectus prepared by or on behalf of us or to which we may have referred you in connection with this offering. We take no responsibility for, and can provide no assurance as to the reliability of, any other information that others may give you. Neither we nor any of the underwriters is making an offer to sell or seeking offers to buy these securities in any jurisdiction where, or to any person to whom, the offer or sale is not permitted. The information in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date on the front cover of this prospectus, regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or of any sale of shares of our securities, and the information in any free writing prospectus that we may provide you in connection with this offering is accurate only as of the date of that free writing prospectus. Our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects may have changed since those dates.

For investors outside the United States: We have not and the underwriters have not done anything that would permit this offering or possession or distribution of this prospectus in any jurisdiction where action for that purpose is required, other than in the United States. Persons outside the United States who come into possession of this prospectus must inform themselves about, and observe any restrictions relating to, the offering of the securities and the distribution of this prospectus outside the United States.

RISK FACTORS

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following risk factors, as well as the other information in this prospectus, including our financial statements and related notes, which are incorporated by reference in this prospectus, before deciding whether to invest in shares of our common stock. The occurrence of any of the adverse developments described in the following risk factors could materially and adversely harm our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects. In that case, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

Risks Related to this Offering

Management will have broad discretion over the use of the net proceeds received by us in this offering and may apply them to uses that do not improve our operating results or the value of your securities.

Our management will have broad discretion in the application of the net proceeds we receive in this offering, including for any of the purposes described in the section of this prospectus entitled “Use of Proceeds,” and you will not have the opportunity as part of your investment decision to assess whether our management is using the net proceeds appropriately. Because of the number and variability of factors that will determine our use of the net proceeds from this offering, their ultimate use may vary substantially from their currently intended use. The failure by our management to apply these funds effectively could result in financial losses that could have a material adverse effect on our business and cause the price of our common stock to decline. Pending their use, we may invest our net proceeds from this offering in short-term, interest-bearing securities. These investments may not yield a favorable return to our stockholders.

A substantial number of shares of common stock may be sold in the market following this offering, which may depress the market price for our common stock.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock (including shares issued upon the exercise of options, warrants and other convertible securities) in the public market following this offering could cause the market price of our common stock to decline. A substantial majority of the outstanding shares of our common stock are, and the shares of common stock sold in this offering upon issuance will be, freely tradable without restriction or further registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

Because we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future, capital appreciation, if any, will be your sole source of gain.

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock. We anticipate that we will retain our earnings, if any, for future growth and therefore do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our common stock in the future. As a result, only appreciation of the price of our common stock will provide a return to stockholders.

You may experience future dilution as a result of future equity offerings.

In order to raise additional capital, we may in the future offer additional shares of our common stock or other securities convertible into or exchangeable for our common stock. We cannot assure you that we will be able to sell shares or other securities in any other offering at a price per share that is equal to or greater than the price per share paid by investors in this offering, and investors purchasing shares or other securities in the future could have rights superior to existing stockholders. The price per share at which we sell additional shares of our common stock or other securities convertible into or exchangeable for our common stock in future transactions may be higher or lower than the price per share in this offering.

Risks Related to the Company

Although our financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, we have recently accumulated significant losses and have negative cash flows from operations, which raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern  ..

If we are unable to improve our liquidity position we may not be able to continue as a going concern. The accompanying consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result if we are unable to continue as a going concern and, therefore, be required to realize our assets and discharge our liabilities other than in the normal course of business which could cause investors to suffer the loss of all or a substantial portion of their investment.

We are currently executing on a plan of action to increase the volume of samples processed by our labs. In addition, we are executing on a plan of action to increase the number of customers for our supportive software solutions. While the results of these plans of action are encouraging, no conclusion can be drawn at this time about the ultimate efficacy of these plans of action.

In order to support our continued operation, we received $5,000,000 in proceeds from pledging certain of our accounts receivable as collateral under a prepaid forward purchase contract. We are also entitled to $2,516,028 in income tax refunds, the claim for which was filed with the IRS in early April 2016. There can be no assurance as to the timing of the receipt of the income tax refunds for which we have filed.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to achieve our business plans, raise any more required capital or secure the financing necessary to achieve our current operating plan. Our ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon our ability to successfully accomplish the plan described in the preceding paragraphs and eventually regain profitable operations.

Our common stock could be delisted from NASDAQ.

On March 16, 2016, we were notified by NASDAQ that the bid price of our common stock closed below the minimum $1.00 per share requirement for continued inclusion under Marketplace Rule 5550(a)(2) (the “Bid Price Rule”). In accordance with Marketplace Rule 5810(c)(3)(A), we have 180 calendar days to regain compliance. If at any time before the expiration of such 180-day period, the bid price of our common stock closes at $1.00 per share or more for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days, we will regain compliance with the Bid Price Rule. If we do not regain compliance prior to the expiration of such 180-day period, an additional 180 days may be granted to regain compliance so long as we meet the NASDAQ Capital Market initial listing criteria (except for the bid price requirement).

Additionally, on April 26, 2016, we were notified by NASDAQ that the stockholders’ equity balance reported on our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 fell below the $2,500,000 minimum requirement for continued listing under the Marketplace Rule 5550(b)(1) (the “Equity Rule”). As of December 31, 2015, our stockholder’s equity balance was $(1,193,799). In accordance with the Equity Rule, we have until June 10, 2016 to prepare and submit a plan to NASDAQ outlining how we intend to regain compliance. If the plan is accepted, we may be granted up to 180 calendar days from April 26, 2016 to regain compliance. There can be no guarantee that we will be able to regain compliance with the continued listing requirement of the Equity Rule or that our plan will be accepted by NASDAQ.

In the future, our common stock may fall below the NASDAQ listing requirements or we may not comply with other listing requirements, with the result being that our common stock may be delisted. If our common stock is delisted, we may list our common stock for trading over the counter. Delisting from NASDAQ could adversely affect the liquidity and price of our common stock. A determination could also then be made that our common stock is a “penny stock” which would require brokers trading in our common stock to adhere to more stringent rules and possibly result in a reduced level of trading. This could have a long-term impact on our ability to raise future capital through the sale of our common stock.

Failure to achieve and maintain effective internal controls could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Effective internal controls are necessary for us to safeguard our assets and provide reliable financial reports. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports, our operating results could be harmed. All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.

While we continue to evaluate and improve our internal controls, we are a small company with limited staff, and we cannot be certain that the measures we implement will ensure that we design, undertake and maintain adequate controls over our financial processes and reporting in the future. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could harm our operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations.

Failure to achieve and maintain an effective internal control environment could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a material adverse effect on our stock price.

Our independent registered public accounting firm has identified material weaknesses in our financial reporting process.

Our independent registered public accounting firm has identified material weaknesses in our financial reporting process. Insufficient staffing and accounting processes and procedures led to a lack of contemporaneous documentation supporting the accounting for certain transactions. Based on this material weakness in internal control over financial reporting, management concluded the Company did not maintain effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015. The Company is in the process of taking the following steps to remediate the material weakness: (i) increasing the staffing of its internal accounting department, including the addition of Chief Financial Officer with a healthcare background, (ii) engaging outside independent consultants to assist in the analysis of complex accounting transactions, and (iii) implementing enhanced documentation procedures to be followed by the internal accounting department and outside independent consultants. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully implement our plans to remediate the material weaknesses in our financial reporting process. Our failure to successfully implement our plans to remediate these material weaknesses could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations, to produce timely and reliable financial information, and to effectively prevent fraud. Additionally, such failure, or other weaknesses that we may experience in our financial reporting process or other internal controls, could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative impact on our financial condition and stock price.

Our business could be harmed from the loss or suspension of a license or imposition of a fine or penalties under, or future changes or changing interpretations of, CLIA or state laboratory licensing laws to which we are subject.

The clinical laboratory testing industry is subject to extensive federal and state regulation, and many of these statutes and regulations have not been interpreted by the courts. The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988, or CLIA, are federal regulatory standards that apply to virtually all clinical laboratories (regardless of the location, size or type of laboratory), including those operated by physicians in their offices, by requiring that they be certified by the federal government or by a federally approved accreditation agency. CLIA does not preempt state law, which in some cases may be more stringent than federal law and require additional personnel qualifications, quality control, record maintenance and proficiency testing. The sanction for failure to comply with CLIA and state requirements may be suspension, revocation or limitation of a laboratory's CLIA certificate, which is necessary to conduct business, as well as significant fines and/or criminal penalties. Twenty-three or more states have similar laws and we may be subject to similar penalties.

We cannot assure you that applicable statutes and regulations will not be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that would adversely affect our business. Potential sanctions for violation of these statutes and regulations include significant fines and the suspension or loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, compliance with future legislation could impose additional requirements on us, which may be costly.

Healthcare plans have taken steps to control the utilization and reimbursement of healthcare services, including clinical test services.

We also face efforts by non-governmental third-party payers, including healthcare plans, to reduce utilization and reimbursement for clinical testing services.

The healthcare industry has experienced a trend of consolidation among healthcare insurance plans and payers, resulting in fewer but larger insurance plans with significant bargaining power to negotiate fee arrangements with healthcare providers, including clinical testing providers. These healthcare plans, and independent physician associations, may demand that clinical testing providers accept discounted fee structures or assume all or a portion of the financial risk associated with providing testing services to their members through capped payment arrangements. In addition, some healthcare plans have been willing to limit the PPO or Point of Service (“POS”) laboratory network to only a single national laboratory to obtain improved fee-for-service pricing. There are also an increasing number of patients enrolling in consumer driven products and high deductible plans that involve greater patient cost-sharing.

The increased consolidation among healthcare plans and payers increases the potential adverse impact of ceasing to be a contracted provider with any such insurer. The Health Care Reform Law includes provisions, including ones regarding the creation of healthcare exchanges, which may encourage healthcare insurance plans to increase exclusive contracting.

We expect continuing efforts to reduce reimbursements, to impose more stringent cost controls and to reduce utilization of clinical test services. These efforts, including future changes in third-party payer rules, practices and policies, or ceasing to be a contracted provider to a healthcare plan, may have a material adverse effect on our business.

Unless we raise sufficient funds, we will not be able to succeed in our business model.

The Company has historically relied on a combination of cash generated from operations and capital raised from debt and equity sources to fund its operations, acquisitions and capital expenditures. The Company generated negative cash flow from operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2015 and for the three months ended March 31, 2016. If that trend were to continue and the Company were unable to raise sufficient capital to fund its operations through other sources, the Company’s business would experience a material adverse effect. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to raise sufficient funds to fund its operations under its current business model.

Regulation by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) of Laboratory Developed Tests (“LDTs”) and clinical laboratories may result in significant change, and our business could be adversely impacted if we fail to adapt.

High complexity, CLIA-certified laboratories, such as ours, frequently develop testing procedures to provide diagnostic results to customers.  These tests have been traditionally offered by nearly all complex laboratories for the last few decades and LDTs are subject to CMS oversight through its enforcement of CLIA.  The FDA, which regulates the development and use of medical devices, has claimed that it has regulatory authority over LDTs, but has not exercised enforcement with respect to most LDTs offered by high complexity laboratories, and not sought to require these laboratories to comply with FDA regulations regarding medical devices.  During 2010, the FDA publicly announced that it has decided to exercise regulatory authority over these LDTs, and that it plans to issue guidance to the industry regarding its regulatory approach. At that time, the FDA indicated that it would use a risk-based approach to regulation and would direct more resources to tests with wider distribution and with the highest risk of injury, but that it will be sensitive to the need to not adversely impact patient care or innovation. In September 2014, the FDA announced its framework and timetable for implementing this guidance. We cannot predict the ultimate timing or form of any such guidance or regulation or their potential impact. If adopted, such a regulatory approach by the FDA may lead to an increased regulatory burden, including additional costs and delays in introducing new tests. While the ultimate impact of the FDA's approach is unknown, it may be extensive and may result in significant change. Our failure to adapt to these changes could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Some of our operations are subject to federal and state laws prohibiting “kickbacks” and other laws designed to prohibit payments for referrals and eliminate healthcare fraud.

Federal and state anti-kickback and similar laws prohibit payment, or offers of payment, in exchange for referrals of products and services for which reimbursement may be made by Medicare or other federal and state healthcare programs. Some state laws contain similar prohibitions that apply without regard to the payer of reimbursement for the services. Under a federal statute, known as the “Stark Law” or “self-referral” prohibition, physicians, subject to certain exceptions, are prohibited from referring their Medicare or Medicaid program patients to clinical laboratories with which the physicians or their immediate family members have a financial relationship, and the laboratories are prohibited from billing for services rendered in violation of Stark Law referral prohibitions. Violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Law and Stark Law may be punished by civil and criminal penalties, and/or exclusion from participation in federal health care programs, including Medicare and Medicaid.  States may impose similar penalties. The Health Care Reform Law significantly strengthened provisions of the Federal False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback Law provisions, and other health care fraud provisions, leading to the possibility of greatly increased qui tam suits by relators for perceived violations of these laws. There can be no assurance that our activities will not come under the scrutiny of regulators and other government authorities or that our practices will not be found to violate applicable laws, rules and regulations or prompt lawsuits by private citizen “relators” under federal or state false claims laws.

Federal officials responsible for administering and enforcing the healthcare laws and regulations have made a priority of eliminating healthcare fraud. For example, the Health Care Reform Law includes significant new fraud and abuse measures, including required disclosures of financial arrangements with physician customers, lower thresholds for violations and increased potential penalties for violations. Federal funding available for combating health care fraud and abuse generally has increased. While we seek to conduct our business in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, many of the laws and regulations applicable to our business, particularly those relating to billing and reimbursement of tests and those relating to relationships with physicians, hospitals and patients, contain language that has not been interpreted by courts. We must rely on our interpretation of these laws and regulations based on the advice of our counsel and regulatory or law enforcement authorities may not agree with our interpretation of these laws and regulations and may seek to enforce legal remedies or penalties against us for violations.

From time to time we may need to change our operations, particularly pricing or billing practices, in response to changing interpretations of these laws and regulations, regulatory, or judicial determinations with respect to these laws and regulations. These occurrences, regardless of their outcome, could damage our reputation and harm important business relationships that we have with healthcare providers, payers and others. Furthermore, if a regulatory or judicial authority finds that we have not complied with applicable laws and regulations, we would be required to refund amounts that were billed and collected in violation of such laws and regulations. In addition, we may voluntarily refund amounts that were alleged to have been billed and collected in violation of applicable laws and regulations. In either case, we could suffer civil and criminal damages, fines and penalties, exclusion from participation in governmental healthcare programs and the loss of licenses, certificates and authorizations necessary to operate our business, as well as incur liabilities from third-party claims, all of which could harm our operating results and financial condition.

Moreover, regardless of the outcome, if we or physicians or other third parties with whom we do business are investigated by a regulatory or law enforcement authority we could incur substantial costs, including legal fees, and our management may be required to divert a substantial amount of time to an investigation.

To enhance compliance with applicable health care laws, and mitigate potential liability in the event of noncompliance, regulatory authorities, such as the OIG, have recommended the adoption and implementation of a comprehensive health care compliance program that generally contains the elements of an effective compliance and ethics program described in Section 8B2.1 of the United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual, and for many years the OIG has made available a model compliance program targeted to the clinical laboratory industry. In addition, certain states require that health care providers, such as clinical laboratories, that engage in substantial business under the state Medicaid program have a compliance program that generally adheres to the standards set forth in the Model Compliance Program.  Also, under the Health Care Reform Law, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, will require suppliers, such as the Company, to adopt, as a condition of Medicare participation, compliance programs that meet a core set of requirements. While we have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, healthcare compliance and ethics programs that generally incorporate the OIG's recommendations, and training our applicable employees in such compliance, having such a program can be no assurance that we will avoid any compliance issues.

We conduct our clinical laboratory testing business in a heavily regulated industry and changes in regulations or violations of regulations could, directly or indirectly, harm our operating results and financial condition.

The clinical laboratory testing industry is highly regulated and there can be no assurance that the regulatory environment in which we operate will not change significantly and adversely in the future. Areas of the regulatory environment that may affect our ability to conduct business include, without limitation:

These laws and regulations are extremely complex and in many instances, there are no significant regulatory or judicial interpretations of these laws and regulations. Any determination that we have violated these laws or regulations, or the public announcement that we are being investigated for possible violations of these laws or regulations, could harm our operating results and financial condition. In addition, a significant change in any of these laws or regulations may require us to change our business model in order to maintain compliance with these laws or regulations, which could harm our operating results and financial condition.

Failure to comply with complex federal and state laws and regulations related to submission of claims for clinical laboratory services can result in significant monetary damages and penalties and exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid Programs.

