• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

MassDevice

The Medical Device Business Journal — Medical Device News & Articles | MassDevice

  • Latest News
    • Cardiovascular
    • Orthopedics
  • Wall Street Beat
    • Funding Roundup
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Podcasts
    • DeviceTalks Weekly
  • Resources
    • About MassDevice
    • Newsletter Signup
    • Job Board
    • Leadership in Medtech
    • Manufacturer Search
    • MedTech 100 Index
    • Videos
    • Whitepapers
  • DeviceTalks Tuesdays
    • DeviceTalks
  • Coronavirus: Live updates
Home » Biolase ex-CEO Pignatelli ditches the board

Biolase ex-CEO Pignatelli ditches the board

August 7, 2014 By Arezu Sarvestani

Biolase ex-CEO Pignatelli steps down from board

Former Biolase (NSDQ:BIOL) CEO Federico Pignatelli, who was removed from the corner office by a court order earlier this year, also walked away from the company’s board of directors.

Pignatelli issued yet another letter to Biolase stockholders this week, announcing his decision to retire immediately and withdraw his nomination for election. He didn’t go quietly, accusing other board members of scheming to "disenfranchise independent Directors through a series of calculated actions designed to isolate us and remove our power."

Fellow board member Dr. Norman Nemoy resigned just a day ahead of Pignatelli, although there was no accompanying announcement about his departure. That leaves the Biolase board comprise entirely of members with ties to Oracle or to Larry Feinberg, managing partner for major stakeholder Oracle Partners, Pignatelli said.

Pignatelli has been at odds with Oracle for months, a feud that returned with a vengeance after Biolase reported dismal 1st quarter earnings this year. Oracle accused Pignatelli of "improper Board manipulations" and sought a court order to reorganize the company’s board. A Delaware Supreme Court ruling handed down in June forced Pignatelli to retire as CEO, making way for new acting CEO and board member Jeffrey Nugent and new board chairman Paul Clark.

Since being ousted, Pignatelli has claimed that Nugent and others schemed with Oracle to eject him and take over the company. Pignatelli launched an investigation and filed a lawsuit against the new Biolase and its leadership (which he later withdrew) and attempted to secure his seat on the board by appealing to shareholders through press releases.

In his latest letter, issued yesterday, Pignatelli offered yet another laundry list of alleged misdeeds by Biolase’s new leadership, including providing excessive compensation packages, establishing golden parachutes for new managers and giving Oracle too much power over the board.

Read the full letter below:

To My Fellow Stockholders:

Later today I will deliver to Paul N. Clark and Michael C. Carroll, the Chairman and Secretary of BIOLASE, respectively, my letter of resignation as a Director of BIOLASE, effective as of 11:59 p.m. Pacific time today. Further, I will withdraw my name from the ballot for election to the BIOLASE Board at the upcoming annual meeting of stockholders.

I have served as a Director of BIOLASE for the past 23 years, including years with a hostile majority of the Board (2006 to August 2010) that made numerous poor decisions, against my vote, that I only managed to overturn upon being named Chairman and CEO in August 2010. I am concerned about the company’s future as I foresee a repeat of what happened in the past. My decision to resign has not been an easy one as I have deep emotional and financial roots with BIOLASE and the utmost respect for its employees and long-standing stockholders, who have shown great confidence and faith in BIOLASE and its former leadership. My decision to resign follows a protracted campaign by a majority of the Board, controlled by and acting under the direction of Oracle Partners (Oracle) (BIOLASE’s largest stockholder) and Larry N. Feinberg (Oracle’s Managing Partner), to disenfranchise independent Directors through a series of calculated actions designed to isolate us and remove our power. The Board majority, controlled by Oracle, blocked our access to BIOLASE books and records and effectively prevented us from participating in the BIOLASE corporate governance process.