We are subject to extensive federal and state laws and regulations relating to the submission of claims for payment for clinical laboratory services, including those that relate to coverage of our services under Medicare, Medicaid and other governmental health care programs, the amounts that may be billed for our services and to whom claims for services may be submitted.

Our failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could result in our inability to receive payment for our services or result in attempts by third-party payers, such as Medicare and Medicaid, to recover payments from us that have already been made. Submission of claims in violation of certain statutory or regulatory requirements can result in penalties, including substantial civil money penalties for each item or service billed to Medicare in violation of the legal requirement, and exclusion from participation in Medicare and Medicaid. Government authorities may also assert that violations of laws and regulations related to submission or causing the submission of claims violate the federal False Claims Act (“FCA”) or other laws related to fraud and abuse, including submission of claims for services that were not medically necessary. Violations of the FCA could result in enormous economic liability. The FCA provides that all damages are trebled, and each false claim submitted is subject to a penalty of up to $11,000. For example, we could be subject to FCA liability if it was determined that the services we provided were not medically necessary and not reimbursable, particularly if it were asserted that we contributed to the physician's referrals of unnecessary services to us. It is also possible that the government could attempt to hold us liable under fraud and abuse laws for improper claims submitted by an entity for services that we performed if we were found to have knowingly participated in the arrangement that resulted in submission of the improper claims.

Changes in regulation and policies, including increasing downward pressure on health care reimbursement, may adversely affect reimbursement for diagnostic services and could have a material adverse impact on our business.

Reimbursement levels for health care services are subject to continuous and often unexpected changes in policies, and we face a variety of efforts by government payers to reduce utilization and reimbursement for diagnostic testing services. Changes in governmental reimbursement may result from statutory and regulatory changes, retroactive rate adjustments, administrative rulings, competitive bidding initiatives, and other policy changes.

The Health Care Reform Law includes two separate reductions in the reimbursement rates for our clinical laboratory services under the clinical laboratory fee schedule. First, it includes a “productivity adjustment”. Second, it includes an additional 1.75 percent reduction, the first of a series of such annual reductions effective from 2011 to 2015, which would reduce the annual Consumer Price Index-based update that would otherwise determine our reimbursement for clinical laboratory services. These reimbursement cuts could adversely affect our business.

The U.S. Congress has considered, at least yearly in conjunction with budgetary legislation, changes to the Medicare fee schedules under which we receive reimbursement. For example, currently there is no copayment or coinsurance required for clinical laboratory services. However, Congress has periodically considered imposing a 20 percent coinsurance on laboratory services. If enacted, this would require us to attempt to collect this amount from patients, although in many cases the costs of collection would exceed the amount actually received.

The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) pays laboratories on the basis of a fee schedule that is reviewed and re-calculated on an annual basis. CMS may change the fee schedule upward or downward on billing codes that we submit for reimbursement on a regular basis; our revenue and business may be adversely affected if the reimbursement rates associated with such codes are reduced. Even when reimbursement rates are not reduced, policy changes add to our costs by increasing the complexity and volume of administrative requirements. Medicaid reimbursement, which varies by state, is also subject to administrative and billing requirements and budget pressures. Recently, state budget pressures have caused states to consider several policy changes that may impact our financial condition and results of operations, such as delaying payments, reducing reimbursement, restricting coverage eligibility and service coverage, and imposing taxes on our services.

Failure to timely or accurately bill for our services could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Billing for clinical testing services is extremely complicated and is subject to extensive and non-uniform rules and administrative requirements. Depending on the billing arrangement and applicable law, we bill various payers, such as patients, insurance companies, Medicare, Medicaid, physicians, hospitals and employer groups. Changes in laws and regulations could increase the complexity and cost of our billing process. Additionally, auditing for compliance with applicable laws and regulations as well as internal compliance policies and procedures adds further cost and complexity to the billing process. Further, our billing systems require significant technology investment and, as a result of marketplace demands, we need to continually invest in our billing systems.

Missing, incomplete, or incorrect information on requisitions adds complexity to and slows the billing process, creates backlogs of unbilled requisitions, and generally increases the aging of accounts receivable and bad debt expense. Failure to timely or correctly bill may lead to our not being reimbursed for our services or an increase in the aging of our accounts receivable, which could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. Failure to comply with applicable laws relating to billing or even having to pay back amounts incorrectly billed and collected could lead to various penalties, including: (1) exclusion from participation in CMS and other government programs; (2) asset forfeitures; (3) civil and criminal fines and penalties; and (4) the loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations necessary to operate our business, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or cash flows.

There have been times when our accounts receivables have increased at a greater rate than revenue growth and, therefore, have adversely affected our cash flows from operations. We have taken steps to implement systems and processing changes intended to improve billing procedures and related collection results. We believe that we have made progress by reorganizing our accounts receivable and billing functions and that our allowance for doubtful accounts is adequate. However, we cannot assure that our ongoing assessment of accounts receivable will not result in the need for additional provisions. Such additional provisions, if implemented, could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

During the last half of 2014 and the first three quarters of 2015, the Company experienced difficulty in delivering accurate electronic submissions to third party payers. The difficulties arose from a variety of factors, including, pressure, scrutiny and requirement for additional information from payers related to toxicology services, difficulty complying with CMS’s new HCPCS codes for toxicology services, difficulty in accurately billing for internal reference lab work, and complications arising from the implementation of new billing technology. These difficulties has a significant impact on the time it takes the Company to collect its receivables and consequently on its cash flow from operations. The Company believes that these difficulties have been corrected in the fourth quarter of 2015, but there can be no assurance that CMS and other third party payers will not change their requirements resulting in further billing related difficulties.

Our operations may be adversely impacted by the effects of extreme weather conditions, natural disasters such as hurricanes and earthquakes, health pandemics, hostilities or acts of terrorism and other criminal activities.

Our operations are always subject to adverse impacts resulting from extreme weather conditions, natural disasters, health pandemics, hostilities or acts of terrorism or other criminal activities. Such events may result in a temporary decline in the number of patients who seek clinical testing services or in our employees' ability to perform their job duties. In addition, such events may temporarily interrupt our ability to transport specimens, to receive materials from our suppliers or otherwise to provide our services. The occurrence of any such event and/or a disruption of our operations as a result may adversely affect our results of operations.

Increased competition, including price competition, could have a material adverse impact on our net revenues and profitability.

We operate in a business that is characterized by intense competition. Our major competitors include large national laboratories that possess greater name recognition, larger customer bases, and significantly greater financial resources and employ substantially more personnel than we do. Many of our competitors have long established relationships. We cannot assure you that we will be able to compete successfully with such entities in the future.

The clinical laboratory business is intensely competitive both in terms of price and service. Pricing of laboratory testing services is often one of the most significant factors used by health care providers and third-party payers in selecting a laboratory. As a result of the clinical laboratory industry undergoing significant consolidation, larger clinical laboratory providers are able to increase cost efficiencies afforded by large-scale automated testing. This consolidation results in greater price competition. We may be unable to increase cost efficiencies sufficiently, if at all, and as a result, our net earnings and cash flows could be negatively impacted by such price competition. We may also face competition from companies that do not comply with existing laws or regulations or otherwise disregard compliance standards in the industry. Additionally, we may also face changes in fee schedules, competitive bidding for laboratory services or other actions or pressures reducing payment schedules as a result of increased or additional competition. Additional competition, including price competition, could have a material adverse impact on our net revenues and profitability.

Failure to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration Act and the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act, could result in fines and penalties and loss of licensure, and have a material adverse effect upon the Company's business.

The Company is subject to licensing and regulation under federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment and human health and safety, including laws and regulations relating to the handling, transportation and disposal of medical specimens, and infectious and hazardous waste materials, as well as regulations relating to the safety and health of laboratory employees. All of the Company's laboratories are subject to applicable federal and state laws and regulations relating to biohazard disposal of all laboratory specimens, and they utilize outside vendors for disposal of such specimens. In addition, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration has established extensive requirements relating to workplace safety for health care employers, including clinical laboratories, whose workers may be exposed to blood-borne pathogens such as HIV and the hepatitis B virus. These requirements, among other things, require work practice controls, protective clothing and equipment, training, medical follow-up, vaccinations and other measures designed to minimize exposure to, and transmission of, blood-borne pathogens. In addition, the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act requires, among other things, that the Company include in its safety programs the evaluation and use of emergency controls such as safety needles if found to be effective at reducing the risk of needlestick injuries in the workplace.

Failure to comply with federal, state and local laws and regulations could subject the Company to denial of the right to conduct business, fines, criminal penalties and/or other enforcement actions which would have a material adverse effect on its business. In addition, compliance with future legislation could impose additional requirements on the Company which may be costly.

Regulations requiring the use of “standard transactions” for health care services issued under HIPAA may negatively impact the Company's profitability and cash flows.

Pursuant to HIPAA, the Secretary of Health and Human Services has issued regulations designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the health care system by facilitating the electronic exchange of information in certain financial and administrative transactions while protecting the privacy and security of the information exchanged.

The HIPAA transaction standards are complex, and subject to differences in interpretation by payers. For instance, some payers may interpret the standards to require the Company to provide certain types of information, including demographic information not usually provided to the Company by physicians. As a result of inconsistent application of transaction standards by payers or the Company's inability to obtain certain billing information not usually provided to the Company by physicians, the Company could face increased costs and complexity, a temporary disruption in receipts and ongoing reductions in reimbursements and net revenues. In addition, new requirements for additional standard transactions, such as claims attachments and the ICD-10-CM Code Set, could prove technically difficult, time-consuming or expensive to implement.

Failure to maintain the security of customer-related information or compliance with security requirements could damage the Company's reputation with customers, and cause it to incur substantial additional costs and to become subject to litigation.

Pursuant to HIPAA and certain similar state laws, we must comply with comprehensive privacy and security standards with respect to the use and disclosure of protected health information. Under the HITECH amendments to HIPAA, HIPAA was expanded to require certain data breach notifications, to extend certain HIPAA privacy and security standards directly to business associates, to heighten penalties for noncompliance and to enhance enforcement efforts.

The Company receives certain personal and financial information about its customers. In addition, the Company depends upon the secure transmission of confidential information over public networks, including information permitting cashless payments. A compromise in the Company's security systems that results in customer personal information being obtained by unauthorized persons or the Company's failure to comply with security requirements for financial transactions could adversely affect the Company's reputation with its customers and others, as well as the Company's results of operations, financial condition and liquidity. It could also result in litigation against the Company or the imposition of penalties.

Failure of the Company, third party payers or physicians to comply with the ICD-10-CM Code Set and our failure to comply with other emerging electronic transmission standards could adversely affect our business.

The Company believes that it is in compliance in all material respects with the current Transactions and Code Sets Rule. The Company implemented Version 5010 of the HIPAA Transaction Standards, and believes it has fully adopted the ICD-10-CM code set. The compliance date for ICD-10-CM was October 1, 2015. Clinical laboratories are typically required to submit health care claims with diagnosis codes to third party payers. The diagnosis codes must be obtained from the ordering physician. The failure of the Company, third party payers or physicians to transition within the required timeframe could have an adverse impact on reimbursement, day's sales outstanding and cash collections.

Also, the failure of our IT systems to keep pace with technological advances may significantly reduce our revenues or increase our expenses. Public and private initiatives to create healthcare information technology ("HCIT") standards and to mandate standardized clinical coding systems for the electronic exchange of clinical information, including test orders and test results, could require costly modifications to our existing HCIT systems. While we do not expect HCIT standards to be adopted or implemented without adequate time to comply, if we fail to adopt or delay in implementing HCIT standards, we could lose customers and business opportunities.

Compliance with the HIPAA security regulations and privacy regulations may increase the Company's costs.

The HIPAA privacy and security regulations, including the expanded requirements under HITECH, establish comprehensive federal standards with respect to the use and disclosure of protected health information by health plans, healthcare providers and healthcare clearinghouses, in addition to setting standards to protect the confidentiality, integrity and security of protected health information. The regulations establish a complex regulatory framework on a variety of subjects, including:

The Company has implemented policies and procedures related to compliance with the HIPAA privacy and security regulations, as required by law. The privacy and security regulations establish a “floor” and do not supersede state laws that are more stringent. Therefore, the Company is required to comply with both federal privacy and security regulations and varying state privacy and security laws. In addition, for healthcare data transfers from other countries relating to citizens of those countries, the Company may also be required to comply with the laws of those other countries. The federal privacy regulations restrict the Company's ability to use or disclose patient identifiable laboratory data, without patient authorization, for purposes other than payment, treatment or healthcare operations (as defined by HIPAA), except for disclosures for various public policy purposes and other permitted purposes outlined in the privacy regulations. HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, provides for significant fines and other penalties for wrongful use or disclosure of protected health information in violation of the privacy and security regulations, including potential civil and criminal fines and penalties. Due to the enactment of HITECH and an increase in the amount of monetary financed penalties, government enforcement has also increased. It is not possible to predict what the extent of the impact on business will be, other than heightened scrutiny and emphasis on compliance. If the Company does not comply with existing or new laws and regulations related to protecting the privacy and security of health information it could be subject to significant monetary fines, civil penalties or criminal sanctions. In addition, other federal and state laws that protect the privacy and security of patient information may be subject to enforcement and interpretations by various governmental authorities and courts resulting in complex compliance issues. For example, the Company could incur damages under state laws pursuant to an action brought by a private party for the wrongful use or disclosure of confidential health information or other private personal information.

The clinical laboratory industry is subject to changing technology and new product introductions.

Advances in technology may lead to the development of more cost-effective technologies such as point-of-care testing equipment that can be operated by physicians or other healthcare providers in their offices or by patients themselves without requiring the services of freestanding clinical laboratories. Development of such technology and its use by the Company's customers could reduce the demand for its laboratory testing services and negatively impact its revenues.

Currently, most clinical laboratory testing is categorized as “high” or “moderate” complexity, and thereby is subject to extensive and costly regulation under CLIA. The cost of compliance with CLIA makes it impractical for most physicians to operate clinical laboratories in their offices, and other laws limit the ability of physicians to have ownership in a laboratory and to refer tests to such a laboratory. Manufacturers of laboratory equipment and test kits could seek to increase their sales by marketing point-of-care laboratory equipment to physicians and by selling test kits approved for home or physician office use to both physicians and patients. Diagnostic tests approved for home use are automatically deemed to be “waived” tests under CLIA and may be performed in physician office laboratories as well as by patients in their homes with minimal regulatory oversight. Other tests meeting certain FDA criteria also may be classified as “waived” for CLIA purposes. The FDA has regulatory responsibility over instruments, test kits, reagents and other devices used by clinical laboratories and has taken responsibility from the CDC for classifying the complexity of tests for CLIA purposes. Increased approval of “waived” test kits could lead to increased testing by physicians in their offices or by patients at home, which could affect the Company's market for laboratory testing services and negatively impact its revenues.

Health care reform and related programs (e.g. Health Insurance Exchanges), changes in government payment and reimbursement systems, or changes in payer mix, including an increase in capitated reimbursement mechanisms and evolving delivery models, could have a material adverse impact on the Company's net revenues, profitability and cash flow.

Testing services are billed to private patients, Medicare, Medicaid, commercial clients, managed care organizations (“MCOs”) and third-party insurance companies. Tests ordered by a physician may be billed to different payers depending on the medical insurance benefits of a particular patient. Most testing services are billed to a party other than the physician or other authorized person that ordered the test. Increases in the percentage of services billed to government and managed care payers could have an adverse impact on the Company's net revenues.

The various MCOs have different contracting philosophies, which are influenced by the design of the products they offer to their members. Some MCOs contract with a limited number of clinical laboratories and engage in direct negotiation of the rates reimbursed to participating laboratories. Other MCOs adopt broader networks with a largely uniform fee structure offered to all participating clinical laboratories. In addition, some MCOs have used capitation in an effort to fix the cost of laboratory testing services for their enrollees. Under a capitated reimbursement mechanism, the clinical laboratory and the managed care organization agree to a per member, per month payment to pay for all authorized laboratory tests ordered during the month by the physician for the members, regardless of the number or cost of the tests actually performed. Capitation shifts the risk of increased test utilization (and the underlying mix of testing services) to the clinical laboratory provider.

A portion of the third-party insurance fee-for-service revenues are collectible from patients in the form of deductibles, copayments and coinsurance. As patient cost-sharing increases, collectability may be impacted.

In addition, Medicare and Medicaid and private insurers have increased their efforts to control the cost, utilization and delivery of health care services, including clinical laboratory services. Measures to regulate health care delivery in general, and clinical laboratories in particular, have resulted in reduced prices, added costs and decreased test utilization for the clinical laboratory industry by increasing complexity and adding new regulatory and administrative requirements. Pursuant to legislation passed in late 2003, the percentage of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare managed care plans has increased. The percentage of Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled in Medicaid managed care plans has also increased, and is expected to continue to increase. Implementation of the Health Care Reform Law, the health care reform legislation passed in 2010, also may continue to affect coverage, reimbursement, and utilization of laboratory services, as well as administrative requirements.

The Company expects efforts to impose reduced reimbursement, more stringent payment policies and cost controls by government and other payers to continue. If the Company cannot offset additional reductions in the payments it receives for its services by reducing costs, increasing test volume and/or introducing new procedures, it could have a material adverse impact on the Company's net revenues, profitability and cash flows.

As an employer, health care reform legislation also contains numerous regulations that will require the Company to implement significant process and record keeping changes to be in compliance. These changes increase the cost of providing healthcare coverage to employees and their families. Given the limited release of regulations to guide compliance, the exact impact to employers including the Company is uncertain.

A failure to obtain and retain new customers, a loss of existing customers or material contracts, a reduction in tests ordered or specimens submitted by existing customers, or the inability to retain existing and create new relationships with health systems could impact the Company's ability to successfully grow its business.

To offset efforts by payers to reduce the cost and utilization of clinical laboratory services and to otherwise grow its business, the Company needs to obtain and retain new customers and business partners. In addition, a reduction in tests ordered or specimens submitted by existing customers, without offsetting growth in its customer base, could impact the Company's ability to successfully grow its business and could have a material adverse impact on the Company's net revenues and profitability. The Company competes primarily on the basis of the quality of testing, timeliness of test reporting, reporting and information systems, reputation in the medical community, the pricing of services and ability to employ qualified personnel. The Company's failure to successfully compete on any of these factors could result in the loss of customers and a reduction in the Company's ability to expand its customer base.

In addition, as the broader healthcare industry trend of consolidation continues, including the acquisition of physician practices by health systems, relationships with hospital-based health systems and integrated delivery networks are becoming more important. The Company's inability to create relationships with those provider systems and networks could impact its ability to successfully grow its business.

During the year ended December 31, 2015, we had a net loss of 20 customers, representing approximately $20.7 million in annual revenues. Of these losses, we had gained 10 customers representing approximately $2.5 million in annual revenues during the first nine months of 2015 and lost 30 clients representing approximately $23.2 million in annual revenues during the last quarter of 2015.

During the year ended December 31, 2014, we had a net loss of 26 customers, representing approximately $0.5 million in annual revenues.

A failure to identify and successfully close and integrate strategic acquisition targets could have a material adverse impact on the Company's business objectives and its net revenues and profitability.

Part of the Company's strategy involves deploying capital in investments that enhance the Company's business, which includes pursuing strategic acquisitions to strengthen the Company's capabilities and increase its presence in key geographic areas. Since January 1, 2013, the Company has acquired clinical laboratories in California, New Jersey and New Mexico in addition to Clinlab, Medical Mime and CollabRx. However, the Company cannot assure that it will be able to identify acquisition targets that are attractive to the Company or that are of a large enough size to have a meaningful impact on the Company's operating results. Furthermore, the successful closing and integration of a strategic acquisition entails numerous risks, including, among others:

The Company cannot assure that current or future acquisitions, if any, or any related integration efforts will be successful, or that the Company's business will not be adversely affected by any future acquisitions, including with respect to net revenues and profitability. Even if the Company is able to successfully integrate the operations of businesses that it may acquire in the future, the Company may not be able to realize the benefits that it expects from such acquisitions.

Adverse results in material litigation matters or governmental inquiries could have a material adverse effect upon the Company's business and financial condition.

The Company may become subject in the ordinary course of business to material legal action related to, among other things, intellectual property disputes, professional liability, contracts and employee-related matters, as well as inquiries and requests for information from governmental agencies and bodies and Medicare or Medicaid carriers requesting comment and/or information on allegations of billing irregularities, billing and pricing arrangements and other matters that are brought to their attention through billing audits or third parties. The healthcare industry is subject to substantial Federal and state government regulation and audit. Legal actions could result in substantial monetary damages as well as damage to the Company's reputation with customers, which could have a material adverse effect upon its business.

As a company with limited capital and human resources, we anticipate that more of management's time and attention will be diverted from our business to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements than would be the case with a company that has well established controls and procedures. This diversion of management's time and attention may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In the event we identify significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting that we cannot remediate in a timely manner, or if we are unable to receive a positive attestation from our independent registered public accounting firm with respect to our internal control over financial reporting when we are required to do so, investors and others may lose confidence in the reliability of our financial statements. If this occurs, the trading price of our common stock, if any, and ability to obtain any necessary equity or debt financing could suffer. In addition, in the event that our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to rely on our internal control over financial reporting in connection with its audit of our financial statements, and in the further event that it is unable to devise alternative procedures in order to satisfy itself as to the material accuracy of our financial statements and related disclosures, we may be unable to file our periodic reports with the SEC. This would likely have an adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock, if any, and our ability to secure any necessary additional financing, and could result in the delisting of our common stock. In such event, the liquidity of our common stock would be severely limited and the market price of our common stock would likely decline significantly.

An inability to attract and retain experienced and qualified personnel could adversely affect the Company's business.

The loss of key management personnel or the inability to attract and retain experienced and qualified employees at the Company's clinical laboratories could adversely affect the business. The success of the Company is dependent in part on the efforts of key members of its management team.

In addition, the success of the Company's clinical laboratories also depends on employing and retaining qualified and experienced laboratory professionals, including specialists, who perform clinical laboratory testing services. In the future, if competition for the services of these professionals’ increases, the Company may not be able to continue to attract and retain individuals in its markets. The Company's revenues and earnings could be adversely affected if a significant number of professionals terminate their relationship with the Company or become unable or unwilling to continue their employment.

Failure in the Company's information technology systems could significantly increase testing turn-around time or billing processes and otherwise disrupt the Company's operations or customer relationships.

The Company's laboratory operations and customer relationships depend, in part, on the continued performance of its information technology systems. Despite network security measures and other precautions, the Company’s information technology systems are potentially vulnerable to physical or electronic break-ins, computer viruses and similar disruptions. In addition, the Company is in the process of integrating the information technology systems of its recently acquired subsidiaries, and the Company may experience system failures or interruptions as a result of this process. Sustained system failures or interruption of the Company's systems in one or more of its laboratory operations could disrupt the Company's ability to process laboratory requisitions, perform testing, provide test results in a timely manner and/or bill the appropriate party. Breaches with respect to protected health information could result in violations of HIPAA and analogous state laws, and risk the imposition of significant fines and penalties. Failure of the Company's information technology systems could adversely affect the Company's business, profitability and financial condition.

A significant deterioration in the economy could negatively impact testing volumes, cash collections and the availability of credit.

The Company's operations are dependent upon ongoing demand for diagnostic testing services by patients, physicians, hospitals, MCOs, and others. A significant downturn in the economy could negatively impact the demand for diagnostic testing as well as the ability of patients and other payers to pay for services ordered. In addition, uncertainty in the credit markets could reduce the availability of credit and impact the Company's ability to meet its financing needs in the future.

Increasing health insurance premiums and co-payments or high deductible health plans may cause individuals to forgo health insurance and avoid medical attention, either of which may reduce demand for our products and services.

Health insurance premiums, co-payments and deductibles have generally increased in recent years. These increases may cause individuals to forgo health insurance, as well as medical attention. This behavior may reduce demand for testing by our laboratories.

Our business has substantial indebtedness.

We currently have, and will likely continue to have, a substantial amount of indebtedness. Our indebtedness could, among other things, make it more difficult for us to satisfy our debt obligations, require us to use a large portion of our cash flow from operations to repay and service our debt or otherwise create liquidity problems, limit our flexibility to adjust to market conditions, place us at a competitive disadvantage and expose us to interest rate fluctuations. As of March 31, 2016, we had total debt outstanding of approximately $12.3 million, $9.4 million of which is short term. In addition our capital lease obligations were approximately $3.4 million at March 31, 2016.

We expect to obtain the money to pay our expenses and pay the principal and interest on our indebtedness from cash flow from our operations and from other debt or equity offerings. Accordingly, our ability to meet our obligations depends on our future performance and capital raising activities, which will be affected by financial, business, economic and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. If our cash flow and capital resources prove inadequate to allow us to pay the principal and interest on our debt, and meet our other obligations, we could face substantial liquidity problems and might be required to dispose of material assets or operations, restructure or refinance our debt, which we may be unable to do on acceptable terms, and forego attractive business opportunities. In addition, the terms of our existing or future debt agreements may restrict us from pursuing any of these alternatives.

Hardware and software failures, delays in the operation of computer and communications systems, the failure to implement system enhancements or cyber security breaches may harm the Company.

The Company's success depends on the efficient and uninterrupted operation of its computer and communications systems. A failure of the network or data gathering procedures could impede the processing of data, delivery of databases and services, client orders and day-to-day management of the business and could result in the corruption or loss of data. While certain operations have appropriate disaster recovery plans in place, there currently are not redundant facilities everywhere to provide IT capacity in the event of a system failure. Despite any precautions the Company may take, damage from fire, floods, hurricanes, power loss, telecommunications failures, computer viruses, break-ins, cybersecurity breaches and similar events at our various computer facilities could result in interruptions in the flow of data to the servers and from the servers to clients.

In addition, any failure by the computer environment to provide required data communications capacity could result in interruptions in service. In the event of a delay in the delivery of data, the Company could be required to transfer data collection operations to an alternative provider of server hosting services. Such a transfer could result in delays in the ability to deliver products and services to clients. Additionally, significant delays in the planned delivery of system enhancements, improvements and inadequate performance of the systems once they are completed could damage the Company's reputation and harm the business. Finally, long-term disruptions in the infrastructure caused by events such as natural disasters, the outbreak of war, the escalation of hostilities, acts of terrorism (particularly involving cities in which the Company has offices) and cybersecurity breaches could adversely affect the business. Although the Company carries property and business interruption insurance, the coverage may not be adequate to compensate for all losses that may occur.

Our officers and directors will have the ability to exercise significant control over the Company.

Our officers and directors may exercise significant control over all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions. This concentration of ownership may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of the Company or forcing management to change its operating strategies, which may be to the benefit of management but not in the interest of the stockholders of the Company.

Provisions of Delaware law and our organizational documents may discourage takeovers and business combinations that our stockholders may consider in their best interests, which could negatively affect our stock price.

Provisions of Delaware law and our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of the Company or deterring tender offers for our common stock that other stockholders may consider in their best interests.

Our certificate of incorporation authorizes us to issue up to 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock in one or more different series with terms to be fixed by our board of directors. Stockholder approval is not necessary to issue preferred stock in this manner. Issuance of these shares of preferred stock could have the effect of making it more difficult and more expensive for a person or group to acquire control of us, and could effectively be used as an anti-takeover device.

Our bylaws provide for an advance notice procedure for stockholders to nominate director candidates for election or to bring business before an annual meeting of stockholders, including proposed nominations of persons for election to our board of directors, and require that special meetings of stockholders be called only by our chairman of the board, chief executive officer, president or the board pursuant to a resolution adopted by a majority of the board.

The anti-takeover provisions of Delaware law and provisions in our organizational documents may prevent our stockholders from receiving the benefit from any premium to the market price of our common stock offered by a bidder in a takeover context. Even in the absence of a takeover attempt, the existence of these provisions may adversely affect the prevailing market price of our common stock if they are viewed as discouraging takeover attempts in the future.

As a public company, we incur significant administrative workload and expenses.

As a public company with common stock listed on The NASDAQ Capital Market, we must comply with various laws, regulations and requirements, including certain provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as rules implemented by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") and The NASDAQ Stock Market. Complying with these statutes, regulations and requirements, including our public company reporting requirements, continues to occupy a significant amount of the time of our board of directors and management and involves significant accounting, legal and other expenses. We have hired, and anticipate that we will continue to hire, additional accounting personnel to handle these responsibilities, which will increase our operating costs. Furthermore, these laws, regulations and requirements could make it more difficult or more costly for us to obtain certain types of insurance, including director and officer liability insurance, and we may be forced to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.

New laws and regulations as well as changes to existing laws and regulations affecting public companies, including the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and rules adopted by the SEC and by The NASDAQ Stock Market, would likely result in increased costs to us as we respond to their requirements. We are investing resources to comply with evolving laws and regulations, and this investment may result in increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management's time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities.

We plan to use our stock to pay, to a large extent, for future acquisitions and this would be dilutive to investors.

We plan to use additional stock to pay, to a large extent, for future acquisitions, and believe that doing so will enable us to retain a greater percentage of our operating capital to pay for operations and marketing. Price and volume fluctuations in our stock might negatively impact our ability to effectively use our stock to pay for acquisitions, or could cause us to offer stock as consideration for acquisitions on terms that are not favorable to us and our stockholders. If we did resort to issuing stock in lieu of cash for acquisitions under unfavorable circumstances, it would result in increased dilution to investors.

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This prospectus and those documents incorporated by reference in the prospectus contain forward-looking statements. Statements contained in this prospectus that refer to the Company's estimated or anticipated future results are forward-looking statements that reflect current perspective of existing trends and information as of the date of this prospectus. Forward-looking statements generally will be accompanied by words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “plan,” “could,” “should,” “estimate,” “expect,” “forecast,” “outlook,” “guidance,” “intend,” “may,” “might,” “will,” “possible,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” or other similar words, phrases or expressions. Such forward-looking statements include statements about the Company's plans, objectives, expectations and intentions. It is important to note that the Company's goals and expectations are not predictions of actual performance. Actual results may differ materially from the Company's current expectations depending upon a number of factors affecting the Company's business. These risks and uncertainties include those set forth under “Risk Factors” beginning on page [ ], as well as, among others, business effects, including the effects of industry, economic or political conditions outside of the Company's control; the inherent uncertainty associated with financial projections; the anticipated size of the markets and continued demand for the Company's products and services; the impact of competitive products and pricing; and access to available financing on a timely basis and on reasonable terms. We caution you that the foregoing list of important factors that may affect future results is not exhaustive.

When relying on forward-looking statements to make decisions with respect to the Company, investors and others should carefully consider the foregoing factors and other uncertainties and potential events and read the Company's filings with the SEC, available at www.sec.gov for a discussion of these and other risks and uncertainties. The Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement, except as may be required by law. The Company qualifies all forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.

USE OF PROCEEDS

We estimate that we will receive net proceeds from this offering of approximately $[●] million, or approximately $[●] million if the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in full, after deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses.

We intend to use the net proceeds received from this offering for working capital and general corporate purposes, including continued development of software, new diagnostics processes and methodologies and paying for possible acquisitions or expansion of our business.

The expected use of net proceeds of this offering represents our current intentions based upon our present plan and business conditions. As of the date of this prospectus, we cannot specify with certainty all of the particular uses for the net proceeds to be received upon the completion of this offering. The amounts and timing of our actual use of net proceeds will vary depending on numerous factors. As a result, management will have broad discretion in the application of the net proceeds, and investors will be relying on our judgment regarding the application of the net proceeds of this offering.

From time to time, we engage in preliminary discussions and negotiations with various businesses in order to explore the possibility of an acquisition or investment. However, as of the date of this prospectus, we have not entered into any agreements or arrangements which would make an acquisition or investment probable under Rule 3-05(a) of Regulation S-X. In addition, as of the date of this prospectus, we have not entered into any agreements or arrangements for capital expenditures that would be paid for from the proceeds of this offering.

MARKET PRICE FOR COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

Market Information

Our common stock has been listed on the NASDAQ Capital Market since November 3, 2015 under the symbol “RNVA.” Prior to that date, our common stock was listed on the NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “CLRX.”

On May 18, 2016, the closing price for our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Capital Market was $0.60 per share. The following table sets forth the ranges of high and low sales prices per share of our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Capital Market for the periods indicated, as adjusted to reflect the 1-10 reverse stock split that was effective on November 2, 2015. Such quotations represent inter-dealer prices without retail markup, markdown or commission and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.

As of May 18, 2016, there were approximately 125 stockholders of record of our common stock, which excludes stockholders whose shares were held in nominee or street name by brokers.

On March 16, 2016, the Company was notified by NASDAQ that the bid price of the Company's common stock closed below the minimum $1.00 share requirement for continued inclusion under NASDAQ Rule 5550(a)(2) (the “Bid Price Rule”). In accordance with NASDAQ Rule 5810(c)(3)(A), the Company has 180 calendar days, or until September 12, 2016, to regain compliance. If at any time before September 12, 2016, the bid price of the Company's common stock closes at $1.00 per share or more for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days, the Company will regain compliance with the Bid Price Rule. If the Company does not regain compliance by September 12, 2016, an additional 180 days may be granted to regain compliance, so long as the Company meets The NASDAQ Capital Market initial listing criteria (except for the bid price requirement).