These actions included, but were not limited to:

  • The adoption of improper bylaw amendments that (a) provide for a Delaware exclusive forum selection clause; and (b) provide for fee-shifting relating to claims brought by or on behalf of any current or former Director, each of which has the effect of entrenching the Oracle-controlled Directors and disenfranchising stockholders by quieting any voice of opposition;

  • Summarily rejecting a proposed slate of Directors nominated through me for election at the upcoming annual meeting of stockholders because it claims that I – who have owned over a million shares of BIOLASE common stock for years – was not qualified to nominate a slate, based upon a "technical requirement,"1 thus depriving BIOLASE’s stockholders of any opportunity to express their voice on who will lead BIOLASE going forward (and rather than waive this technicality, which would have been appropriate, the Oracle-controlled Board instead chose to spend substantially large sums of BIOLASE’s cash – expenses that should have been Oracle’s as they were undertaken in support only of Oracle’s interests – that otherwise would have been available for product development and marketing, on the fees of extremely expensive large law firms to ensure stockholders did not have a say in this matter);

  • Consummating  a private placement financing "under cover of dark" to Oracle and Oracle supporters on the eve of the record date for the annual meeting at a depressed market price, following apparent actions by Oracle to depress the public market price of BIOLASE’s shares. This placed an additional 6.25 million shares (approximately 16% of previously outstanding shares) in Oracle-controlled hands that can be voted to support and further entrench the Board chosen by Oracle;

  • Repeatedly scheduling meetings of the Board on weekends and during evening hours, on minimal advance notice to Dr. Norman Nemoy and me, the only Directors independent of Oracle;

  • Failing to provide Dr. Nemoy or me with adequate opportunity to review materials in advance of a vote on the related proposal, including most recently, providing a document more than 130 pages in length a mere 11 minutes before the Board meeting was convened at which a vote on the related proposal was held;

  • Refusing to provide salient information, properly requested by Dr. Nemoy or me, and affirmatively directing members of management present at Board meetings not to respond to reasonable and relevant factual inquiries made by Dr. Nemoy or me;

  • The establishment of an Executive Committee of the Board, comprised solely of the Oracle-controlled Directors, to disenfranchise the only Directors independent of Oracle and exclude them from normal corporate governance and the decision-making process, and to permit future decisions to be made without any input from Board members not controlled by Oracle;

  • Rewarding Oracle-chosen management, particularly interim CEO Jeffrey Nugent, with excessive compensation packages that are unrelated to performance or BIOLASE’s financial results (recall that during my tenure as CEO, I was paid $1 per year and periodically was granted stock options issued at the market price on the date of grant – thus, I would only benefit if stockholder value were enhanced under my leadership); and

  • Approving golden parachutes for new members of management, further entrenching them and burdening BIOLASE with contingent liabilities unrelated to performance and the enhancement of stockholder value, adverse to stockholder interests (recall that during my tenure as CEO, substantially all employees had at-will arrangements; we did not burden BIOLASE with special arrangements for management at the expense of all stockholders).

With my resignation, and the resignation of Dr. Norman Nemoy yesterday, the BIOLASE Board is now comprised of Paul N. Clark, Dr. Frederic H. Moll, Jeffrey M. Nugent and James R. Talevich, each of whom has direct ties and/or allegiance to Oracle and Mr. Feinberg. These Directors have voted together as a block, with limited if any deliberations, on each matter (including those delineated above) that has come before the Board since late-February 2014, when Oracle launched its initiative to seize control of the BIOLASE Board and its operations.

What is disturbing is that the Oracle block is comprised of individuals who are well known and considered "of business reputation" in the medical field, such as Larry Feinberg, the principal of Oracle Partners; Fred Moll, a Co-Founder of Intuitive Surgical, CEO of Auris, Director of Hansen Medical; Paul Clark, ex-Vice-President of Abbot Laboratories, ex-CEO of Icos and current Director of Agilent; Jeffrey Nugent, ex-CEO of Neutrogena, now part of Johnson and Johnson and Revlon; and Jim Talevich, ex-CFO of iFlo, acquired by Kimberly-Clark and a former auditor at KPMG. Their actions as Directors and initiatives to disenfranchise stockholders of BIOLASE are inexplicable; however, what is clear is that their actions are not in the best interest of all BIOLASE stockholders and are in violation of fiduciary duties owed to us.