On April 26, 2016, the Company was notified by NASDAQ that the stockholders’ equity balance reported on its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 fell below the $2,500,000 minimum requirement for continued listing under the Marketplace Rule 5550(b)(1) (the “Equity Rule”). As of December 31, 2015, the Company's stockholder’s equity balance was $(1,193,799). In accordance with the Equity Rule, the Company has until June 10, 2016 to prepare and submit a plan to NASDAQ outlining how it intends to regain compliance. If the plan is accepted, the Company may be granted up to 180 calendar days from April 26, 2016 to regain compliance. There can be no guarantee that the Company will be able to regain compliance with the continued listing requirement of the Equity Rule or that our plan will be accepted by NASDAQ.

Dividend Policy

Holders of the Company's common stock are entitled to dividends when, as, and if declared by the board of directors out of funds legally available therefor. The Company does not anticipate the declaration or payment of any dividends in the foreseeable future to common stockholders. The Company had accrued a monthly dividend to the holders of the Medytox Series B Preferred Stock pursuant to the terms of the Medytox Series B Preferred Stock. Dividends of $1,627,188 and $5,010,300 were accrued during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The shares of Medytox Series B Preferred Stock were cancelled as a result of the merger in exchange for shares of Rennova Series B Preferred Stock. The holders of the Rennova Series B Preferred Stock, the Rennova Series C Preferred Stock and the Rennova Series E Preferred Stock receive dividends at the same time any dividend is paid on shares of common stock in an amount equal to the amount such holder would have received if such shares of preferred stock were converted into common stock.

The Company intends to retain earnings, if any, to finance the development and expansion of its business. Future dividend policy will be subject to the discretion of the board of directors and will be contingent upon future earnings, if any, the Company's financial condition, capital requirements, general business conditions and other factors. Therefore, there can be no assurance that any dividends of any kind will ever be paid on the Company's common stock.

CAPITALIZATION

The following table sets forth our capitalization as of March 31, 2016:

The number of shares of our common stock to be outstanding after this offering is based on [●] shares of our common stock outstanding as of [●], 2016 and excludes as of such date:

DILUTION

If you invest in our common stock in this offering, your ownership interest will be diluted to the extent of the difference between the public offering price per share of our common stock in this offering and the as adjusted net tangible book value per share immediately after this offering. We calculate net tangible book value per share by dividing our net tangible book value, which is tangible assets less total liabilities less debt discounts, by the number of outstanding shares of our common stock as of March 31, 2016. Our historical net tangible book value as of March 31, 2016, was approximately $(5.4) million, or $0.37) per share of our common stock.

Dilution per share to new investors is determined by subtracting pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share after this offering from the public offering price per share paid by new investors. The following table illustrates this dilution:

The following table illustrates the per share dilution (unaudited):

If the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in full, the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value will increase $[●], representing an immediate dilution of $[●].

The number of shares of our common stock to be outstanding after this offering is based on [●] shares of our common stock outstanding as of [●], 2016 and excludes as of such date:

BUSINESS

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with our financial statements and related notes incorporated by reference in this prospectus. This discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. The actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including those set forth under “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this prospectus. See “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

We are a provider of diagnostics and supportive software solutions to healthcare providers. Through continued research and development of our diagnostics testing services and an ever-expanding group of strategic and interoperable software solutions that work in unison to empower customers, we aspire to create an efficient, effective single source solution and service for healthcare providers, their patients and individuals. We believe that our approach will benefit from a more sustainable relationship and the capture of multiple revenue streams from the same customer.

Our Services

Rennova is a healthcare enterprise that delivers products and services including laboratory diagnostics, healthcare technology solutions, and revenue cycle management and intends to provide financial services, to medical providers.

Its principal line of business to date is clinical laboratory blood and urine testing services, with a particular emphasis in the provision of urine drug toxicology testing to physicians, clinics and rehabilitation facilities in the United States. Testing services to rehabilitation facilities represented over 90% of the Company’s revenues for the years ended December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, [and for the three months ended March 31, 2016], respectively. Rennova understands the challenges faced by today’s healthcare providers to adopt paper free and interoperable systems and in response to market demand for solutions, has responded strategically by expanding our offering of services to include a full suite of clinical laboratory services. The drug and alcohol rehabilitation and pain management sectors provide an existing and sizable target market, where the need for our services already exists and opportunity is being created by a continued secular growth and need for compliance.

We have recently added genetic testing, specifically pharmacogenetic testing, to our menu of services. Genetic testing represents the most rapidly expanding segment of the diagnostics market worldwide. Growing incidence of genetic diseases present new opportunities for genetic testing. The global market for genetic testing is forecast to reach $2.2 billion by 2017. Increasing knowledge about the potential benefits of genetic testing is one of the prime reasons for the growth of the market. Advancements in the genetic testing space, an aging population and a subsequent rise in the number of chronic diseases, and increasing incidence of cancer cases are the other factors propelling growth in the genetic testing market.

Primary revenue generating activity in this market revolves around DNA profiling aimed at better understanding the predisposition for diseases and possible adverse reactions that may occur with available and/or under clinical development, drugs. Rising importance of early infection detection and prevention together with growing demand of DNA tests in pharmacogenomics or cancer genetic testing is a significant factor responsible for the anticipated growth.

The Company owns and operates the following products and services, to support its business objectives and to enable it to offer the services to its customers:

Medytox Diagnostics

Through five CLIA certified clinical laboratories across the United States, Rennova offers toxicology, clinical pharmacogenetics and esoteric testing. Rennova seeks to provide these testing services with superior logistics and specimen integrity, competitive turn-around times and unparalleled customer service.

Advantage software

Advantage is a proprietary HIPAA compliant software developed to eliminate the need for paper requisitions by providing an easy to use and efficient web-based system that lets you securely place lab orders, track samples and view test reports in real time, all with a few simple clicks from any web-enabled laptop, notepad or smart phone.

Clinlab

A customized web-enabled laboratory information management solution that scales from small physician-operated labs to large clinical reference laboratories.

Medical Mime

Medical Mime offers an optimized Electronic Health Record (“EHR”) for substance abuse and behavioral health providers, a dictation-based ambulatory EHR for physician practices and advanced transcription services.

CollabRx

CollabRx offers interpretation and decision support solutions that enhance cancer diagnoses and treatment through actionable data analytics and reporting for oncologists and their patients.

Medical Billing Choices (“MBC”)

MBC enhances revenue cycle management by utilizing tools designed to improve documentation and collect information, driving faster reimbursement with fewer denied claims.

Platinum Financial Solutions

Platinum Financial Solutions seeks to provide financial solutions in the form of loans to physician practices collateralized by their accounts receivable or through the acquisition of their qualifying accounts receivable at a discounted value. 

Recent Events

On March 18, 2014, the Company, pursuant to a stock purchase agreement, purchased all of the outstanding stock of Clinlab, Inc. (“Clinlab”). Clinlab develops and markets laboratory information management systems.

On May 9, 2014, the Company formed Medical Mime, Inc. (“Mime”), a Florida corporation, as a wholly-owned subsidiary. On May 23, 2014, Mime purchased certain net assets, primarily consisting of software, of GlobalOne Information Technologies, LLC (“GlobalOne”). GlobalOne developed software and provided services for the Electronic Records Management (“ERM”) segment of the medical industry.

On August 26, 2014, the Company purchased all of the outstanding stock of Epinex Diagnostics Laboratories, Inc. (“Epinex”), a California corporation. Epinex is a clinical laboratory in Tustin, California.

On June 1, 2015, the Company entered into a convertible loan and security agreement with Epinex Diagnostics, Inc., pursuant to which the Company agreed to provide advances to Epinex Diagnostics, Inc. of up to $637, 210. Under the agreement, the Company is entitled to 15% annual interest on the advances.

On November 2, 2015, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of April 15, 2015, by and among CollabRx, Inc. (“CollabRx”), CollabRx Merger Sub, Inc. (“Merger Sub”), a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of CollabRx formed for the purpose of the merger, and Medytox Solutions, Inc. (“Medytox”), Merger Sub merged with and into Medytox, with Medytox as the surviving company and a direct, wholly-owned subsidiary of CollabRx (the “Merger”). Prior to closing, the Company amended its certificate of incorporation to effect a 1-for-10 reverse stock split and to change its name to Rennova Health, Inc. In connection with the Merger, (i) each share of common stock of Medytox was converted into the right to receive 0.4096377408003329 shares of common stock of the Company, (ii) each share of Series B Preferred Stock of Medytox was converted into the right to receive one share of a newly-authorized Series B Convertible Preferred Stock of the Company, and (iii) each share of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock of Medytox was converted into the right to receive one share of a newly-authorized Series E Convertible Preferred Stock of the Company. This transaction was accounted for as a reverse merger in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Policies.

Holders of Company equity prior to the closing of the Merger (including all outstanding Company common stock and all restricted stock units, options and warrants exercisable for shares of Company common stock) held 10% of the Company's common stock immediately following the closing of the Merger, and holders of Medytox equity prior to the closing of the Merger (including all outstanding Medytox common stock and all outstanding options exercisable for shares of Medytox common stock, but less certain options that were cancelled upon the closing pursuant to agreements between Medytox and such optionees) held 90% of the Company's common stock immediately following the closing of the Merger, in each case on a fully diluted basis, provided, however, outstanding shares of the newly designated Series B Convertible Preferred Stock and Series E Convertible Preferred Stock, certain outstanding convertible promissory notes exercisable for Company common stock after the closing and certain option grants expected to be made following the closing of the Merger are excluded from such ownership percentages.

On November 3, 2015, the common stock of Rennova Health, Inc. commenced trading on the NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “RNVA.” Prior to that date, our common stock was listed on the NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “CLRX.” Immediately after the consummation of the Merger, the Company had 13,750,010 shares of common stock, 5,000 shares of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock and 45,000 shares of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock issued and outstanding.

On December 30, 2015, the Company issued common stock, Preferred Stock and warrants in a public offering. The offering raised approximately $10 million in gross proceeds.

On March 16, 2016, the Company was notified by NASDAQ that the bid price of the Company's common stock closed below the minimum $1.00 share requirement for continued inclusion under NASDAQ Rule 5550(a)(2) (the “Bid Price Rule”). In accordance with NASDAQ Rule 5810(c)(3)(A), the Company has 180 calendar days, or until September 12, 2016, to regain compliance. If at any time before September 12, 2016, the bid price of the Company's common stock closes at $1.00 per share or more for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days, the Company will regain compliance with the Bid Price Rule. If the Company does not regain compliance by September 12, 2016, an additional 180 days may be granted to regain compliance, so long as the Company meets The NASDAQ Capital Market initial listing criteria (except for the bid price requirement).

On March 31, 2016, the Company entered into an agreement to pledge certain of its accounts receivable as collateral against a prepaid forward purchase contract. The receivables had an estimated collectable value of $8,700,000 and have been adjusted down to approximately $4,300,000 in our books and records. The consideration received was $5,000,000. In exchange for the consideration received, the counterparty received the right to: (i) a 20% per annum investment return from the Company on the consideration, with a minimum repayment term of six months and minimum return of $500,000, (ii) all payments recovered from the accounts receivable up to $5,250,000, if paid in full within six months, or $5,500,000, if not paid in full within six months, and (iii) 20% of all payments of the accounts receivable in excess of amounts received in (i) and (ii). On March 31, 2017, to the extent that the counterparty has not been paid $6,000,000, the Company is required to pay the difference. Christopher Diamantis, a director of the Company, guaranteed the Company's payment obligation of up to $6,000,000. For providing the guarantee, and to the extent that the counterparty receives amounts payable under clause (ii) above exceeding $5,000,000, Mr. Diamantis will be paid a fee by the counterparty equal to the amount by which the amount received under clause (ii) above exceeds $5,000,000 ($250,000 or $500,000, depending on the timing of payment).

On April 26, 2016, the Company was notified by NASDAQ that the stockholders’ equity balance reported on its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 fell below the $2,500,000 minimum requirement for continued listing under the Marketplace Rule 5550(b)(1) (the “Equity Rule”). As of December 31, 2015, the Company's stockholder’s equity balance was $(1,193,799). In accordance with the Equity Rule, the Company has until June 10, 2016 to prepare and submit a plan to NASDAQ outlining how it intends to regain compliance. If the plan is accepted, the Company may be granted up to 180 calendar days from April 26, 2016 to regain compliance. There can be no guarantee that the Company will be able to regain compliance with the continued listing requirement of the Equity Rule or that our plan will be accepted by NASDAQ.

On May 16, 2016, after review and consideration of the impact of the errors described below, the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors, after consultation with Green & Company, CPAs, the Company's independent registered public accounting firm, concluded that the Company's financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 (“2015 Financial Statements”), could no longer be relied upon as being in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles. Accordingly, the Company restated the 2015 Financial Statements.

The Company has determined that it did not correctly record, as of December 31, 2015, $1.2 million in stock issued to its financial adviser related to the Merger as of December 31, 2015 and incorrectly recorded $0.5 million in general and administrative costs related to the Merger that should have increased goodwill related to the Merger. Correction of these errors had the following effects on the Company’s 2015 Financial Statements:

As a result, the Company filed a Form 10-K/A on May 17, 2016 with the Securities and Exchange Commission reflecting such changes.

Business Strategy

Rennova is a provider of diagnostics and supportive software solutions to healthcare providers. Through continued research and development of our diagnostics testing services and an ever-expanding group of strategic and interoperable software solutions that work in unison to empower customers, we aspire to create an efficient, effective single source solution and service for healthcare providers, their patients and individuals. We believe that our approach will benefit from a more sustainable relationship and the capture of multiple revenue streams from the same customer.

To date, we have specialized in providing urine and blood drug toxicology and pain medication testing to physicians, clinics and rehabilitation facilities in the United States. We intend to grow through the acquisition and/or formation of additional laboratory testing facilities and related businesses in the United States.

The Company operates in three segments: 1) clinical laboratory operations, 2) supportive software solutions and 3) decision support and informatics operations. See Note 15, “Segment Reporting,” of the Consolidated Financial Statements for information about our segments.

Clinical Laboratory Operations

The Company has five clinical laboratories, which are wholly owned by our subsidiary, Medytox Diagnostics, Inc. (“MDI”), as follows:

Biohealth Medical Laboratory, Inc. (“Biohealth”): MDI acquired 50.5% ownership of this clinical laboratory specializing in testing blood specimens for alcohol and drugs on December 7, 2012 and the remaining 49.5% on March 31, 2015. The initial agreement allowed MDI to retain all revenues. The Company has acquired and provided additional equipment in order to allow Biohealth to test urine for drugs and medication monitoring. The lab is fully-accredited and licensed. Operations began in the fourth quarter of 2012.

Alethea Laboratories, Inc. (“Alethea”): MDI acquired 100% ownership of Alethea on January 1, 2013. Althea operates a licensed clinical lab in Las Cruces, New Mexico and is an enrolled Medicare provider. The Company secured new and larger premises for Alethea and relocated the operations of Alethea into these new premises in the first quarter of 2014 increasing the area being utilized from approximately 3,000 square feet to over 7,500 square feet. The Company has in the first quarter of 2015 secured an additional 2,500 square feet taking the total area used to approximately 10,000 square feet. The Company is acquiring and providing additional equipment in order to allow Alethea to test urine for drugs and medication monitoring. Operations at Alethea began in the first quarter of 2014.

International Technologies, LLC (“Intl Tech”): MDI acquired 100% ownership of Intl Tech on April 4, 2013. Intl Tech operates a licensed clinical lab in Waldwick, New Jersey and is an enrolled Medicare provider. The Company is acquiring and providing additional equipment in order to allow Intl Tech to test urine for drugs and medication monitoring. Operations at Intl Tech began in the first quarter of 2014.

EPIC Reference Labs, Inc. (“EPIC”): MDI formed EPIC as a wholly-owned subsidiary on January 29, 2013 to provide reference, confirmation and clinical testing services. The Company acquired necessary equipment and licenses in order to allow EPIC to test urine for drugs and medication monitoring. Operations at EPIC began in January 2014 using approximately 2,500 square feet and the premises has since been expanded to occupy approximately 12,500 square feet of a purpose built facility.

Epinex Diagnostics Laboratories, Inc. (“EDL”): MDI acquired 100% ownership of EDL on May 23, 2014. EDL is a clinical laboratory in Tustin, California. The Company has renovated the existing area to include approximately 5,000 square feet of space and has provided additional lab equipment to allow EDL to test urine for drugs and medication monitoring. EDL began operations in February 2015.

Supportive Software Solutions

The Company has six subsidiaries that provide supportive services, primarily to its clinical laboratories and corporate operations and to a lesser but increasing extent, third party customers.

Medytox Medical Marketing & Sales, Inc. (“MMMS”): MMMS was formed on March 9, 2013 as a wholly-owned subsidiary to provide marketing, sales, and customer service exclusively for our clinical laboratories.

Medical Billing Choices, Inc. (“MBC”): MBC was acquired by the Company on August 22, 2011. MBC is our in-house billing company which compiles and sends invoices to our customers (primarily insurance companies, Medicaid, Medicare, and Preferred Provider Organizations (“PPOs”)), for reimbursement. MBC also provides such billing services for select outside third-party companies.

Health Technologies Solutions, Inc. (“HTS”): HTS is a wholly-owned subsidiary that provides information technology and software solutions to our subsidiaries and outside medical service providers.

Clinlab, Inc. (“Clinlab”): Clinlab was acquired by the Company on March 18, 2014. Clinlab develops and markets laboratory information management systems (“LIS”). Clinlab has installed its LIS into the Company’s laboratories to create a uniform LIS platform throughout the Company’s labs.

Medical Mime, Inc. (“Mime”): Mime was formed on May 9, 2014 as a wholly-owned subsidiary that specializes in electronic health records (EHR) initially targeting the rehab marketplace.

Platinum Financial Solutions, Ltd (“PFS”): PFS has been formed as a 100% owned foreign subsidiary of the Company to investigate and pursue the opportunity of providing financial solutions, including factoring and accounts receivables’ financing in the healthcare sector. PFS has a Florida subsidiary, Platinum Financial Solutions, LLC, through which it may do business with U.S. based customers.

Decision Support and Informatics Operations

CollabRx, Inc. (“CollabRx”): CollabRx was acquired by the Company on November 2, 2015 via reverse merger as discussed above. CollabRx develops and markets medical information and clinical decision support products and services intended to set a standard for the clinical interpretation of genomics-based, precision medicine.

Marketing Strategy

Rennova provides a suite of products and services to the medical services sector. We market a single source for multiple business solutions that serve the medical services industry. We have invested in a professional sales team, an admirable client services team and cutting-edge proprietary technologies to better serve the needs of the modern-day medical provider. The Company intends to expand from its acquisition and subsequent integration of businesses, into a robust business model providing an extensive range of services to medical providers that demonstrate improved patient care and outcomes.

Competition

The Company competes in a fragmented industry split between independently-owned and physician-owned laboratories. There are three predominant players in the industry that operate as full-service clinical laboratories (processing blood, urine and other tissue). In addition, the competition ranges from smaller privately-owned laboratories (3-6 employees) to large publicly-traded laboratories with significant market capitalizations.

Governmental Regulation

General

The clinical laboratory industry is subject to significant governmental laws and regulations at the federal, state and local levels. As described below, these laws and regulations concern licensure and operation of clinical laboratories, claim submission and payment for laboratory services, health care fraud and abuse, security, privacy and confidentiality of health information, quality and environmental and occupational safety.

Regulation of Clinical Laboratories

The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (“CLIA”) are regulations that include federal standards applicable to all U.S. facilities or sites that test human specimens for health assessment or to diagnose, prevent, or treat disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”), in partnership with the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) and the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), supports the CLIA program and clinical laboratory quality. CLIA requires that all clinical laboratories meet quality assurance, quality control and personnel standards. Laboratories also must undergo proficiency testing and are subject to inspections.

Standards for testing under CLIA are based on the complexity of the tests performed by the laboratory, with tests classified as “high complexity,” “moderate complexity,” or “waived.” Laboratories performing high complexity testing are required to meet more stringent requirements than moderate complexity laboratories. Laboratories performing only waived tests, which are tests determined by the FDA to have a low potential for error and requiring little oversight, may apply for a certificate of waiver exempting them from most of the requirements of CLIA. All Company facilities hold CLIA certificates to perform high complexity testing. The sanctions for failure to comply with CLIA requirements include suspension, revocation or limitation of a laboratory's CLIA certificate, which is necessary to conduct business, cancellation or suspension of the laboratory's approval to receive Medicare and/or Medicaid reimbursement, as well as significant fines and/or criminal penalties. The loss or suspension of a CLIA certification, imposition of a fine or other penalties, or future changes in the CLIA law or regulations (or interpretation of the law or regulations) could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

In addition to compliance with the federal regulations, the Company is also subject to state and local laboratory regulation. CLIA provides that a state may adopt laboratory regulations different from or more stringent than those contained in Federal law. There are approximately 23 states with state licensure or permit requirements for an independent lab facility physically located within the state. State laws may require that laboratory personnel meet certain qualifications, specify certain quality controls, or require maintenance of certain records. There are, for example, 16 states (including California and Florida) that have even more stringent requirements with which lab personnel must comply to obtain state licensure or a certificate of qualification.

The Company believes that it is in compliance with all applicable laboratory requirements. The Company's laboratories have continuing programs to ensure that their operations meet all such regulatory requirements, but no assurances can be given that the Company's laboratories will pass all future licensure or certification inspections. The Company has implemented the position of Chief Compliance Officer with supporting staff, including staff specifically for licensing, credentialing and certification inspection purposes. We embrace compliance as an integral part of our culture and we consistently promote that culture of ethics and integrity.

The FDA has regulatory responsibility over instruments, test kits, reagents and other devices used by clinical laboratories. The FDA has issued draft guidance regarding FDA regulation of laboratory-developed tests. There are many pending regulatory and legislative proposals that would increase general FDA oversight of clinical laboratories and laboratory-developed tests. The outcome and ultimate impact of such proposals on the business is difficult to predict at this time. Our point of collection testing devices are regulated by the FDA. The FDA has authority to take various administrative and legal actions for non-compliance, such as fines, product suspension, warning letters, injunctions and other civil and criminal sanctions. We make every good faith effort to exercise proactive monitoring and review of pending legislation and regulatory action.

Payment for Clinical Laboratory Services

In each of 2015 and 2014, [and for the three months ended March 31, 2016], the Company derived less than 10% of its net sales directly from the Medicare and Medicaid programs. In addition, the Company's other business depends significantly on continued participation in these programs and in other government healthcare programs, in part because clients often want a single laboratory to perform all of their testing services. In recent years, both governmental and private sector payers have made efforts to contain or reduce health care costs, including reducing reimbursement for clinical laboratory services.

Reimbursement under the Medicare program for clinical diagnostic laboratory services is subject to a clinical laboratory fee schedule that sets the maximum amount payable in each Medicare carrier's jurisdiction. This clinical laboratory fee schedule is updated annually. Laboratories bill the program directly for covered tests performed on behalf of Medicare beneficiaries. State Medicaid programs are prohibited from paying more than the Medicare fee schedule limit for clinical laboratory services furnished to Medicaid recipients.

Payment under the Medicare fee schedule has been limited from year to year by Congressional action, including imposition of national limitation amounts and freezes on the otherwise applicable annual Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) updates. For most diagnostic lab tests, the national limitation is now 74.0% of the national median of all local fee schedules established for each test. Under a provision of the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000 (“BIPA”), for tests performed after January 1, 2001 that the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines are new tests for which no limitation amount has previously been established, the cap is set at 100% of the median.

Medicare, Medicaid and other government program payment reductions will not currently have a direct adverse effect on the Company's net earnings and cash flows, due to insignificant revenue earned, however, it is not currently possible to project what impact will be had in future years.

In addition to reimbursement rates, the Company is also impacted by changes in coverage policies for laboratory tests. Congressional action in 1997 required the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to adopt uniform coverage, administration and payment policies for many of the most commonly performed lab tests using a negotiated rulemaking process. The negotiated rulemaking committee established uniform policies limiting Medicare coverage for certain tests to patients with specified medical conditions or diagnoses, replacing local Medicare coverage policies which varied around the country. The final rules generally became effective in 2002, and the use of uniform policies improves the Company's ability to obtain necessary billing information in some cases, but Medicare, Medicaid and private payer diagnosis code requirements continue to negatively impact the Company's ability to be paid for some of the tests it performs. Due to the range of payers and policies, the extent of this impact continues to be difficult to quantify.

Future changes in federal, state and local laws and regulations (or in the interpretation of current regulations) affecting government payment for clinical laboratory testing could have a material adverse effect on the Company. In March 2010, comprehensive healthcare legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), was enacted. Based on currently available information, the Company is unable to predict what type of changes in legislation or regulations, if any, will occur.

Standard Electronic Transactions, Security and Confidentiality of Health Information and Other Personal Information

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) was designed to address issues related to the security and confidentiality of health insurance information. In an effort to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the health care system by facilitating the electronic exchange of information in certain financial and administrative transactions, HIPAA regulations were promulgated. These regulations apply to health plans, health care providers that conduct standard transactions electronically and health care clearinghouses (“covered entities”). Five such regulations have been finalized: (i) the Transactions and Code Sets Rule; (ii) the Privacy Rule; (iii) the Security Rule; (iv) the Standard Unique Employer Identifier Rule, which requires the use of a unique employer identifier in connection with certain electronic transactions; and (v) the National Provider Identifier Rule, which requires the use of a unique health care provider identifier in connection with certain electronic transactions.

The Privacy Rule regulates the use and disclosure of protected health information (“PHI”) by covered entities. It also sets forth certain rights that an individual has with respect to his or her PHI maintained by a covered entity, such as the right to access or amend certain records containing PHI or to request restrictions on the use or disclosure of PHI. The Privacy Rule requires covered entities to contractually bind third parties, known as business associates, in the event that they perform an activity or service for or on behalf of the covered entity that involves access to PHI. The Security Rule establishes requirements for safeguarding patient information that is electronically transmitted or electronically stored. The Company believes that it is in compliance in all material respects with the requirements of the HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules.

The Federal Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”), which was enacted in February 2009, strengthens and expands the HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules and their restrictions on use and disclosure of PHI. HITECH includes, but is not limited to, prohibitions on exchanging patient identifiable health information for remuneration, and additional restrictions on the use of PHI for marketing. HITECH also fundamentally changes a business associate's obligations by imposing a number of Privacy Rule requirements and a majority of Security Rule provisions directly on business associates that were previously only directly applicable to covered entities. Moreover, HITECH requires covered entities to provide notice to individuals, HHS, and, as applicable, the media when unsecured protected health information is breached, as that term is defined by HITECH. Business associates are similarly required to notify covered entities of a breach.

The omnibus HIPAA regulation implementing most of the HITECH provisions was issued in January 2013 and made significant changes to the HIPAA Privacy, Security, Enforcement, and Breach Notification Rules. Compliance with most of the changes became required on September 23, 2013. The Company believes its policies and procedures are fully compliant with the HITECH requirements.

On February 6, 2014, the CMS and HHS published final regulations that amended the HIPAA Privacy Rule to provide individuals (or their personal representatives) with the right to receive copies of their test reports from laboratories subject to HIPAA, or to request that copies of their test reports be transmitted to designated third parties. Previously, laboratories that were CLIA-certified or CLIA-exempt were not subject to the provision in the Privacy Rule that provides individuals with the right of access to PHI. The HIPAA Privacy Rule amendment resulted in the preemption of a number of state laws that prohibit a laboratory from releasing a test report directly to the individual. The Company revised its policies and procedures to comply with these new access requirements and has updated its privacy notice to reflect individuals' new access rights under this final rule.

The standard unique employer identifier regulations require that employers have standard national numbers that identify them on standard transactions. The Employer Identification Number, also known as a Federal Tax Identification Number, issued by the Internal Revenue Service, was selected as the identifier for employers and was adopted effective July 30, 2002. The Company believes it is in compliance with these requirements.

The administrative simplification provisions of HIPAA mandate the adoption of standard unique identifiers for health care providers. The intent of these provisions is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the electronic transmission of health information. The National Provider Identification Rule requires that all HIPAA-covered health care providers, whether they are individuals or organizations, must obtain a National Provider Identifier (“NPI”) to identify themselves in standard HIPAA transactions. NPI replaces the unique provider identification number - as well as other provider numbers previously assigned by payers and other entities - for the purpose of identifying providers in standard electronic transactions. The Company believes that it is in compliance with the HIPAA National Provider Identification Rule in all material respects.

The total cost associated with the requirements of HIPAA and HITECH is not expected to be material to the Company's operations or cash flows. However, future regulations and interpretations of HIPAA and HITECH could impose significant costs on the Company.

In addition to the HIPAA regulations described above, there are a number of other Federal and state laws regarding the confidentiality and security of medical information, some of which apply to clinical laboratories. These laws vary widely, but they most commonly restrict the collection, use and disclosure of medical and financial information and other personal information. In some cases, state laws are more restrictive than and therefore not preempted by HIPAA. Penalties for violation of these laws may include sanctions against a laboratory's licensure, as well as civil and/or criminal penalties. Violations of the HIPAA provisions could result in civil and/or criminal penalties, including significant fines and up to 10 years in prison. HITECH also significantly strengthened HIPAA enforcement. It increased the civil penalty amounts that may be imposed, required HHS to conduct periodic audits to confirm compliance and also authorized state attorneys general to bring civil actions seeking either injunctions or damages in response to violations of the HIPAA privacy and security regulations that affect the privacy of state residents. Additionally, numerous other countries have or are developing similar laws governing the collection, use, disclosure and transmission of personal and/or patient information.

The Company believes that it is in compliance in all material respects with the current Transactions and Code Sets Rule. The Company implemented Version 5010 of the HIPAA Transaction Standards and believes it has fully adopted the ICD-10-CM code set. The compliance date for ICD-10-CM was October 1, 2015. The costs associated with ICD-10-CM Code Set were substantial, and failure of the Company, third party payers or physicians to apply the new code set could have an adverse impact on reimbursement, day’s sales outstanding and cash collections. As a result of inconsistent application of transaction standards by payers or the Company's inability to obtain certain billing information not usually provided to the Company by physicians, the Company could face increased costs and complexity, a temporary disruption in receipts and ongoing reductions in reimbursements and net revenues.

The Company believes it is in compliance in all material respects with the Operating Rules for electronic funds transfers and remittance advice transactions, for which the compliance date was January 1, 2014.

Fraud and Abuse Laws and Regulations

Existing federal laws governing federal health care programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, as well as similar state laws, impose a variety of broadly described fraud and abuse prohibitions on health care providers, including clinical laboratories. These laws are interpreted liberally and enforced aggressively by multiple government agencies, including the U.S. Department of Justice, HHS' Office of Inspector General (“OIG”), and various state agencies. Historically, the clinical laboratory industry has been the focus of major governmental enforcement initiatives. The federal government's enforcement efforts have been increasing over the past decade, in part as a result of the enactment of HIPAA, which included several provisions related to fraud and abuse enforcement, including the establishment of a program to coordinate and fund federal, state and local law enforcement efforts. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 also included new requirements directed at Medicaid fraud, including increased spending on enforcement and financial incentives for states to adopt false claims act provisions similar to the federal False Claims Act. Recent amendments to the False Claims Act, as well as other enhancements to the federal fraud and abuse laws enacted as part of the ACA, are widely expected to further increase fraud and abuse enforcement efforts. For example, the ACA established an obligation to report and refund overpayments from Medicare within 60 days of identification; failure to comply with this new requirement can give rise to additional liability under the False Claims Act and Civil Monetary Penalties statute. On February 16, 2012, CMS issued a proposed rule to establish regulations addressing the reporting and returning of overpayments. On February 11, 2016, CMS issued the final rule defining when an overpayment is identified and adopted a six year look-back period. The rule is effective 30 days from the publication date.

The federal health care programs’ anti-kickback law (the “Anti-Kickback Law”) prohibits knowingly providing anything of value in return for, or to induce the referral of Medicare, Medicaid or other federal health care program business. Violations can result in imprisonment, fines, penalties, and/or exclusion from participation in federal health care programs. The OIG has published “safe harbor” regulations which specify certain arrangements that are protected from prosecution under the Anti-Kickback Law if all conditions of the relevant safe harbor are met. Failure to fit within a safe harbor does not necessarily constitute a violation of the Anti-Kickback Law; rather, the arrangement would be subject to scrutiny by regulators and prosecutors and would be evaluated on a case by case basis. Many states have their own Medicaid anti-kickback laws and several states also have anti-kickback laws that apply to all payers (i.e., not just government health care programs).

From time to time, the OIG issues alerts and other guidance on certain practices in the health care industry that implicate the Anti-Kickback Law or other federal fraud and abuse laws. Examples of such guidance documents particularly relevant to the Company and its operations follow.