Before considering my resignation, I attempted to invoke the powers of the Delaware Chancery Court to recognize the competing Board slate I put forth for election at the annual meeting and to protect certain rights of all BIOLASE stockholders; however, after being denied expedited relief on a number of time-sensitive issues by the Delaware Chancery Court, based upon various technicalities argued by the Oracle-controlled Board and designed to drown the proceedings in a sea of red tape, I determined that it is in the best interest of BIOLASE stockholders that I change my strategy, withdraw as a Director and Director nominee, and seek to preserve and protect the rights of BIOLASE stockholders as an independent unaffiliated stockholder. Among the issues that are of primary concern to me, above and beyond the entrenchment initiatives by the Oracle-controlled Board highlighted above, are the following, each of which will potentially cause real and irreparable harm to BIOLASE:

  • The precipitous exodus of BIOLASE employees since the lawsuit filed by Oracle and its interference in the company’s business with the appointment of Jeffrey Nugent as the interim chief executive officer to succeed me; and

  • Business retention and exploitation of revenue opportunities, particularly in light of a current BIOLASE leadership team that has limited experience in BIOLASE’s core business area and a business strategy that is clouded at best.

I am deeply committed to preserving the BIOLASE business franchise and enhancing stockholder value. BIOLASE has an extensive and exceptional portfolio of current and potential product offerings, technologies and intellectual property, most of which were developed under my leadership. If properly exploited, these products will radically change the way surgery is performed in many fields of medicine and in dentistry, substantially enhancing BIOLASE stockholder value. In fact, I strongly believe that the most revolutionary technologies among these new offerings, which consist of valuable company trade secrets, have been secretly revealed to affiliates of Oracle by certain members of the Board and management to the exclusion of others in the market, which is what piqued Oracle’s interest in raiding BIOLASE in the first instance.

It is ironic, to say the least, that Oracle is attempting to gain a stranglehold on these innovative products by assassinating the character and record of the very management that helped developed them. Oracle’s message appears to be that BIOLASE has been floundering under poor management, but their actions suggest that they will go to any lengths to obtain what I and my management team created. As that appears to be their plan (if that is their plan), they should pay a fair price to stockholders, not a depressed price generated from poor interim management and unsupported revisionist history and rhetoric. Achieving fair value for all BIOLASE stockholders has always been, and will continue to be, my principal goal. Unfortunately, due to the Oracle initiative and the current Board composition, I am no longer able to effectively exercise my duties as a Director and guide the implementation of our long-term product strategy from that position.

Rest assured, I remain fully committed to my fellow BIOLASE stockholders to preserve and protect our proprietary and commercial interests and ensure that stockholder value is maximized. In just over a month, the Oracle-controlled Directors have reduced BIOLASE’s corporate governance from a stockholder democracy to an Oracle dictatorship, muting any voices of independence and without regard to stockholder value and the fundamental BIOLASE business franchise. I will not passively stand by and allow this to advance – we the stockholders of BIOLASE must insist upon the full accountability of those at the helm.

Respectfully, 
Federico Pignatelli

Filed Under: Dental, News Well Tagged With: Biolase, Laser/Light-based Devices, Oracle Partners, Personnel Moves

In case you missed it

  • DTW Podcast: How is Zimmer Biomet waging the ortho data war? Do medical devices carry physics-based biases?
  • Another BD Alaris infusion pump recall is Class I
  • 9 medical devices you should keep an eye out for in 2021
  • A quick history of the tech behind J&J, AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccines
  • FDA finalizes rule to scale back how it regulates medtech software
  • Qorvo wins FDA nod for test that uses acoustic waves to detect COVID-19 antigens
  • Amgen completes $1.9B acquisition of Five Prime Therapeutics
  • SeaSpine prices $87.8M offering
  • Annual COVID-19 vaccines likely, according to Pfizer CEO
  • Medtronic has another serious HVAD recall
  • Vicarious Surgical to go public in $1.1B SPAC deal
  • Analysts are bullish on Align Technology
  • Trice Medical raises more than $10M
  • FDA clears Acutus Medical suite of universal transseptal crossing devices
  • Mayo Clinic helps launch two new companies for improved diagnostics
  • HHS shoots down ‘flawed’ plan to let some devices skip review
  • Solo-Dex launches peripheral nerve block catheter