In October 1994, the OIG issued a Special Fraud Alert on arrangements for the provision of clinical laboratory services. The Fraud Alert set forth a number of practices allegedly engaged in by some clinical laboratories and health care providers that raise issues under the federal fraud and abuse laws, including the Anti-Kickback Law. These practices include: (i) providing employees to furnish valuable services for physicians (other than collecting patient specimens for testing) that are typically the responsibility of the physicians' staff; (ii) offering certain laboratory services at prices below fair market value in return for referrals of other tests which are billed to Medicare at higher rates; (iii) providing free testing to physicians' managed care patients in situations where the referring physicians benefit from such reduced laboratory utilization; (iv) providing free pick-up and disposal of bio-hazardous waste for physicians for items unrelated to a laboratory's testing services; (v) providing general-use facsimile machines or computers to physicians that are not exclusively used in connection with the laboratory services; and (vi) providing free testing for health care providers, their families and their employees (i.e., so-called “professional courtesy” testing). The OIG emphasized in the Special Fraud Alert that when one purpose of such arrangements is to induce referrals of program-reimbursed laboratory testing, both the clinical laboratory and the health care provider (e.g., physician) may be liable under the Anti-Kickback Law, and may be subject to criminal prosecution and exclusion from participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. More recently, in June 2014, the OIG issued another Special Fraud Alert addressing compensation paid by laboratories to referring physicians for blood specimen processing and for submitting patient data to registries. This Special Fraud Alert reiterates the OIG’s longstanding concerns about payments from laboratories to physicians in excess of the fair value of the physician’s services and payments that reflect the volume or value of referrals of federal healthcare program business.

Another issue the OIG has expressed concern about involves the provision of discounts on laboratory services billed to customers in return for the referral of federal health care program business. In a 1999 Advisory Opinion, the OIG concluded that a proposed arrangement whereby a laboratory would offer physicians significant discounts on non-federal health care program laboratory tests might violate the Anti-Kickback Law. The OIG reasoned that the laboratory could be viewed as providing such discounts to the physician in exchange for referrals by the physician of business to be billed by the laboratory to Medicare at non-discounted rates. The OIG indicated that the arrangement would not qualify for protection under the discount safe harbor to the Anti-Kickback Law because Medicare and Medicaid would not get the benefit of the discount. Similarly, in a 1999 correspondence, the OIG stated that if any direct or indirect link exists between a discounts that a laboratory offers to a skilled nursing facility (“SNF”) for tests covered under Medicare's payments to the SNF and the referral of tests billable by the laboratory under Medicare Part B, then the Anti-Kickback Law would be implicated.

The OIG also has issued guidance regarding joint venture arrangements that may be viewed as suspect under the Anti-Kickback Law. These documents have relevance to clinical laboratories that are part of (or are considering establishing) joint ventures with potential sources of federal health care program business. The first guidance document, which focused on investor referrals to such ventures, was issued in 1989 and another concerning contractual joint ventures was issued in April 2003. Some of the elements of joint ventures that the OIG identified as “suspect” include: arrangements in which the capital invested by the physicians is disproportionately small and the return on investment is disproportionately large when compared to a typical investment; specific selection of investors who are in a position to make referrals to the venture; and arrangements in which one of the parties to the joint venture expands into a line of business that is dependent on referrals from the other party (sometimes called “shell” joint ventures). In a 2004 advisory opinion, the OIG expressed concern about a proposed joint venture in which a laboratory company would assist physician groups in establishing off-site pathology laboratories. The OIG indicated that the physicians' financial and business risk in the venture was minimal and that the physicians would contract out substantially all laboratory operations, committing very little in the way of financial, capital, or human resources. The OIG was unable to exclude the possibility that the arrangement was designed to permit the laboratory to pay the physician groups for their referrals, and therefore was unwilling to find that the arrangement fell within a safe harbor or had sufficient safeguards to protect against fraud or abuse.

Violations of other fraud and abuse laws also can result in exclusion from participation in federal health care programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. One basis for such exclusion is an individual's or entity's submission of claims to Medicare or Medicaid that are substantially in excess of that individual's or entity’s usual charges for like items or services. In 2003, the OIG issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that would have defined the terms “usual charges” and “substantially in excess” in ways that might have required providers, including the Company, to either lower their charges to Medicare and Medicaid or increase charges to certain other payers to avoid the risk of exclusion. On June 18, 2007, however, the OIG withdrew the proposed rule, saying it preferred to continue evaluating billing patterns on a case-by-case basis. In its withdrawal notice, the OIG also said it “remains concerned about disparities in the amounts charged to Medicare and Medicaid when compared to private payers,” that it continues to believe its exclusion authority for excess charges “provides useful backstop protection for the public fisc from providers that routinely charge Medicare or Medicaid substantially more than their other customers,” and that it will continue to use “all tools available … to address instances where Medicare or Medicaid are charged substantially more than other payers.” The enforcement by Medicaid officials of similar state law restrictions also could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

Under another federal statute, known as the “Stark Law” or “self-referral” prohibition, physicians who have a financial or compensation relationship with a clinical laboratory may not, unless an exception applies, refer Medicare patients for testing to the laboratory, regardless of the intent of the parties. Similarly, laboratories may not bill Medicare for services furnished pursuant to a prohibited self-referral. There are several Stark law exceptions that are relevant to arrangements involving clinical laboratories, including: 1) fair market value compensation for the provision of items or services; 2) payments by physicians to a laboratory for clinical laboratory services; 3) an exception for certain ancillary services (including laboratory services) provided within the referring physician's own office, if certain criteria are satisfied; 4) physician investment in a company whose stock is traded on a public exchange and has stockholder equity exceeding $75.0 million; and 5) certain space and equipment rental arrangements that are set at a fair market value rate and satisfy other requirements. All of the requirements of a Stark Law exception must be met to take advantage of the exception. Many states have their own self-referral laws as well, which in some cases apply to all patient referrals, not just Medicare.

There are a variety of other types of federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including laws prohibiting submission of false or fraudulent claims. The Company seeks to conduct its business in compliance with all federal and state fraud and abuse laws. The Company is unable to predict how these laws will be applied in the future, and no assurances can be given that its arrangements will not be subject to scrutiny under such laws. Sanctions for violations of these laws may include exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal health care programs, significant criminal and civil fines and penalties, and loss of licensure. Any exclusion from participation in a federal or state health care program, or any loss of licensure, arising from any action by any federal or state regulatory or enforcement authority, would likely have a material adverse effect on the Company's business. In addition, any significant criminal or civil penalty resulting from such proceedings could have a material adverse effect on the Company's business.

Environmental, Health and Safety

The Company is subject to licensing and regulation under federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment and human health and safety and laws and regulations relating to the handling, transportation and disposal of medical specimens, infectious and hazardous waste and radioactive materials. All Company laboratories are subject to applicable federal and state laws and regulations relating to biohazard disposal of all laboratory specimens and the Company generally utilizes outside vendors for disposal of such specimens. In addition, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) has established extensive requirements relating to workplace safety for health care employers, including clinical laboratories, whose workers may be exposed to blood-borne pathogens such as HIV and the hepatitis B virus. These regulations, among other things, require work practice controls, protective clothing and equipment, training, medical follow-up, vaccinations and other measures designed to minimize exposure to, and transmission of, blood-borne pathogens.

On November 6, 2000, Congress passed the Needle Stick Safety and Prevention Act, which required, among other things, that companies include in their safety programs the evaluation and use of engineering controls such as safety needles if found to be effective at reducing the risk of needle stick injuries in the workplace. The Company has implemented the use of safety needles at all of its service locations, where applicable.

Although the Company is not aware of any current material non-compliance with such federal, state and local laws and regulations, failure to comply could subject the Company to denial of the right to conduct business, fines, criminal penalties and/or other enforcement actions.

Drug Testing

There is no comprehensive federal law that regulates drug testing in the private sector. The Drug-Free Workplace Act does impose certain employee education requirements on companies that do business with the government, but it does not require testing, nor does it restrict testing in any way. Drug testing is allowed under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) because the ADA does not consider drug abuse a disability -- but the law does not regulate or prohibit testing. Instead of a comprehensive regulatory system, federal law provides for specific agencies to adopt drug testing regulations for employers under their jurisdiction. As a general rule, testing is presumed to be lawful unless there is a specific restriction in state or federal law.

Controlled Substances

The use of controlled substances in testing for drugs of abuse is regulated by the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration.

Compliance Program

The Company continuously evaluates and monitors its compliance with all Medicare, Medicaid and other rules and regulations. The objective of the Company's compliance program is to develop, implement, and update compliance safeguards as necessary. Emphasis is placed on developing compliance policies and guidelines, personnel training programs and various monitoring and audit procedures to attempt to achieve implementation of all applicable rules and regulations.

The Company seeks to conduct its business in compliance with all statutes, regulations, and other requirements applicable to its clinical laboratory operations. The clinical laboratory testing industry is, however, subject to extensive regulation, and many of these statutes and regulations have not been interpreted by the courts. There can be no assurance that applicable statutes and regulations will not be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that would adversely affect the Company. Potential sanctions for violation of these statutes and regulations include significant fines and the loss of various licenses, certificates, and authorizations, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company's business.

Employees

As of March 23, 2016, we have 198 employees, of which 185 are full time. Of our total employees, 64 are assigned to laboratory operations, 42 are assigned to medical support services, 46 are assigned to sales and customer service and 46 are assigned to medical billing and corporate administration.

In April 2015, the Company and its then Chief Financial Officer, Jace Simmons, agreed to seek a new Chief Financial Officer with a background in the healthcare industry. At that time, the Company’s Corporate Controller, Jeffrey Wadman, was appointed Interim Chief Financial Officer.

In August 2015, the Company hired a new Chief Compliance Officer, Steven Burdelski. Mr. Burdelski heads up the Company’s compliance and credentialing groups. Mr. Burdelski previously served as an executive manager of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), where he received multiple awards for excellence and was responsible for strategic planning and leadership of all FBI investigative programs such as criminal, cyber, counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and critical incident management in the Bureau's Tampa office.

In September 2015, the Company appointed Jason P. Adams its Chief Financial Officer. At that time, the Company’s Interim Chief Financial Officer returned to his former position within the Company. Prior to joining Medytox, Mr. Adams was the Chief Financial Officer of West Central Behavioral Health, a provider of behavioral health services in the state of New Hampshire. His experience as a senior financial executive also includes similar positions with Alico, Inc., and the Source Interlink Companies, Inc. Mr. Adams holds a BS degree in Accounting from Castleton University, and a Colorado CPA designation.

In November 2015, in connection with the merger, the Company named Thomas Mika Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of its CollabRx subsidiary. Mr. Mika was appointed President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company in 2005 and Chairman of the Board the following year.

In December 2015, the Company hired a Chief Revenue Officer, Mark Jewett. Mr. Jewett will also service as the interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company’s medical billing subsidiary. Mr. Jewett has over 25 years’ experience in finance and operations. His experience includes senior management positions with both private and publically traded companies. Mr. Jewett holds Bachelor’s degrees in Accounting and Computer Science and a Master’s degree in Accountancy. He is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified Internal Auditor.

In March 2016, the Company hired a new Corporate Counsel, Victoria Nemerson. At that time, the Company accepted the resignation of its existing Corporate Counsel, Dean Viskovich. Ms. Nemerson has over 25 years’ experience in regulatory compliance, law and accounting. Ms. Nemerson is an active member in good standing of the Florida bar. In addition to large public company experience, Ms. Nemerson held the position of General Counsel and Interim CFO for The Wounded Warrior Project, a 501(c)(3) entity. Ms. Nemerson’s broad and diverse background also includes her role as Special Counsel in the private law practice of Constangy, Brooks & Smith, LLC, a nationally recognized labor and employment law firm.

Legal Proceedings

During the course of business, litigation commonly occurs. From time to time, the Company may be a party to litigation matters involving claims against the Company. The Company operates in a highly regulated industry which may inherently lend itself to legal matters. Management is aware that litigation has associated costs and that results of adverse litigation verdicts could have a material effect on the Company's financial position or results of operations. Management, in consultation with legal counsel, has addressed known assertions and predicted unasserted claims below.

Epinex has been sued in a California state court by two former employees who allege that they were wrongfully terminated, as well as a variety of unpaid wage claims. The Company participated in formal mediation on February 25, 2016 in California.

In February 2016, the Company received notice that the Internal Revenue Service had placed a lien against Medytox Solutions, Inc. and its subsidiaries relating to unpaid 2014 taxes due, plus penalties and interest, totaling $4,964,000. The Company paid $100,000 toward its 2014 tax liability in March 2016. The Company filed its 2015 Federal tax return on March 15, 2016. The 2015 return and the accompanying election to carryback the reported net operating losses should permit the Company to have the lien lifted.

MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND  RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion and analysis provides information which management believes is relevant to an assessment and understanding of our consolidated results of operations and financial condition. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties.  Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of numerous factors including, but not limited to, those described above under “Cautionary Statement Concerning Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors”.  The discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto.  

Unless stated otherwise, the words “we,” “us,” “our,” “the Company,” “Rennova Health” or “Rennova Health, Inc.” means Rennova Health, Inc.

For the Year Ended December 31, 2015 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2014

Restatement

On May 16, 2016, after review and consideration of the impact of the errors described below, the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors, after consultation with Green & Company, CPAs, the Company's independent registered public accounting firm, concluded that the Company's financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 (“2015 Financial Statements”), could no longer be relied upon as being in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles. Accordingly, the Company restated the 2015 Financial Statements.

The Company has determined that it did not correctly record, as of December 31, 2015, $1.2 million in stock issued to its financial adviser related to the Merger as of December 31, 2015 and incorrectly recorded $0.5 million in general and administrative costs related to the Merger that should have increased goodwill related to the Merger. Correction of these errors had the following effects on the Company’s 2015 Financial Statements:

As a result, the Company filed a Form 10-K/A on May 17, 2016 with the Securities and Exchange Commission reflecting such changes. 

Results of Operations

We have three operating segments 1) Clinical Laboratory Operations, 2) Supportive Software Solutions, and 3) Decision Support and Informatics Operations. We present our discussion of results of operations by segment below.

The following table presents key financial and operating metrics for our Clinical Laboratory Operations segment:

The decline in net revenues related primarily to (a) a decrease in the net recovery rate of revenues from 25% of gross billings to insurance carriers to 20% of gross billings to insurance carriers, (b) the 25.1% decline in insured test volume, (c) an $18.0 million increase in reserves for bad debts, partially offset by (d) an increase in the net reimbursement rate from third party payers. The decrease in the net recovery rate resulted in a decrease in net revenues of $11.4 million. The decrease in insured test volume resulted in a decrease in net revenues of $11.5 million. The increase in the net reimbursement rate from third party payers resulted in an increase in net revenues of $1.2 million. The increase in reserves for bad debts related primarily to slower collections related to changes in billing practices and increased requirements related to medical necessity from third party payers that have increased the time it takes to collect versus the prior year.

The decline in direct costs of revenue resulted from (a) the transition of a significant portion of our testing from external reference labs to internal processing, resulting in a 37.5% decrease in direct costs per sample and (b) the 8% decline in total samples processed. The decline in direct cost per sample resulted in a $5.4 million decrease in direct costs of revenues while the decline in total samples processed resulted in a $1.3 million decrease in direct costs of revenues.

The decline in general and administrative costs resulted primarily from a decrease in the amounts charged by our Supportive Software Solutions group to our Clinical Laboratory Operations group for services provided.

The decline in sales and marketing expenses related primarily to the decline in commissionable collections related to the decline in net revenues.

We experienced a significant decline in our operating income, before impairment charges, and cash flow from our Clinical Laboratory Operations segment in 2015 as well as a decline in our market capitalization that resulted in an impairment of 100% of goodwill and intangible assets for the Clinical Laboratory Operations segment.

The increase in depreciation and amortization relates primarily to the expansion of our Riviera Beach, FL laboratory and improvements required to transition a significant portion of our testing from external reference labs to internal processing.

The following table presents key financial metrics for our Supportive Software Solutions segment:

The 21% decrease in net revenues from 2014 relates primarily to a $0.9 million decline in the amounts charged by our Supportive Software Solutions group to our Clinical Laboratory Operations group for services provided, partially offset by revenues generated from the launch of our electronic health records product, Medical Mime, into the rehab sector in the fourth quarter of 2015.

The increase in general and administrative expenses relates primarily to increased development spending related to the launch and refinement of our electronic health records product into the rehab sector.

We experienced a significant decline in our operating income, excluding impairment charges, and cash flow from our Supportive Software Solutions segment in 2015 as well as a decline in our market capitalization that resulted in an impairment of 100% of goodwill and intangible assets for the segment.

The increase in depreciation and amortization relates primarily to the purchase of additional technology assets required to support the launch of our electronic health records product into the rehab sector and for support of general corporate requirements.

The following table presents key financial metrics for our Decision Support and Informatics Operations segment:

The results of our Decision Support and Informatics Operations segment are included in 2015 for the two months following our acquisition of CollabRx, Inc. All changes versus the prior year relate to the acquisition of CollabRx, Inc. in November 2015 and the resulting creation of the Decision Support and Informatics Operations segment.

We experienced a significant decline in our market capitalization that resulted in an impairment of 100% of goodwill and intangible assets for the Decision Support and Informatics Operations segment.

The following table presents key financial metrics for our Corporate group:

The increase in general and administrative costs relates primarily to a $2.9 million increase in stock compensation expenses, which are non-cash, and $1.2 million in merger, acquisition and integration expenses related to the acquisition of CollabRx. The remaining increase relates primarily to the expansion of our management team.

The following table presents consolidating operating income and other income and expense items for the Company:

The increase in interest expense relates primarily to increased borrowings in 2015 and an increase of $1.5 million in non-cash amortization of debt discounts.

Other income relates to items that are generally non-recurring in nature. Therefore, inter-period comparisons are not meaningful. In 2015, other income was comprised of a $2.3 million realized gain on derivative instruments related to the amendment and extension of one of our notes payable – related parties, a $0.3 million gain on legal settlements, and a $0.6 million unrealized gain on derivative instruments related to the change in valuation associated with our various floating price convertible debt instruments and warrants.

For 2015, our effective tax rate was 20.1% versus 49.2% for 2014. The decrease in our effective tax rate relates to a decrease in the impact of certain permanent differences of 11.0% and the accrual of a 100% valuation allowance against all of our deferred tax assets in 2015 totaling $8.6 million.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Overview

The Company historically has utilized cash generated from operations and various credit facilities to fund working capital needs, acquisitions and capital expenditures. Future cash needs for working capital, acquisitions and capital expenditures may require management to seek additional equity or obtain additional credit facilities. The sale of additional equity could result in additional dilution to the Company's stockholders. A portion of the Company's cash may be used to acquire or invest in complementary businesses or products or to obtain the right to use complementary technologies. From time to time, in the ordinary course of business, the Company evaluates potential acquisitions of such businesses, products or technologies.

For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, we funded our operations primarily through cash provided by operations and borrowings from third parties. Our principal use of funds during the year ended December 31, 2015 has been for operating activities, payments on borrowings, additions to property and equipment, dividends to Preferred B shareholders, income tax obligations from prior years and general corporate expenses. Management believes that based on the current level of operations, cash flow from operations and financing activities, the Company will have sufficient liquidity to fund anticipated expenses, tax obligations and other commitments for the next twelve months.

Liquidity and Capital Resources during the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014

The following table presents our capital resources as of December 31, 2015 and 2014:

The following table presents the major sources and uses of cash for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014:

The decline in cash from operations from 2014 to 2015 is presented in the following table:

The decline in net income is discussed in results of operations above. The increase in non-cash adjustments to revenue relates primarily to a $20.1 million impairment of goodwill and intangibles in 2015 and a $2.9 million increase in stock-based compensation expense.

The decrease in accounts receivable relates primarily to increased bad debt write-offs of $18.0 million due to slower collections related to changes in billing practices and increased requirements related to medical necessity from third party payers that have increased the time it takes to collect versus the prior year.

The larger increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses relates primarily to a $1.1 million increase in accrued dividends on Medytox Series B Preferred Stock over 2014. The Medytox Series B Preferred Stock is no longer outstanding and therefore no further dividends will be accrued.

The decrease in income tax assets and liabilities relates primarily to the decrease in pre-tax income that has resulted in a $2.4 million income tax refund due for 2013 and taxes paid in cash of $1.8 million in 2015 that were accrued at December 31, 2014.

The increase in cash from investing activities relates primarily to $4.7 million of cash received in the acquisition of CollabRx in 2015, $1.6 million of cash paid for acquisitions in 2014 and a $2.0 million decrease in capital expenditures related to the completion of the build out of our Riviera Beach, FL laboratory.

The increase in cash from financing activities relates primarily to a public offering of common and preferred stock, both with attached warrants, in December 2015 that generated $9.2 million in cash, of which $7.0 million was allocated to the warrants, a $3.4 million decrease in payments of accrued dividends on the Medytox Series B Preferred stock and changes in overall borrowings and repayments on debt instruments. For a description of our various debt instruments and specific transactions, see Note 8 – Notes Payable to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2016 Compared to the Three Months Ended March 31, 2015

Results of Operations

The following table presents key financial and operating metrics for our Clinical Laboratory Operations segment:

The decline in net revenues related primarily to (a) a decrease in the net recovery rate of revenues from 28% of gross billings to insurance carriers to 20% of gross billings to insurance carriers and (b) the 85.4% decline in insured test volume. The decrease in the net recovery rate resulted in a decrease in net revenues of $3.9 million. The decrease in insured test volume resulted in a decrease in net revenues of $8.2 million.

The decline in direct costs of revenue resulted from (a) the transition of a significant portion of our testing from external reference labs to internal processing, resulting in a 58.4% decrease in direct costs per sample and (b) the 72.9% decline in total samples processed. The decline in direct cost per sample resulted in a $0.6 million decrease in direct costs of revenues while the decline in total samples processed resulted in a $2.9 million decrease in direct costs of revenues.

The decline in general and administrative costs resulted primarily from a decrease in the amounts charged by our Supportive Software Solutions group to our Clinical Laboratory Operations group for services provided.

The decline in sales and marketing expenses related primarily to the decline in commissionable collections related to the decline in net revenues.

The increase in depreciation and amortization relates primarily to the expansion of our Riviera Beach, Florida laboratory and improvements required to transition a significant portion of our testing from external reference labs to internal processing.

The following table presents key financial metrics for our Supportive Software Solutions segment:

The 1.3% decrease in net revenues from 2015 relates primarily to a $0.1 million decline in the amounts charged by our Supportive Software Solutions group to our Clinical Laboratory Operations group for services provided, partially offset by revenues generated from the launch of our electronic health records product, Medical Mime, into the rehab sector in the fourth quarter of 2015.

The decrease in general and administrative expenses relates primarily to movement of a significant portion of our development activities from contracted labor to internal personnel.

The increase in depreciation and amortization relates primarily to the purchase of additional technology assets required to support the launch of our electronic health records product into the rehab sector and for support of general corporate requirements.

The following table presents key financial metrics for our Decision Support and Informatics Operations segment:

All changes versus the prior year relate to the acquisition of CollabRx, Inc. in November 2015 and the resulting creation of the Decision Support and Informatics Operations segment.

The following table presents key financial metrics for our Corporate group:

The increase in general and administrative costs relates primarily to the expansion of our management team.

The following table presents consolidating operating income and other income and expense items for the Company:

The increase in interest expense relates primarily to increased borrowings in the first quarter of 2016 and an increase of $0.5 million in non-cash amortization of debt discounts.

Other income relates to items that are generally non-recurring in nature. Therefore, inter-period comparisons are not meaningful. For the three months ended March 31, 2016, other income was comprised of a $3.4 million unrealized gain on derivative instruments related to the change in valuation associated with our various floating price convertible debt instruments and warrants. For the three months ended March 31, 2015, other income was comprised of a $0.3 million gain on a legal settlement.

For the three months ended March 31, 2016, our effective tax rate was 0.0% versus 49.3% for the same period of 2015. The decrease in our effective tax rate relates primarily to of a 100% valuation allowance against our net deferred tax assets in the first quarter of 2016.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Overview

The Company historically has utilized cash generated from operations and various credit facilities to fund working capital needs, acquisitions and capital expenditures. Future cash needs for working capital, acquisitions and capital expenditures may require management to seek additional equity or obtain additional credit facilities. The sale of additional equity could result in additional dilution to the Company's stockholders. A portion of the Company's cash may be used to acquire or invest in complementary businesses or products or to obtain the right to use complementary technologies. From time to time, in the ordinary course of business, the Company evaluates potential acquisitions of such businesses, products or technologies.

For the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, we funded our operations primarily through borrowings from third parties. Our principal use of funds during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 has been for operating activities, payments on borrowings, additions to property and equipment, dividends to former Medytox Preferred B shareholders (during the three months ended March 31, 2015) and general corporate expenses. Management believes that based on the current level of operations, cash flow from operations and financing activities, the Company will have to secure additional funding in order to have sufficient liquidity to fund anticipated expenses, tax obligations and other commitments for the next twelve months.

Liquidity and Capital Resources during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015

The following table presents our capital resources as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015:

The following table presents the major sources and uses of cash for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015:

The increase in cash used in operations from the three months ended March 31, 2015 the three months ended March 31, 2015 is presented in the following table:

The decline in net income is discussed in results of operations above. The decrease in non-cash adjustments to revenue relates primarily to a $6.5 million decrease in allowances for bad debts.

The improvement in accounts receivable performance relates primarily to a decrease of $6.5 million in allowance for bad debts as well as improved collections versus revenues in the three months ended March 31, 2016 versus the same period of 2015.

The deterioration of accounts payable performance relates primarily to catch-up payments on accounts payable that were outstanding at December 31, 2015, versus little such activity in the three months ended March 31, 2015.

The minimal change in income tax assets and liabilities for the three months ended March 31, 2016 relates to the accrual of a 100% valuation allowance on our net deferred tax assets.

The decrease in capital expenditures relates primarily to the completion of the build out of our Riviera Beach, Florida laboratory in 2015.

The increase in cash from financing activities relates primarily to the placement of a $5,000,000 note payable relating to the prepaid forward purchase contract during the three months ended March 31, 2016. For a description of our various debt instruments and specific transactions, see Note 4 – Notes Payable to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Going Concern

The Company’s consolidated financial statements and management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations are prepared using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles applicable to a going concern that contemplates the realization of assets and liquidation of liabilities in the normal course of business. However, the Company has recently accumulated significant losses and has negative cash flows from operations, which raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Management's plans with respect to alleviating the adverse financial conditions that caused management to express substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern are as follows:

The Company is currently executing on a plan of action to increase the volume of samples processed by its labs. In addition, the Company is executing on a plan of action to increase the number of customers for its supportive software solutions. While the results of these plans of action are encouraging, no conclusion can be drawn at this time about the ultimate efficacy of these plans of action.

In order to support the Company’s continued operation, the Company received $5,000,000 from pledging certain of its accounts receivable as collateral to a prepaid forward purchase contract. The Company is also entitled to $2,415,103 in income tax refunds, the claim for which was filed with the IRS in early April 2016. There can be no assurance as to the timing of the receipt of the income tax refunds for which the Company has filed.

There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to achieve its business plans, raise any more required capital or secure the financing necessary to achieve its current operating plan. The ability of the Company to continue as a going concern is dependent upon its ability to successfully accomplish the plan described in the preceding paragraphs and eventually regain profitable operations. The accompanying consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if the Company is unable to continue as a going concern.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

Our principal accounting policies are described in Note 2 of the consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus. The preparation of the financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the Unites States (“U.S. GAAP”) requires management to make significant judgments and estimates. Some accounting policies have a significant impact on amounts reported in these financial statements. Our financial position and results of operations may be materially different when reported under different conditions or when using different assumptions in the application of such policies. In the event estimates or assumptions prove to be different from actual amounts, adjustments are made in subsequent periods to reflect more current information. Significant accounting policies, including areas of critical management judgments and estimates, include the following:

Revenue Recognition

Service revenues are principally generated from laboratory testing services including chemical diagnostic tests such as blood analysis and urine analysis. Net service revenues are recognized at the time the testing services are performed and are reported at their estimated net realizable amounts.

Net service revenues are determined utilizing gross service revenues net of allowances. Even though it is the responsibility of the patient to pay for laboratory service bills, most individuals in the United States have an agreement with a third party payer such as Medicare, Medicaid or a commercial insurance provider to pay all or a portion of their healthcare expenses; the majority of services provided by us are to patients covered under a third party payor contract. Despite follow up billing efforts, the Company does not currently anticipate collection of a significant portion of self-pay billings including the patient responsibility portion of the billing for patients covered by third party payors. The Company currently does not have any capitated agreements. In the remainder of the cases, the Company is provided the third party billing information and seeks payment from the third party under the terms and conditions of the third party payer for health service providers like us. Each of these third party payers may differ not only with regard to rates, but also with regard to terms and conditions of payment and providing coverage (reimbursement) for specific tests. Estimated revenues are established based on a series of procedures and judgments that require industry specific healthcare experience and an understanding of payer methods and trends.

We review our calculations on a monthly basis in order to make certain that we are properly allowing for the uncollectable portion of our gross billings and that our estimates remain sensitive to variances and changes within our payer groups. The contractual allowance calculation is made on the basis of historical allowance rates for the various specific payer groups on a monthly basis with a greater weight being given to the most recent trends; this process is adjusted based on recent changes in underlying contract provisions and shifts in the testing being performed. The provision for bad debts represents our estimate of net revenues that will ultimately be uncollectable and is based upon our analysis of historical payment rates by specific payer groups on a monthly basis with primary weight being given to the most recent trends; this approach allows bad debt to more accurately adjust to short-term changes in the business environment. These two calculations are routinely analyzed by us on the basis of actual allowances issued by payers and the actual payments made to determine what adjustments, if any, are needed. Based on the calculations at December 31, 2014, we determined that the collectible portion of our gross billings that should be reflected in net revenues was 25% of the outgoing billings. At December 31, 2015, we determined that the collectible portion of our gross billings that should be reflected in net revenues was 20% of the outgoing billings. This change was impacted, in part, by certain third party payers that had, at various times during 2015, unilaterally stopped payments to our labs. Those amounts are currently in dispute with those third party payers.

Contractual Allowances and Doubtful Accounts

Accounts receivable are reported at realizable value, net of allowances for credits and doubtful accounts, which are estimated and recorded in the period the related revenue is recorded. The Company has a standardized approach to estimate and review the collectability of its receivables based on a number of factors, including the period they have been outstanding. Historical collection and payer reimbursement experience is an integral part of the estimation process related to allowances for contractual credits and doubtful accounts. In addition, the Company regularly assesses the state of its billing operations in order to identify issues which may impact the collectability of these receivables or reserve estimates. Receivables deemed to be uncollectible are charged against the allowance for doubtful accounts at the time such receivables are written-off. Recoveries of receivables previously written-off are recorded as credits to the allowance for doubtful accounts. Historically, revisions to the allowances for doubtful accounts estimates are recorded as an adjustment to provision for bad debts within selling, general and administrative expenses.

Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets

The Company accounts for the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets according to the Financial Accounting Standards Board's (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 360 “Property, Plant and Equipment”. ASC 360 clarifies the accounting for the impairment of long-lived assets and for long-lived assets to be disposed of, including the disposal of business segments and major lines of business. Long-lived assets are reviewed when facts and circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the asset may not be recoverable. When necessary, impaired assets are written down to estimated fair value based on the best information available. Estimated fair value is generally based on either appraised value or measured by discounting estimated future cash flows. Considerable management judgment is necessary to estimate discounted future cash flows. Accordingly, actual results could vary significantly from such estimates.

As of December 31, 2015, management determined that its goodwill and intangible assets were impaired. As such, it recorded an impairment charge totaling $20.1 million.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The Company's balance sheet includes certain financial instruments. The carrying amounts of current assets and current liabilities approximate their fair value because of the relatively short period of time between the origination of these instruments and their expected realization.

ASC 820 “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” defines fair value as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. ASC 820 also establishes a fair value hierarchy that distinguishes between (1) market participant assumptions developed based on market data obtained from independent sources (observable inputs) and (2) a reporting 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:

Stock Based Compensation

The Company accounts for Stock-Based Compensation under ASC 718 “Compensation – Stock Compensation”, which addresses the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or services, with a primary focus on transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in share-based payment transactions. ASC 718 is a revision to SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” and supersedes Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” and its related implementation guidance. ASC 718 requires measurement of the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair value of the award (with limited exceptions). Incremental compensation costs arising from subsequent modifications of awards after the grant date must be recognized.

On September 25, 2013, the Company's board of directors approved and adopted the Medytox Solutions, Inc. 2013 Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Plan”). The Plan was approved by the holders of a majority of the voting stock of the Company on November 22, 2013. The Plan provided for the grant of shares of common stock, options, performance shares, performance units, restricted stock, stock appreciation rights and other awards. The Plan was cancelled in connection with the Merger. All grants made under the Plan remain in force, as adjusted pursuant to the terms of the Merger.