RSS From Medical Design & Outsourcing

  • EPA delayed notifying residents of ethylene oxide emissions
    The EPA delayed notifying neighbors of an Illinois medical device sterilization plant of ethylene oxide (EtO) emissions the agency measured in 2018, according to an inspector general’s report released yesterday. The report also says that “leadership” in the agency’s Office of Air and Radiation also failed to conduct public meetings with residents either near the… […]
  • 9 medical devices you should keep an eye out for in 2021
    The medical device industry weathered the COVID-19 pandemic well — and is now set to roll out a host of innovations in 2021. Economists generally expect the U.S. to see a boom as we emerge from the pandemic and resulting recession. Medtech companies appear set to ride the wave this year, with plans to seek… […]
  • Greenlight Guru to provide QMS to NIH diagnostics program
    NIH has chosen Greenlight Guru to provide quality management software for its COVID-19 rapid diagnostics program. The agency launched the Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics (RADx) program in March 2020 to speed the development, commercialization and implementation COVID-19 testing technologies. As the only QMS provider currently available to all projects in the RADx program, Greenlight Guru… […]
  • MicroCare names CFO
    MicroCare (New Britain, Conn.) has announced the appointment of John Stardellis as the company’s new chief financial officer (CFO). Stardellis joins MicroCare with more than 20 years’ experience in a variety of finance, policy and operational leadership roles. Most recently, he served as CFO at i-Health, a division of DSM Nutritional Products. “John’s track record with… […]
  • Mayo Clinic helps launch two new companies for improved diagnostics
    Mayo Clinic announced that it is introducing a new technology platform to support two new companies it has launched. Rochester, Minn.–based Mayo Clinic’s Remote Diagnostics & Management Platform (RDMP) is designed to connect data with new AI algorithms and augment human decision-making within existing clinical workflows, according to a news release. Get the full story… […]
  • Intertek gains FDA nod for premarket device testing
    Intertek has won accreditation under an FDA pilot program for testing laboratories, the company said this week. The accreditation authorizes Intertek’s 12 “medical centers of excellence” to perform premarket testing of devices for the U.S. market. The Accreditation Scheme for Conformity Assessment pilot program is a voluntary program developed to provide increased confidence in testing… […]
  • HHS shoots down ‘flawed’ plan to let some devices skip review
    The Biden administration has nixed what it described as a “flawed” Trump-era decision to exempt certain medical devices — including infusion pump controllers and fetal monitors — from regulatory review. HHS published the original notice in the Federal Register on Jan. 15, shortly before President Joe Biden was set to take office, without speaking with… […]
  • More than 50 medtech testing sites win FDA pilot accreditation
    The FDA announced today that more than 50 laboratory sites were chosen to participate in its program for streamlined regulatory reviews. In total, 53 sites made the FDA’s initial list for participation in its Accreditation Scheme for Conformity Assessment (ASCA) program, which will set out to support more streamlined regulatory reviews of medical device market… […]
  • Medline Industries up for sale?
    Medline Industries is looking for a buyer in a deal that could be worth $30 billion, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal. The Journal cites “people familiar with the matter” saying that Northfield, Ill.-based Medline has hired Goldman Sachs to manage the process. The people added that the company might alternatively seek… […]
  • Micro to add plant in Costa Rica
    Contract manufacturer Micro today announced plans to open a new plant in Costa Rica. The 32,000 ft² facility will significantly increase Micro’s cleanroom assembly capacity, according to the Somerset, N.J.-based company. It will be located in the Zona Franca Metro business park and is expected to open in late 2021 with operations beginning in 2022.… […]
  • Survey shows solid medical device industry performance despite pandemic
    By Stewart Eisenhart, Emergo Group Medical device and IVD manufacturers report healthy performance over the course of 2020, but also faced significant operational and regulatory challenges related to the coronavirus pandemic. Get the full story here at the Emergo Group’s blog. The opinions expressed in this blog post are the author’s only and do not… […]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Primary Sidebar

DeviceTalks by MassDevice · How Zimmer Biomet is competing in ortho’s data race; Do medical devices carry physics-based biases?

MEDTECH 100 INDEX

Medtech 100 logo
Market Summary > Current Price
The MedTech 100 is a financial index calculated using the BIG100 companies covered in Medical Design and Outsourcing.
Need Medtech news in a minute?
We Deliver!

MassDevice Enewsletters get you caught up on all the mission critical news you need in med tech. Sign up today.

Tweets by @MassDevice
MDO ad

Footer

MASSDEVICE MEDICAL NETWORK

DeviceTalks
Drug Delivery Business News
Medical Design & Outsourcing
Medical Tubing + Extrusion

MASSDEVICE

Subscribe to MassDevice
Advertise with us
About
Contact us

Add us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Connect with us on LinkedIn Follow us on YouTube

Copyright © 2021 · WTWH Media LLC and its licensors. All rights reserved.
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of WTWH Media.

Advertise | Privacy Policy | RSS