Pursuant to the terms of the Company’s 2007 Equity Participation Plan (“2007 Equity Plan”), which became available upon the acquisition of CollabRx, Inc., an aggregate of 20,000 shares of common stock is available for grant pursuant to the 2007 Equity Plan, plus the number of shares of common stock which are or become available for issuance under the 1998 Equity Plan and the Director Option Plan and which are not thereafter issued under such plans. The 2007 Equity Plan provides for the grant of incentive stock options, nonqualified stock options, restricted stock, stock appreciation rights, performance shares, performance stock units, dividend equivalents, stock payments, deferred stock, restricted stock units, other stock-based awards, and performance-based awards.  The option exercise price of all stock options granted pursuant to the 2007 Equity Plan will not be less than 100% of the fair market value of the common stock on the date of grant. Stock options may be exercised as determined by the Board, but in no event after the tenth anniversary date of grant, provided that a vested nonqualified stock option may be exercised up to 12 months after the optionee's death. Awards granted under the 2007 Equity Plan are generally subject to vesting at the discretion of the Committee. As of December 31, 2015, 2,130 shares were available for issuance under the 2007 Equity Plan. In connection with the Merger, the stockholders of the Company approved increasing the number of shares available for issuance under the 2007 Equity Plan to 50,000,000 shares and increasing the maximum number of shares any one individual may receive in any calendar year from 100,000 shares to 7,500,000 shares.

The Company accounts for stock-based compensation awards to non-employees in accordance with ASC 505-50, Equity-Based Payments to Non-Employees. Under ASC 505-50, the Company determines the fair value of the options, warrants or stock-based compensation awards granted as either the fair value of the consideration received or the fair value of the equity instruments issued, whichever is more reliably measurable. Any stock options or warrants issued to non-employees are recorded in expense and additional paid-in capital in stockholders' equity/(deficit) over the applicable service periods using variable accounting through the vesting dates based on the fair value of the options or warrants at the end of each period.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We currently have no off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future material effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources.

MANAGEMENT

Executive Officers and Directors

The following table sets forth information with respect to persons who are currently serving as directors and executive officers of the Company.

All directors of the Company serve one year terms and hold office until the next annual meeting of stockholders and until their respective successors are duly elected and qualified.

Executive Officers' and Directors' Biographies

Seamus Lagan was appointed Chief Executive Officer and President and a director of the Company on November 2, 2015 and as Chief Executive Officer and a director of Medytox Solutions, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company (“Medytox”) effective September 15, 2014. Mr. Lagan has been, either individually or through Alcimede LLC, a consultant to Medytox since May 2011. Mr. Lagan has been a director of Alcimede since its formation in 2007. Alcimede is a privately-held, Delaware limited liability company which provides various consulting services, including management, organization, and financial consulting services. Mr. Lagan also currently serves, through Alcimede, as chief executive officer of the following subsidiaries of the Company: Medytox Diagnostics, Inc. (since February 2012), and Health Technology Solutions, Inc. (since June 2011) and as president of Medical Billing Choices, Inc. (since July 2013). From September 2008 through May 2011, Mr. Lagan was a private investor. In 2008, TecEnergy UK Limited (“TEC”), a waste management and alternative energy company in England and Wales, of which Mr. Lagan served as a director, was placed into administration to protect it from bankruptcy. The relevant taxing authorities in the United Kingdom alleged that the directors reduced the debt of TEC to its creditors at the expense of tax liabilities to the taxing authorities. There were no other allegations of wrongdoing, but based on such allegations, the taxing authorities sought to have each of the directors of TEC banned from acting as a director in the United Kingdom for a three-year period. At the time of such action, Mr. Lagan had significant health issues and did not defend himself. As a result, Mr. Lagan was banned in his absence from acting as a director of a United Kingdom company from October 8, 2010 until October 2015 (In the Matter of TecEnergy UK Limited and in the Matter of the Company Directors Disqualifications Act of 1986 between the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and Seamus Lagan (Norwich County Court, UK, Claim No. 0NR00656)). Mr. Lagan graduated from Ballymena Technical College in Ireland in 1989.

Thomas R. Mika has been Chairman of the Board of the Company since October 2006. He also serves as the President and Chief Executive Officer of CollabRx, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. He previously had been President and Chief Executive Officer from March 2005 to November 2, 2015. In addition, he held the positions of Acting Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company until November 2, 2015. In July of 2012, Tegal Corporation acquired the private company CollabRx, subsequently adopting its name and mission. CollabRx (and Tegal) had been on the NASDAQ since its IPO in 1995. Following a long service on the Board of Directors of Tegal beginning in 1992, Mr. Mika was appointed Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in 2002. Mr. Mika began his association with Tegal in 1990, when he served as consultant to Nazem & Company, a venture firm that acquired the Company from Motorola in 1990. Previously, Mr. Mika co-founded IMTEC, a boutique investment and consulting firm whose areas of focus included health care, pharmaceuticals, media and information technology. As a partner of IMTEC, Mr. Mika served clients in the United States, Europe and Japan over a period of 20 years, taking on the role of CEO in several ventures. Earlier in his career, Mr. Mika was a managing consultant with Cresap, McCormick & Paget and a policy analyst for the National Science Foundation. At NSF he was a member of the initial three-person team that developed and published the landmark Science Indicators, the biennial report of the National Science Board to the President of the United States. Since April 27, 2015, Mr. Mika has served as a director of NanoVibronix, Inc., a medical device company focusing on non-invasive biological response activating devices. Mr. Mika holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Microbiology from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a Master of Business Administration degree from the Harvard Graduate School of Business.

Jason P. Adams commenced employment with Medytox in September 2015, and was appointed Chief Financial Officer on September 12, 2015. Mr. Adams was appointed Chief Financial Officer of the Company on November 2, 2015. Prior to joining Medytox, Mr. Adams was the Chief Financial Officer of West Central Behavioral Health, a provider of behavioral health services in the state of New Hampshire, from March 2014 until September 2015. Prior to his involvement with West Central Behavioral Health, he held similar positions with Alico, Inc., from April 2012 until March 2014, and the Source Interlink Companies, Inc., from February 2006 through April 2012. Mr. Adams holds a BS degree in Accounting from Castleton University, and a Colorado CPA designation.

Paul R. Billings, M.D., Ph.D, FACP, FACMG, joined the board of directors on April 7, 2014. A Board certified internist and clinical geneticist, Dr. Billings is currently the Chairman of Biological Dynamics, Inc., an innovative cancer testing company in San Diego, CA. He is also a member of the board of directors of Trovagene, Inc. (NASDAQ: TROV), acting Chief Medical Officer (CMO) of Omicia, Inc., and serves on other for-profit and not-for-profit boards including the Council for Responsible Genetics, the country’s oldest independent biotechnology "watchdog" organization. In the recent past, Dr. Billings completed significant consultancies at Johnson & Johnson and ThermoFisher Scientific (creating and directing the IMPACT Cancer Program) and was the CMO of Life Technologies Inc. (Lifetech) and then the CMO (consulting) of the Genetic Sciences Division of ThermoFisher Scientific, both positions aimed at improving patient care through expanding the use of medically relevant genomic technologies in clinical settings. Dr. Billings was formerly a director of Ancestry.com, the Executive Chairman of Signature Genomics Inc., and a Founder of the Cordblood Registry, Inc. Additionally, he was a founder or chief executive officer of several companies involved in genetic and diagnostic medicine including GeneSage Inc., Omicia Inc., and CELLective Dx Corporation, and was senior vice president for corporate development at Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (NYSE; LH). Dr. Billings has extensive expertise and experience in the areas of genomics and molecular medicine. He has served on the Scientific Advisory Board of the Food and Drug Administration, the Genomic Medicine Advisory Committee at the Department of Veterans Affairs, and as a Director of the Personalized Medicine Coalition. Prior to the appointments at Lifetech and TFS, Dr. Billings was the Director and Chief Scientific Officer of the Genomic Medicine Institute at El Camino Hospital, the largest community hospital in Silicon Valley. He was also a member of the United States Department of Health and Human Services Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health and Society. In addition, Dr. Billings has had a distinguished career as a physician and researcher. He has held academic appointments at Harvard University, U.C. San Francisco, Stanford University and U.C. Berkeley, and has served as a physician at a number of leading medical centers. He is the author of nearly 200 publications and books on experimental and clinical medicine. His work on genetic discrimination was instrumental in the creation and passage of the federal Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act of 2008. Dr. Billings holds an M.D. from Harvard Medical School and a Ph.D. in immunology from Harvard University.

Christopher E. Diamantis has served as a director of the Company since November 2, 2015 and previously served as a director of Medytox from April 24, 2013 to November 2, 2015. Mr. Diamantis has served, since 1999, as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Integrated Financial Settlements, Inc., a structured settlement consulting firm in Tallahassee, Florida. He has also been, since April 2000, a director and managing partner of the Gabor Agency, Inc., a 65-year old Florida-based company specializing in investment and insurance planning for public employees and universities. In addition, since 2007, Mr. Diamantis has been a director and partner in Counsel Financial Services, Inc., a specialty financial firm catering to the needs of the legal community and the largest non-bank lender to law firms in the United States. He is a past member of the Board of Governors of the Florida State University College of Business and past president of the National Structured Settlements Trade Association.

Benjamin Frank has served as a director of the Company since November 2, 2015 and previously served as a director of Medytox from April 24, 2013 to November 2, 2015. Mr. Frank is a retired lawyer and businessman, with particular experience in healthcare, foreign trade, retail, business development and government. After practicing as an attorney, from 1962 to 1966, he was a Senior Vice President and member of the Board of Directors of Allied Stores Corporation, which owned department stores and specialty stores, including Jordan Marsh, Brooks Brothers, Ann Taylor and others. He also served, from 1971 to 1987, as a Vice President and Trustee of North Shore University Hospital, currently North Shore University Hospital, Long Island Jewish Hospital System. Mr. Frank was appointed in February 2009 by former Florida Governor Charlie Crist to the Board of the Health Care District of Palm Beach County and he served as Chair of the Board from October 2011 to February 2013.

Michael L. Goldberg has served as a director of the Company since November 2, 2015 and previously served as a director of Medytox from August 6, 2015 to November 2, 2015. Mr. Goldberg has been the Managing Director of Monarch Capital LLC since April, 2006. Monarch is a corporate consulting company primarily servicing small to mid-sized public and private companies. As such, he served in a corporate restructuring capacity as a Director, Acting Chief Executive Officer and President of IDO Security, Inc., from July 2006, until May 2013. Mr. Goldberg served as a Director and Chief Executive Officer of Rx Medical Services Corp. (RXM), an American Stock Exchange listed company, a position he held from May 1991 through June 2006. RXM was a medical company, which at one time managed and owned rural hospitals, clinical laboratories and MRI/CT centers across the United States. While there he was responsible for in excess of 25 acquisitions across the country. Mr. Goldberg has been involved as a consultant to a number of private and public companies in varying industries, assisting in their formation and capital structures. Mr. Goldberg began his career as an Asper Fellow in the US Attorney's office in 1974 with the Criminal division of the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. (Watergate prosecution team) before becoming an Assistant District Attorney in Philadelphia where he rose to the major trial and then homicide division. Mr. Goldberg was also a litigator in Philadelphia where he maintained a private practice before he transitioned into a career in corporate restructuring. Mr. Goldberg has served as a Director of both private and publicly traded companies and has served on audit and compensation committees.

Robert Lee has served as a director of the Company since November 2, 2015 and previously served as a director of Medytox from August 6, 2015 to November 2, 2015. Mr. Lee is currently the Managing Partner of Sheffield Investment Partners, and has served in such capacity since 2010. Prior thereto, from 2008 until 2010, Mr. Lee served as a Managing Director of New Stream Capital, and from 2000 until 2007, Mr. Lee was a Managing Director at CRT Capital Group. Prior to joining CRT, Mr. Lee was a Managing Director of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter from 1984 until 2000. Mr. Lee ran several units of Dean Witter's Investment Bank including the M&A Group. After the merger of Dean Witter with Morgan Stanley, Mr. Lee was a Managing Director in the M&A group at Morgan Stanley working most closely with the Financial Sponsors. Mr. Lee also serves as a Board member of SL Investment Management, and has served in such capacity since 2011. From 2001 to 2008, Mr. Lee served on the Board of Springs Industries, and from 2008 until 2013, Mr. Lee served on the Board of Springs Window Fashions. Mr. Lee is also on the board of visitors for the Wake Forest School of Business, and previously served as Chairman of such Board. Mr. Lee received his undergraduate degree in economics from Dartmouth College (BA 1976) and attended the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business.

Family Relationships amongst Directors and Executive Officers

There are no family relationships between the executive officers and directors.

Board Committees

The board of directors of has an audit committee, a compensation committee and a nominating/corporate governance committee. Each of these committees operate under a charter that has been previously approved by the CollabRx board of directors and will have the composition and responsibilities described below. The board of directors from time to time may establish other committees to facilitate the management of the Company and may change the composition and the responsibilities of the existing committees.

The table below summarizes the membership of each of the three standing board committees of the Company after the merger.

Audit Committee

The purpose of the audit committee of the Company is to review the Company's audited financial statements with management, review the Company's independent registered public accountants' performance in the annual audit, review audit fees, review fees for the preparation of the Company's tax returns, discuss the Company's internal accounting control policies and procedures and consider and appoint the Company's independent registered public accountants. The audit committee has the authority to engage the services of outside experts and advisors as it deems necessary or appropriate to carry out its duties and responsibilities.

The audit committee charter is available on the Company's website at www.rennovahealth.com by selecting “Investors” and then “Governance” from the available options.

The audit committee of the Company consists of Robert Lee and Benjamin Frank. Each member of the audit committee qualifies as “independent” for purposes of membership on audit committees pursuant to the Listing Rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market and the rules and regulations of the SEC and is “financially literate” as required by the Listing Rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market. In addition, the board of directors of the Company has determined that Mr. Lee qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined by the rules and regulations of the SEC and meets the qualifications of “financial sophistication” under the Listing Rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market.

Compensation Committee

The purpose of the compensation committee of the Company is to assist the board of directors of the Company in the discharge of its responsibilities with respect to employee compensation including the adoption, periodic review and oversight of the Company's compensation strategy, policies and plans. The compensation committee of the Company administers equity plans of the Company, CollabRx and Medytox. The compensation committee has the authority to engage the services of outside experts and advisors as it deems necessary or appropriate to carry out its duties and responsibilities.

The compensation committee charter is available on the Company's website at www.rennovahealth.com by selecting “Investors” and then “Governance” from the available options.

The compensation committee of the Company consists of Dr. Paul Billings and Benjamin Frank.

Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee

The purpose of the governance and nominating committee of the Company is to oversee all aspects relating to corporate governance, including acting as an independent committee evaluating transactions between the Company and directors and officers. The nominating/corporate governance committee also assists the board of directors by identifying individuals qualified to become board members, recommend for selection by the board of directors the director nominees to stand for election at the next annual meeting of the Company's stockholders and recommend to the board director nominees for each committee of the board (other than this committee).

When reviewing related party transactions, the nominating/corporate governance committee considers all relevant facts and circumstances, including:

The nominating/corporate governance committee will only approve or ratify a related party transaction when it determines that, upon consideration of all relevant information, the transaction is in, or is not inconsistent with, the best interests of the Company and stockholders. No related party transactions will be consummated without the approval or ratification of the nominating/corporate governance committee and the disinterested members of the Company board of directors. Any directors interested in a related party transaction will recuse themselves from any vote relating to a related party transaction in which they have an interest.

The nominating/corporate governance committee has the authority to engage the services of outside experts and advisors as it deems necessary or appropriate to carry out its duties and responsibilities.

The nominating/corporate governance committee charter is available on the Company's website at www.rennovahealth.com by selecting “Investors” and then “Governance” from the available options.

The nominating/corporate governance committee of the Company consists of Benjamin Frank, Christopher Diamantis and Robert Lee.

Risk Management

The board of directors as a whole monitors and considers policies to manage risk as part of its regular activities. The committees of the board focus on and manages specific forms of risk and reports their activities to the board of directors. The audit committee is primarily responsible for the identification and review of financial risk. The compensation committee works to minimize risks associated with the executive compensation plans and stock benefit plans that it establishes. The nominating/corporate governance committee considers risks presented by changing law and regulation and recommend changes in governance and operations to comply.

Director Independence

The board of directors has affirmatively determined that each of Dr. Paul Billings, Benjamin Frank and Robert Lee is an “independent director” as defined under the Listing Rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market. The Listing Rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market provide a list of disqualifying criteria for the independence determination. For example, under these rules, a director who is, or during the past three years was, employed by the company or by any parent or subsidiary of the company, other than prior employment as an interim chairman or interim chief executive officer, would not be considered independent. No director qualifies as independent unless the board of directors affirmatively determines that the director does not have a material relationship with the listed company that would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The following table sets forth all of the compensation awarded to, earned by or paid to (i) each individual that served as our principal executive officer during our last completed fiscal year; (ii) the Company's two most highly compensated executive officers other than the principal executive officer at the conclusion of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 and (iii) the Company's two most highly compensated executive officers other than the principal executive officer but for the fact that these persons were not serving as executive officers at the conclusion of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 (collectively, the Named Executive Officers).

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE