The selling shareholders named in this prospectus are offering 3,091,635 ordinary shares of NANO-X IMAGING LTD. We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of the shares being sold by the selling shareholders.

Our ordinary shares are listed on The Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “NNOX.” On February 5, 2021, the closing sales price of our ordinary shares as reported on The Nasdaq Global Market was $69.77 per ordinary share.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 and are subject to reduced public company reporting requirements. See “Prospectus Summary—Implications of Being an Emerging Growth Company and a Foreign Private Issuer.”

Investing in our ordinary shares involves a high degree of risk. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page 13 of this prospectus for a discussion of information that should be considered in connection with an investment in our ordinary shares.

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.

The underwriters expect to deliver the shares to purchasers in the offering on or about February 16, 2021.

Through and including March 7, 2021 (the 25^th day after the date of this prospectus), all dealers effecting transactions in these securities, whether or not participating in this offering, may be required to deliver a prospectus. This is in addition to a dealer’s obligation to deliver a prospectus when acting as an underwriter and with respect to an unsold allotment or subscription.

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus and any related free-writing prospectus that we authorize to be distributed to you. We and the selling shareholders have not authorized any person, including any underwriter, to provide you with information different from that contained in this prospectus or any related free-writing prospectus that we authorize to be distributed to you. This prospectus is not an offer to sell, nor is it seeking an offer to buy, our ordinary shares in any state or jurisdiction where such offer or sale is not permitted. The information in this prospectus speaks only as of the date of this prospectus unless the information specifically indicates that another date applies, regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or of any sale of the ordinary shares offered hereby. Our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may have changed since that date. We do not take any responsibility for, nor do we provide any assurance as to the reliability of, any information other than the information in this prospectus and any free writing prospectus prepared by us or on our behalf. Neither the delivery of this prospectus nor the sale of our ordinary shares means that information contained in this prospectus is correct after the date of this prospectus.

You may lose all of your investment in our ordinary shares. If you are uncertain as to our business and operations or you are not prepared to lose all of your investment in our ordinary shares, we strongly urge you not to purchase any of our ordinary shares. We recommend that you consult legal, financial, tax and other professional advisors or experts for further guidance before participating in the offering of our ordinary shares as further detailed in this prospectus.

We do not recommend that you purchase our ordinary shares unless you have prior experience with investments in capital markets, and basic knowledge of the healthcare and medical imaging industry, and unless you have received independent professional advice.

The ordinary shares offered by this prospectus have not been approved or disapproved by the Israel Securities Authority (the “ISA”), nor have such shares been registered for sale in Israel. The ordinary shares may not be offered or sold, directly or indirectly, to the public in Israel, absent the publication of a prospectus that has been approved by the ISA. The ISA has not issued permits, approvals or licenses in connection with this offering or publishing this prospectus, nor has it authenticated the details included herein, confirmed their reliability or completeness, or rendered an opinion as to the quality of the shares being offered.

This document does not constitute a prospectus under the Israeli Securities Law, 5728-1968 (the “Securities Law”) and has not been filed with or approved by the ISA. In the State of Israel, this document may be distributed only to, and may be directed only at, and any offer of the ordinary shares may be directed only at (i) to the extent applicable, a limited number of persons in accordance with the Securities Law and (ii) investors listed in the first addendum to the Securities Law (the “Addendum”) consisting primarily of joint investment in trust funds, provident funds, insurance companies, banks, portfolio managers, investment advisors, members of the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange Ltd., underwriters, venture capital funds, entities with equity in excess of New Israeli Shekel (“NIS”) 50 million, and “qualified individuals,” each as defined in the Addendum (as it may be amended from time to time), collectively referred to as qualified investors (in each case purchasing for their own account or, where permitted under the Addendum, for the accounts of their clients who are investors listed in the Addendum). Qualified investors will be required to submit written confirmation that they fall within the scope of the Addendum, are aware of the meaning of same and agree to it.

This prospectus includes statistics and other data relating to markets, market sizes and other industry data pertaining to our business that we have obtained from industry publications and surveys and other information available to us. Industry publications and surveys generally state that the information contained therein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. We have not independently verified any of the data from third-party sources nor have we ascertained the underlying economic assumptions relied upon therein. Market data and statistics are inherently predictive and speculative and are not necessarily reflective of actual market conditions. Such statistics are based on market research, which itself is based on sampling and subjective judgments by both the researchers and the respondents, including judgments about what types of products and transactions should be included in the relevant market. In addition, the value of comparisons of statistics for different markets is limited by many factors, including that (i) the markets are defined differently, (ii) the underlying information was gathered by different methods, and (iii) different assumptions were applied in compiling the data. Accordingly, the market statistics included in this prospectus should be viewed with caution. We believe that information from these industry publications included in this prospectus is reliable.

Solely for convenience, the trademarks, service marks, and trade names referred to in this prospectus are without the ® and ™ symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights or the rights of the applicable licensors to these trademarks, service marks and trade names. This prospectus contains additional trademarks, service marks and trade names of others, which are the property of their respective owners. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trademarks, service marks or trade names to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other companies.

We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Israel under the name “NANO-X IMAGING LTD” on December 20, 2018. We commenced our operations on September 3, 2019. Substantially all of our assets were acquired or assigned (the “Asset Purchase”) from our predecessor company, Nanox Imaging PLC (“Nanox Gibraltar”), a Gibraltar public company, pursuant to an asset purchase agreement (the “Asset Purchase Agreement”), dated as of September 3, 2019 and as amended on December 3, 2019 and December 31, 2019, between Nanox Gibraltar and us.

As of September 3, 2019, we and Nanox Gibraltar had the same shareholders and therefore the transaction was treated as a transaction under common control for accounting purposes. For periods and at dates prior to the Asset Purchase, the financial statements prior to September 3, 2019 included in this prospectus were prepared based on the historical financial statements of Nanox Gibraltar, which were adjusted to reflect (a) only the net assets that were transferred in the transaction according to the Asset Purchase Agreement, (b) that no interests of Nanox Japan, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Nanox Gibraltar (“Nanox Japan (predecessor)”) were transferred under the Asset Purchase, and the fact that the consolidated statement of operations at Nano-X Imaging Ltd includes the costs incurred for services provided by Nanox Japan (predecessor) to Nanox Gibraltar, (c) the consideration in the Asset Purchase as if it was recorded at the beginning of the earliest period presented, against a decrease in the shareholders’ equity, with the exception of the cash consideration that was received by Nanox Gibraltar from its equity financing activities in 2019, which was recorded in 2019, and (d) all of the share-related information as the share information of Nano-X Imaging Ltd.

Unless derived from our financial statements or otherwise noted, the terms “shekels” and “NIS” refer to New Israeli Shekels, the lawful currency of the State of Israel, the terms “dollar” or “$” refer to U.S. dollars, the lawful currency of the United States, “Yen” refers to Japanese Yen, the lawful currency of Japan, and “KRW” refers to Korean Won, the lawful currency of South Korea.

We are subject to various risks that may materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. An investment in our ordinary shares is speculative and involves a high degree of risk. In evaluating an investment, and before deciding whether to invest, in our ordinary shares, you should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below, together with all the other information included in this prospectus, including our consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

If any of the events described in the following risk factors actually occurs, or if additional risks and uncertainties that are not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial later materialize, then our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially adversely affected, the trading price of our ordinary shares could very likely decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment in our shares. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. In addition, the risks discussed below include forward-looking statements, and our actual results may differ substantially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements.

We are a development-stage company, and are subject to all of the risks inherent in the establishment of a new business enterprise. We have a limited operating history and only a preliminary and unproven business plan upon which investors may evaluate our prospects. We have not yet demonstrated the feasibility of our digital X-ray source technology for commercial applications. Although we have produced a working prototype of the Nanox.ARC and developed a prototype of the Nanox.CLOUD, we have not produced any of the approximately 15,000 Nanox.ARC units planned for the initial global deployment under the contract manufacturing agreement with FoxSemicon Integrated Technology, Inc., a subsidiary of Foxconn (“FITI”). Even if we are able to do so, we may not be able to manufacture the Nanox.ARC at the low costs needed to support our business models, including the Subscription Model, which is our primary business model. We may not receive, or may be delayed in receiving, the necessary approval or clearance for the Nanox.ARC or our future products. We also have not entered into any commercial arrangement for the licensing of our X-ray source under the Licensing Model.

Furthermore, even if our technology becomes commercially viable, our business models may not generate sufficient revenue necessary to support our business. We estimate that effectively stimulating market interest in our Nanox System will require deploying at least 5,000 to 10,000 Nanox.ARC units. In addition, we estimate that a minimum installed base of at least 1,000 Nanox.ARC units will be needed to support our business during the initial deployment, assuming we enter into at least one licensing agreement on commercially reasonable terms. We may never achieve any of these thresholds for units deployed in the near-to-mid-term at any level or at all, which may cause our business to fail. The Subscription Model is based on selling the Nanox System at low cost or no cost using a pay-per-scan pricing structure, which is pioneering for medical imaging companies and is subject to numerous risks. The medical imaging industry is also highly competitive and our technology, products, services or business models may not achieve widespread market acceptance. If we are unable to address any issues mentioned above, or encounter other problems, expenses, difficulties, complications, and delays in connection with the starting and expansion of our business, our entire business may fail, in which case you may lose your entire investment.

We have a history of net losses and negative cash flow from operations since inception and we expect such losses and negative cash flows from operations to continue in the foreseeable future. As of September 30, 2020 and December 31, 2019, we had working capital of approximately $235.7 million and $(10.6) million, respectively, and shareholders’ equity (deficit) of approximately $239.1 million and $(8.8) million, respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019 and the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, we incurred net losses of approximately $24.8 million, $3.5 million, $22.6 million and $1.9 million, respectively. As of September 30, 2020 and December 31, 2019, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $65.4 million and $40.6 million, respectively, and negative cash flow from operations of $8.2 million, $2.0 million, $5.5 million and $3.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019 and the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. We anticipate our losses will continue to increase from current levels

because we expect to incur additional costs related to developing our business, including research and development costs, manufacturing costs, employee-related costs, costs of complying with government regulations, intellectual property development and prosecution costs, marketing and promotion costs, capital expenditures, general and administrative expenses, and costs associated with operating as a public company

Our ability to generate revenue from our operations and, ultimately, achieve profitability will depend on, among others, whether we can complete the development and commercialization of our technology, our future products and our services, including our X-ray source technology, the Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD, whether we can manufacture the Nanox.ARC on a commercial scale in such amounts and at such costs as we anticipate, and whether we can achieve market acceptance of our products, services and business models. We may never generate any revenue or operate on a profitable basis. Even if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain it.

We have developed our X-ray source technology, including both the MEMs X-ray chips and tubes, and a working prototype of the Nanox.ARC. Even though we believe our X-ray source has achieved commercial applicability, our technology has not been tested over extended periods of time and therefore no meaningful data exists regarding the durability, safety and effectiveness of our X-ray source over extended periods. Although we have produced a working prototype of the Nanox.ARC, we may not be able to successfully integrate our X-ray source into the Nanox.ARC or any medical imaging system. In addition, there is no precedent for commercialization of technology like ours. Even with a fully functional prototype, the commercial scale production and deployment of Nanox.ARC will require significant additional development, sales and marketing efforts, and we may not be able to ensure the effectiveness, accuracy, consistency and safety of the Nanox.ARC in commercial settings. Any unanticipated technical or other problems and the possible insufficiency of funds and other resources needed to complete the development and commercialization of our X-ray source, the Nanox.ARC or the Nanox.CLOUD may result in delays and cause us to incur additional expenses that would increase our losses. If our X-ray source is not commercially feasible now or in the long term, our business may fail.

In addition to the Nanox.ARC, we are also developing the Nanox.CLOUD, a companion cloud software designed to deliver MSaaS. We have developed a prototype of the Nanox.CLOUD. The development and commercialization of the Nanox.CLOUD has a number of risks, including:

If we are unable to successfully develop and commercialize the Nanox.CLOUD, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be negatively impacted.

Our core digital X-ray source technology is the basis of our business. The Nanox.ARC currently under development is being designed to integrate our X-ray source technology into a medical imaging device for commercial use. As a result, the success of our business plan is highly dependent on our ability to develop, manufacture and commercialize our X-ray source technology and related products and services, such as the Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD, and our failure to do so could cause our business to fail. Successful commercialization of medical imaging devices is a complex and uncertain process, dependent on the efforts of management, manufacturers, local operators, integrators, medical professionals, third-party payors, as well as general economic conditions, among other factors. Any factor that adversely impacts the development and commercialization of our X-ray source technology or related products and services, including the Nanox.ARC, the Nanox.CLOUD and the Nanox System, will have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Some potential factors include:

Our inability to successfully obtain clearance or approval for and subsequently commercialize our X-ray source technology or related products and services, and/or successfully develop and commercialize additional products or any enhancements to the products which we may develop would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We are taking a multi-step approach to the regulatory clearance process. As a first step, we submitted a 510(k) premarket notification to an accredited Review Organization under the Third Party Review Program for a single-source version of the Nanox.ARC in January 2020. As part of the review process, in March 2020, we received an information request, referred to as a major deficiency letter, from the Review Organization, which among other things, required us to provide additional data and other information to complete the application and to address certain deficiencies highlighted by the reviewer, including the results of certain performance tests. On September 3, 2020, we submitted our response to the Review Organization. The response included additional data and other information to complete the application and to address certain deficiencies identified by the reviewer, including the results of certain performance tests. On September 10, 2020, the Review Organization requested that we include a second predicate device in our 510(k) premarket notification. On September 26, 2020, we submitted our revised 510(k) premarket notification to the Review Organization, which the Review Organization subsequently recommended to the FDA for clearance on December 28, 2020. On January 1, 2021, we received an informational request from the FDA through the Review Organization regarding our submission, which we responded to on January 4, 2021. On January 30, 2021, we received additional information requests from the FDA which, among other things, require us to address certain deficiencies and questions, including requests that we provide additional support regarding the intended use of the Nanox.ARC and the comparability

of the Nanox.ARC to the predicate device. We plan to respond to these requests promptly. In addition, we will continue to work with the FDA to address further information requests, if any. In addition, we will continue to optimize and develop features of the Nanox.ARC, and plan to submit an additional 510(k) premarket notification to the FDA with respect to the multi-source Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD during 2021. If cleared by the FDA, we expect to commercialize the multi-source Nanox.ARC and we may seek alternatives for commercialization of our single-source Nanox.ARC. The review process may be more costly and time consuming than we expect and we may not ultimately be successful in completing the review process and our 510(k) premarket notification may not be cleared by the FDA in a timely manner or at all. We may also need to seek approval from foreign regulatory authorities. With respect to our X-ray source technology, although we believe that it does not require FDA approval or clearance, regulatory agencies may not agree. To date, we have not had any discussion with the FDA or other regulatory authorities regarding the regulatory pathways for the novel digital X-ray source. Efforts to achieve required governmental clearances and approvals could be costly and time consuming, and we may not be able to obtain any such required clearances or approvals in accordance with our anticipated timeline or in a cost-efficient manner. Any delay or failure to obtain necessary regulatory clearances or approvals could have a material negative impact on our ability to generate revenues. Even if the products containing our technology receive the required regulatory clearance or approval, such products will remain subject to extensive regulatory requirements. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements of the FDA and other applicable U.S. and foreign regulatory authorities, or previously unknown problems with any approved commercial products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes are discovered, we could be subject to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions.

In addition, the cost of compliance with new laws or regulations governing our technology or future products could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. New laws or regulations may impose restrictions or obligations on us that could force us to redesign our technology or other future products or services, and may impose restrictions that are not possible or practicable to comply with, which could cause our business to fail. See “—Risks Related to Government Regulation.”

Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. Our net losses were $24.8 million, $3.5 million, $22.6 million and $1.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019 and the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. In addition, significant resources were invested in the development of our X-ray source technology prior to us acquiring the technology. We anticipate that our future cash requirements will continue to be significant. From December 2019 through July 2020, we entered into share purchase agreements in connection with the private placement conducted prior to our initial public offering with certain investors for an aggregate purchase price, before fees and expenses, of approximately $79 million. We may need to obtain additional financing to implement our business plan as described in this prospectus. Specifically, although we believe our cash on hand are sufficient to complete the manufacture, shipping, installation and deployment of the initial wave of approximately 15,000 Nanox.ARC units, as well as to support the continued research and development of the Nanox.ARC and the development of the Nanox.CLOUD, we may need to raise additional funds for such purposes, including in the case of unforeseen events. Such financings could include equity financing, which may be dilutive to shareholders, or debt financing, which would likely restrict our ability to borrow from other sources. In addition, such securities may contain rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of the rights of our current shareholders. Additional funds may not be available when we need them, on terms attractive to us, or at all. If adequate funds are not available on a timely basis, we may be required to curtail the development of our technology, products or services, or materially delay, curtail, reduce or terminate our research and development and commercialization activities. We could be forced to sell or dispose of our rights or assets. Any inability to raise adequate funds on commercially reasonable terms could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation and prospects, including the possibility that a lack of funds could cause our business to fail and liquidate with little or no return to investors.

We expect the Subscription Model to be our primary business model and the key to achieving our vision of increasing early-detection of medical conditions that are discoverable by X-ray. Even if we are able to successfully implement our Sales Model and/or our Licensing Model, the sustainability of our general business plan depends substantially on the sustainability of our Subscription Model. We believe that effectively stimulating market interest in our Nanox System will require deploying 5,000 to 10,000 Nanox.ARC units. In addition, we estimate that a minimum installed base of at least 1,000 Nanox.ARC units will be needed to support our business during the initial deployment, assuming we enter into at least one licensing agreement on commercially reasonable terms. The success of our Subscription Model will also depend on each device, once deployed, performing a sufficient number of scans per day to be fully utilized. We may not be successful in achieving these goals for various reasons, including:

Any of the above factors may negatively affect the implementation of our Subscription Model, or cause our Subscription Model to fail.

Under our proposed Licensing Model, we expect to be engaged to tailor our X-ray source to other medical imaging companies’ specific systems to replace the legacy X-ray source or to license our X-ray source technology to them to develop new types of imaging systems, and we expect to receive a one-time, non-recurring licensing fee upfront, as well as recurring royalty payments for each imaging system sold by such companies. We expect customization to be a complex and multi-step process that varies for each project, which will require significant research and testing activities. We may also not be able to demonstrate the feasibility, functionality or safety of our technology in other medical imaging systems, meet the potential licensees’ design and manufacturing requirements, or satisfy their marketing and product needs. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into licensing agreements with favorable terms as a result of a numbers of factors, many of which are outside of our control, including willingness of, and the resources available to, other medical imaging companies to in-license our novel X-ray source technology, our ability to agree with a potential partner on the value of our technology, or on the related terms, as well as the availability of other technologies at lower cost or other alternative technologies at the time. We have not entered into any licensing agreements; however, we are in negotiations regarding a commercial arrangement with FUJIFILM Corporation for the licensing of our Nanox System. Any of the above factors may negatively affect the implementation of our Licensing Model, or cause our Licensing Model to fail.

The FDA may require products developed by other medical imaging companies under the Licensing Model to go through lengthier or more rigorous processes than we expected. These products may also be subject to regulations by governmental agencies in other jurisdictions, or regulation by other federal, state and local agencies. In addition, we may not have control with respect to any such further regulatory approval strategies or process. If such products do not receive, or are delayed in receiving, the necessary clearances or approvals, or if the performance of one or more clinical trials are required in connection with such clearances or approvals, the prospects of our Licensing Model may be materially affected, which could have a material adverse impact on our business and our revenues.

Public health crises such as pandemics or similar outbreaks could adversely impact our business. Beginning in 2019, a novel strain of a virus named SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), or coronavirus, which causes COVID-19, has spread to most countries across the world, including Israel, Japan and all 50 states within the U.S. The COVID-19 pandemic is evolving, and to date has led to the implementation of various responses, including government-imposed quarantines, travel restrictions and other public health safety measures. The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely impacted our operations in various ways. For example, our engineers have limited ability to make work-related trips to Korea or Israel to test and optimize the Nanox.ARC or to begin development of MEMs X-ray chip manufacturing in Korea. Our potential business partners have limited ability to make on-site visits to our facilities or attend industry conferences and meetings in person to experience the Nanox.ARC, which has negatively impacted our business development and deployment activities. Due, in part, to travel restrictions as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we expect to manufacture a small number of Nanox.ARC units in Israel on a purchase order basis that will be used for the acceptance tests under our MSaaS agreements, demonstrations, regulatory approvals and for the initial global deployment, among other purposes. The external labs we work with have been affected by COVID-19, resulting in delays in our timeline for obtaining regulatory clearance and approval. Our FDA and other regulatory approvals and clearances may be delayed due to prioritization of vaccines for COVID-19. COVID-19 has also caused shutdowns or disruptions of business for our manufactures and suppliers.

The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts our operations or those of our third-party partners will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence, including the duration of the pandemic, new information that will emerge concerning the severity of the coronavirus and the actions to contain the coronavirus or treat its impact, among others. The continued spread of COVID-19 globally could adversely impact our development, manufacture or deployment of the Nanox System, which could adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory clearance and approval for and to commercialize the Nanox System, increase our operating expenses and have a material adverse effect on our financial results.

These and other factors arising from the COVID-19 pandemic could worsen in countries that are afflicted with the coronavirus. Any of these factors, and other factors related to any such disruptions that are unforeseen, could have a material adverse effect on our business and our results of operations and financial condition. Further, uncertainty around these and related issues could lead to adverse effects on the economy of the United States and other economies, which could impact our ability to raise the necessary capital needed to develop and commercialize the Nanox System.

The medical imaging industry is rapidly evolving and subject to intense and increasing competition. To compete successfully and to be able to establish and maintain a competitive position in current and future technologies, we will need to demonstrate the advantages of our technology over well-established alternative solutions, products and technologies, such as CT, as well as newer methods of medical imaging and early detection. We believe that effectively stimulating market interest for the Nanox System will require deploying 5,000 to 10,000 Nanox.ARC units. To achieve this, we will need to raise or develop financial resources, technical expertise, marketing, distribution or support capabilities and we may not be successful in doing so.

Also, companies offering traditional medical imaging systems, such as General Electric, Siemens, Philips, Hologic, Varian, Fuji, Toshiba and Hitachi, may be better established in the market than we are, have greater corporate, financial, operational, sales and marketing resources than we do, or have more experience in research and development than we have. In particular, the field emission technology has been used by a wide range of leading market players in an attempt to create an alternative digital source of X-ray, the most well-known attempt being the use of carbon nano tubes as the base materials for a potential field emission-based solution. In addition, early-detection technologies developed by other companies, such as blood testing and DNA screening, may also reduce the attractiveness of our technology for early detection or render it obsolete. Successful developments of these or other technologies by competitors resulting in new approaches for medical imaging, including technologies, products or services that are more effective or commercially attractive, could make our technology less useful or obsolete. We may also face opposition from certain industry leaders, who may have political influence and the ability to delay deployment of the Nanox System in certain geographical areas.

Furthermore, as the market expands, we expect the entry of additional competitors, such as cloud computing companies or leading IT companies, who may have longer operating histories, more extensive international operations, greater name recognition, and/or substantially greater technical, marketing and financial resources.

Our competitive position also depends on our ability to:

If our technology is not, or our future products or services are not, competitive based on these or other factors, our business would be harmed.

If cleared, we expect to rely on third-party manufacturers and suppliers for the commercial production of the Nanox.ARC. We have entered into direct arrangements on a purchase order basis with a manufacturer for the production of our X-ray tubes. We are evaluating, subject to completion of testing, a transition from glass-based X-ray tubes to ceramics-based tubes for cost efficiency purposes, which are the tubes to be used in the multi-source version of the Nanox.ARC, and we intend to enter into an agreement for such ceramics-based tubes with a new manufacturer in the future. In addition, we have entered into a contract manufacturing agreement with FITI to manufacture the Nanox.ARC, with a goal to enable the commercial production of the initial approximately 15,000 units planned for global deployment by the end of 2024. Under the contract manufacturing agreement with FITI, FITI will negotiate and contract with other parties for the supply of the various other components of the Nanox.ARC in accordance with the pre-approved supplier list and on the terms to be agreed upon by both parties. Our dependence on such third-party manufacturers and suppliers involves a number of risks, including:

Due, in part, to travel restrictions as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we expect to manufacture a small number of Nanox.ARC units in Israel on a purchase order basis that will be used for the acceptance tests under our MSaaS agreements, demonstrations, regulatory approvals and for the initial global deployment, among other purposes. Although we expect to formalize our arrangement in writing, we have not yet done so, and we may not establish a formal agreement or be able to enforce the obligations under such arrangements. Furthermore, we currently expect to engage only one general manufacturer for the mass production of the Nanox.ARC. As we further expand our business in connection with the commercialization of our technology, we expect to seek to engage alternative manufacturers of the Nanox.ARC. If any of our manufacturers or suppliers breach their agreements, are unable to meet their contractual or quality requirements, or become unwilling to perform for any reason, we may be unable, or may be unable in a timely manner, to locate alternative acceptable manufacturers or suppliers and enter into favorable agreements with them.

As mentioned above, we currently manufacture the MEMs X-ray chips in the clean rooms located in Tokyo, Japan. While we intend to expand our manufacturing capacity, including through the establishment of the Korean Subsidiary, to meet our currently anticipated needs, we may not have sufficient capacity to manufacture the MEMs X-ray chips as our business expands. In addition, we rely on third parties to supply the raw materials and certain component parts. Disruptions of our relationships with such suppliers could negatively impact our production for an extended period of time. Any inability to acquire sufficient quantities of any raw materials or components in a timely manner from these third-party suppliers could have a material negative impact on our business.

In addition, if we change the manufacturer of a critical component of our products, such as our proposed transition from using glass-based tubes to ceramics-based tubes, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities, procedures and operations that comply with our quality and applicable regulatory requirements, which could further impede our ability to manufacture our products in a timely manner. Transitioning to a new supplier could be time-consuming and expensive, may result in interruptions in our operations and product delivery, could affect the performance specifications of our products or could require that we modify the design of those systems. If the change in manufacturer results in a significant change to any product, a new 510(k) clearance or approval from the FDA or similar international regulatory authorization may be necessary before we implement the change, which could cause substantial delays. The occurrence of any of these events could harm our ability to meet the demand for our products in a timely or cost-effective manner. See “—Risks Related to Government Regulation.”

Developing manufacturing procedures for new products requires developing specific production processes for those products. Developing such processes could be time consuming, and any unexpected difficulty in doing so can delay the introduction of the Nanox.ARC. Moreover, difficulties associated with adapting our technology and product design to the proprietary process technology and design rules of outside manufacturers can lead to reduced yields. Since low yields may result from either design or process technology failures, yield problems may not be effectively determined or resolved until an actual product exists that can be analyzed and tested to identify process sensitivities relating to the design rules that are used. As a result, yield problems may not be identified until well into the production process, and resolution of yield problems may require cooperation between our manufacturers and us. This risk could be compounded by the offshore location of our manufacturers, increasing the effort and time required to identify, communicate and resolve manufacturing yield problems. Manufacturing defects that we do not discover during the manufacturing or testing process may lead to costly product recalls. These risks may lead to increased costs or delayed product delivery, which would harm our profitability and customer relationships. Furthermore, our, our manufacturers’ or our suppliers’ production processes and assembly methods may have to change to accommodate any significant, future expansion of our manufacturing capacity, which may increase the manufacturing costs, delay production of our products, reduce our product margin, require supplemental filings with the FDA or other regulatory authorities, any of which may adversely impact our business. If we are unable to keep up with demand for our products by successfully manufacturing and shipping our products in a timely manner, our revenue could be impaired, and market acceptance for our products could be adversely affected.

We are pursuing three simultaneous business models to maximize the commercial potential of our X-ray source technology, each of which requires significant time and resources, in particular, our primary business model, the Subscription Model. We are a company with limited operating history and we may not have the necessary resources, expertise and experience to successfully execute any of our business models on a global scale, such as obtaining the necessary approvals or clearances from the regulatory agencies of our target markets. Our ability to execute our models is dependent on a number of factors, including the ability of our senior management team to execute our models, our ability to engage local operators and integrators in different geographic regions, our ability to begin or maintain our pace of product development, manufacturing and commercialization, our ability to meet the changing needs of the medical imaging market, and the ability of our employees to perform at a high-level. If we are unable to execute our models, if our models do not drive the growth that we anticipate, or if our market opportunity is not as large as we have estimated, it could adversely affect our business and our prospects.

We have a limited operating history and have no history of marketing our X-ray source technology, the Nanox.ARC, the Nanox.CLOUD or any other product using our technology. We may fail to generate significant interest in our X-ray source technology, the Nanox.ARC, the Nanox.CLOUD or the imaging products using our technology, or any other product we may develop. These and other factors, including the following, may affect the rate and level of market acceptance:

If cleared or approved for marketing by the FDA or other regulatory agencies, depending on the approved clinical indication, the Nanox.ARC will be competing with existing and future imaging products and similar offerings. The technology underlying our X-ray source and the Nanox.ARC may be perceived as inferior or inaccurate and patients may be unwilling to undergo medical screening using the Nanox.ARC or other products using our technology. Moreover, patients and medical professionals may be unwilling to depart from the current medical imaging technology. Medical professionals tend to be slow to change their medical diagnostic practices because of perceived liability risks arising from the use of new technology or products, and they may not recommend medical imaging using the Nanox.ARC or other products using our technology until there is long-term clinical evidence to convince them to alter or modify their existing imaging methods. Our efforts to educate patients, radiologists and other members of the medical community on the benefits of our products require significant resources and may not be successful. Our efforts to educate the marketplace may require more resources than are required by conventional technologies marketed by our competitors. In particular, gaining market acceptance for our products in nascent markets, such as China, India, and certain countries in Latin America, could be challenging. Moreover, in the event that the Nanox.ARC or other products using our technology are the subject of guidelines, clinical studies or scientific publications that are unfavorable or damaging, or otherwise call into question their benefits, we may have difficulty in convincing market participants to adopt our products. In addition, medical professionals, patients, providers of medical imaging services and third-party payors may not adopt or reimburse the use of the Nanox.ARC in the near term or at all. If we are unable to achieve or maintain an adequate level of market acceptance, we may not generate significant revenue or become profitable and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects would be significantly harmed.

We expect to do business globally, including in North America and certain countries in Asia, Europe, Africa, Latin America and Australia. Commercialization of our X-ray source technology, the Nanox.ARC or the Nanox System in foreign markets, either directly or through third parties, is subject to additional risks and uncertainties, including:

Specifically, we are subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended (the “FCPA”), the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, the United Kingdom Bribery Act 2010, the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Chapter 9 (sub-chapter 5) of the Israeli Penal Law, 1977, the Israeli Prohibition on Money Laundering Law–2000 and possibly other anti-bribery and anti-money laundering laws in countries outside of the United States in which we conduct our activities. As we engage finders to obtain MSaaS agreements in certain countries, we and our finders may have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or state-owned or affiliated entities. We may be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of these third-party business partners and intermediaries, our employees, representatives, contractors, partners and agents, even if we do not explicitly authorize such activities. As we expand our international business, our risks under these laws may increase.

We also may sell the Nanox.ARC, the Nanox.CLOUD or the Nanox System to government entities, which are subject to a number of challenges and risks. Any actual or perceived privacy, data protection, or data security incident, or even any perceived defect with regard to our practices or measures in these areas, may negatively impact public sector demand for our products. Government entities may also have statutory, contractual or other legal rights to terminate contracts with us for convenience or due to a default, and any such termination may adversely affect our future results of operations. Governments routinely investigate and audit government contractors’ administrative processes, and any unfavorable audit could result in the government refusing to continue buying our subscriptions, a reduction of revenue, or fines or civil or criminal liability if the audit uncovers improper or illegal activities. In addition, sales of the Nanox.ARC, the Nanox.CLOUD or the Nanox System in foreign markets could also be adversely affected by the imposition of governmental controls, political and economic instability, trade restrictions and changes in tariffs, any of which may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Because the Nanox System is still in the development stage, it is not yet approved for third-party payor coverage or reimbursement. Coding and coverage determinations as well as reimbursement levels and conditions are important to the commercial success of an imaging product or offering. The future availability of insurance coverage and reimbursement for newly approved medical devices is highly uncertain, and our future business will be greatly impacted by the level of reimbursement provided by third-party payors. In the United States, third-party payors decide which imaging products and services they will cover, how much they will pay and whether they will continue reimbursement. Third-party payors may not cover or provide adequate reimbursement for the Nanox System or the imaging services using the Nanox System, assuming we are able to fully develop and obtain all regulatory approvals and clearances to market it in the United States or other geographies. To date, we have not had any discussions with any third-party payors, including any regulatory agencies administering

any government funded healthcare programs, regarding the coding, coverage or reimbursement for imaging services using the Nanox System. Accordingly, unless government and other third-party payors provide coverage and reimbursement for our services, patients and healthcare providers may choose not to use them, which would cause investors to lose their entire investment. A primary trend in the United States healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular products and services. Reimbursement may not be available, or continue to be available, for the Nanox System or the imaging services using the Nanox System, other products or systems using our X-ray source technology or any other products we may develop in the future, or even if reimbursement is available, such reimbursement may not be adequate. We also will be subject to foreign reimbursement policies in the international markets we expect to enter. Decisions by health insurers or other third-party payors in these markets not to cover, or to discontinue reimbursing, our products could materially and adversely affect our business. If such decisions are made, they could also have a negative impact on our ability to generate revenues, in which case we may need to obtain additional financing.

In the United States, over the past several years, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), the federal agency responsible for administering the Medicare program, has implemented numerous changes to payment policies for imaging procedures in both the hospital setting and non-hospital settings, which include physician offices and freestanding imaging facilities. Some of these changes have had a negative impact on utilization of imaging services. Examples of these changes include:

We also expect increased regulation and oversight of advanced diagnostic testing. One provision in the Protecting Access to Medicare Act requires CMS to develop appropriate use criteria (“AUC”) that professionals must consult when ordering advanced diagnostic imaging services (which include magnetic resonance imaging (“MRI”), CT, nuclear medicine (including position emission tomography) and other advanced diagnostic imaging services that the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) may specify). Under this provision, which is currently set to be fully implemented on January 1, 2022, payment is to be made to the furnishing professional for an applicable advanced diagnostic imaging service only if the claim indicates that the ordering professional consulted a qualified clinical decision support mechanism, as identified by HHS, as to whether the ordered service adheres to the applicable AUC. To the extent that these types of changes have the effect of reducing the aggregate number of diagnostic medical imaging procedures performed in the United States, our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows would be adversely affected.

Billing for imaging services is complex. Payment is provided by individual patients and from a variety of payors, such as commercial insurance carriers, managed care organizations and governmental programs. Each payor typically has different billing requirements, and the billing requirements of many payors have become increasingly stringent.

Among the factors complicating our customers’ ability to bill and receive reimbursement from third-party payors are:

In addition, we may be required to seek new billing codes for imaging services using the Nanox System, and regulatory authorities may not approve the creation of separate codes. Additionally, even if we are successful, these billing codes or the payment amounts associated with such codes may change in the future.

The impact of these factors may be compounded by our use of the novel Subscription Model. These billing complexities, and the related uncertainty in obtaining payment for our products, could negatively affect our revenue, cash flow and profitability.

We have entered into certain, and expect to enter into additional, collaborative arrangements and MSaaS agreements with respect to the research, development, manufacture and commercialization of our technology with different relevant industry participants, including, among others, local operators, integrators, radiologists, cloud storage providers and medical AI software providers and third-party payors. See “Business—Commercial Agreements.” Any future potential collaborative or MSaaS arrangements may require us to rely on external consultants, advisors and experts for assistance in several key functions, including research and development, manufacturing, regulatory, intellectual property, commercialization and distribution. We cannot and will not control these third parties, but we may rely on them to achieve results, which may be significant to us. Relying upon these collaborative arrangements subjects us to a number of risks, including:

In addition, if disputes arise between us and any of our collaborators, it could result in the delay or termination of the development, manufacturing or commercialization of products containing our technology, lead to protracted and costly legal proceedings, or cause collaborators to act in their own interest, which may not be in our interest. As a result, the collaborative arrangements that we may enter into, may not achieve their intended goals.

If any of these scenarios materialize, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We also may have other future products where it is desirable or essential to enter into agreements with a collaborator who has greater financial resources or different expertise than us, but for which we are unable to find an appropriate collaborator or are unable to do so on favorable terms. If we fail to enter into such collaborative agreements on favorable terms, it could materially delay or impair our ability to develop and commercialize, and increase the costs of development and commercialization of, our technology.

Our business exposes us to potential liability risks that are inherent in the marketing and sale of products used in patient care. We may be held liable if the Nanox System or if any other product that integrates our X-ray source technology causes injury or death or is found otherwise unsuitable during usage. The Nanox System currently under development incorporates sophisticated components and computer software. Complex software can contain errors, particularly when first introduced. In addition, new products or enhancements may contain undetected errors or performance problems that, despite testing, are discovered only after installation. Patients could allege or possibly prove defects of our products or other products that integrate our technology.

A product liability claim, regardless of its merit or eventual outcome, could result in significant legal defense costs and divert management’s attention. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

Any of these outcomes may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, and may increase the volatility of our share price.

The coverage limits of our insurance policies we may choose to purchase to cover related risks may not be sufficient to cover future claims. If sales of the Nanox System or other products integrating our technology increase or we suffer future product liability claims, we may be unable to maintain product liability insurance at satisfactory rates or with adequate amounts or at all. A product liability claim, any product recalls or excessive warranty claims, whether arising from defects in design or manufacture or otherwise, could negatively affect our sales or require a change in the design or manufacturing process, any of which could harm our relationship with our customers and partners, and have a material adverse impact on our reputation and business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, if the Nanox System or other products integrating our technology are defective, we, our future customers or partners may be required to notify regulatory authorities and/or to recall the products. See “—Risks Related to Government Regulation—Our products may cause or contribute to adverse medical events or be subject to failures or malfunctions that we are required to report to the FDA, and if we fail to do so, we would be subject to sanctions that could harm our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations. The discovery of serious safety issues with our products, or a recall of our products either voluntarily or at the

direction of the FDA or another governmental authority, could have a negative impact on us.” Any recall would divert management’s attention and financial resources and harm our reputation with customers, patients, medical professionals and third-party payors. A recall involving the Nanox System would be particularly harmful to our business. The adverse publicity resulting from any of these actions could adversely affect the perception of our customers or partners. These investigations or recalls, especially if accompanied by unfavorable publicity, could result in our incurring substantial costs, losing revenues and damaging our reputation, each of which would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our ability to implement our business plan depends on the continued services of key members of our senior management. In particular, and to a critical extent, we are dependent on the continued efforts and services of the members of management named in the “Management” section. If we lose the services of such key members of our management team, we would likely be forced to expend significant time and money in the pursuit of replacement individuals, which may result in a delay in the implementation of our business plan and plan of operations. We may not be able to find satisfactory replacements on terms that would not be unduly expensive or burdensome to us. We do not currently carry a key-man life insurance policy that would assist us in recouping our costs in the event of the death or disability of a member of our management team. The loss of members of our management team, or our inability to attract or retain other qualified individuals, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We expect that the Nanox System will enable us to accumulate a significant amount of highly sensitive and/or confidential information, including medical images and other medical information. These images could be received by our customers or collaborators, such as medical AI-analytics companies, to increase the probability of early disease detection. While employee contracts generally contain standard confidentiality provisions, our employees, customers or collaborators may not properly handle or process sensitive or confidential data. The improper handling of sensitive or confidential data, or even the perception of such mishandling (whether or not valid), or other security lapses by us, our customers or collaborators, could reduce demand for such products or otherwise expose us to financial or reputational harm or legal liability.

In addition, any security breach, including personal data breaches, or incident, including cybersecurity incidents, that we experience could result in unauthorized access to, misuse of, or unauthorized acquisition of the sensitive or confidential information and data (including medical information), the loss, corruption, or alteration of this data, interruptions in our operations, or damage to our systems. Any such incidents could expose us to claims, litigation, regulatory or other governmental investigations, administrative fines and potential liability. An increasing number of digital platforms have disclosed breaches of their security, some of which have involved sophisticated and highly targeted attacks on portions of their services. Because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently and often are not foreseeable or recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate preventative measures. If an actual or perceived breach of our security occurs, public perception of the effectiveness of our security measures and brand could be harmed and our results of operations could be negatively affected. Data security breaches and other incidents may also result from non-technical means (e.g., actions by employees or contractors). Any compromise of our security could result in a violation of applicable security, privacy or data protection, consumer and other laws, regulatory or other governmental investigations, enforcement actions, and legal and financial exposure, including potential contractual liability. Any such compromise could also result in damage to our reputation and a loss of confidence in our security and privacy or data protection measures. Any of these effects could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our ability to execute our business strategy depends, in part, on the continued and uninterrupted performance of our IT systems, which support our operations. Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems, and those of third parties on which we rely, are vulnerable to damage from,

among others, computer viruses, malware, natural disasters, terrorism, war, telecommunication and electrical failures, cyber-attacks or cyber-intrusions over the internet, attachments to emails, persons inside our organization, or persons with access to systems inside our organization or similar disruptive problems. The risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyber-attacks or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers, foreign governments, and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. If such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our product development programs. Any such security breach may compromise information stored on our networks and may result in significant data losses or theft of personally identifiable information. A cybersecurity breach could also hurt our reputation by adversely affecting the patients’ perception of the security of their information. A number of proposed and enacted federal, state and international laws and regulations obligate companies to notify individuals of security breaches involving particular personally identifiable information, which could result from breaches experienced by us or by third parties, including collaborators, vendors, contractors or other organizations with which we expect to form strategic relationships. In addition, a cybersecurity attack could result in other negative consequences, including disruption of our internal operations, increased cyber security protection costs, lost revenue, regulatory actions or litigations.

The U.S. dollar is our functional and reporting currency. However, a portion of our operating expenses, including personnel and facilities related expenses, are incurred in NIS, Yen and KRW. As a result, we are exposed to the risks that the NIS, Yen and KRW may appreciate relative to the U.S. dollar, or, if the NIS, Yen and KRW instead devalues relative to the U.S. dollar, that the inflation rate in Israel may exceed such rate of devaluation of the NIS, Yen or KRW, or that the timing of such devaluation may lag behind inflation in Israel. In any such event, the dollar cost of our operations in Israel would increase and our dollar-denominated results of operations would be adversely affected. Given our general lack of currency hedging arrangements to protect us from fluctuations in the exchange rates of the NIS, Yen and KRW and other foreign currencies in relation to the U.S. dollar (and/or from inflation of such foreign currencies), we may be exposed to material adverse effects from such movements. Our exchange rate exposure may change over time as our business evolves and could result in increased costs or reduced revenue and could affect our actual cash flow. Changes in the relative values of currencies occur regularly and, in some instances, may have a significant impact on our operating results. The rate of inflation in Israel or in currency exchange rates may materially change and we might not be able to effectively mitigate these risks.

We have, and expect to enter into, agreements with manufacturers and/or suppliers in China for the production of our X-ray tube, the Nanox.ARC and some of their respective components. If significant tariffs or other restrictions are placed by the United States government on Chinese imports or any related counter-measures are taken by China, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially harmed. In July 2018, the Trump Administration announced a list of thousands of categories of goods that could face tariffs. If these duties or any other forms of duties or tariffs are imposed on the Nanox.ARC, our X-ray tube or their components, we may be required to charge higher prices in the United States than we expect, which may result in fewer customers and harm our operating performance. Alternatively, we may seek to shift production outside of China, resulting in significant costs and disruption to our operations and business. Our business could also be impacted by retaliatory trade measures taken by China or other countries in response to existing or future tariffs, causing us to raise prices or make changes to our operations, any of which could materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business is subject to risks arising from changes in domestic and global economic conditions, including adverse economic conditions in markets in which we operate, which may harm our business. For example, the current COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant volatility and uncertainty in U.S. and international markets.

If our future customers significantly reduce spending in areas in which our technology and products are utilized, or prioritize other expenditures over our technology and products, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects would be materially adversely affected.

Disruption to the global economy could also result in a number of follow-on effects on our business, including a possible slow-down resulting from lower customer expenditures; inability of customers to pay for products, solutions or services on time, if at all; more restrictive export regulations which could limit our potential customer base; negative impact on our liquidity, financial condition and share price, which may impact our ability to raise capital in the market, obtain financing and secure other sources of funding in the future on terms favorable to us.

In addition, the occurrence of catastrophic events, such as hurricanes, storms, earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, medical epidemics and other catastrophes that adversely affect the business climate in any of our markets could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Some of our operations are located in areas that have been in the past, and may be in the future, susceptible to such occurrences.

We are, and may in the future become, subject to litigation or claims arising in or outside the ordinary course of business that could negatively affect our business operations and financial condition, including securities class actions and shareholder derivative actions, both of which are typically expensive to defend. Such claims and litigation proceedings may be brought by third parties, including our customers, competitors, advisors, service providers, partners or collaborators, employees, and governmental or regulatory bodies. For example, we currently have a securities class-action complaint pending against us and certain current officers and a director, asserting violations of federal securities laws and seeking unspecified damages. We believe this lawsuit is without merit and intend to defend this case vigorously. See “Business—Legal Proceedings.”

The outcome of any litigation, regardless of its merits, is inherently uncertain and may differ substantially from our expectations. Any claims and lawsuits, and the disposition of such claims and lawsuits, could be time-consuming and expensive to resolve, divert management attention and resources, and lead to attempts on the part of other parties to pursue similar claims. We may not be able to determine the amount of any potential losses and other costs we may incur due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation and settlement negotiations. In the event we are required or decide to pay amounts in connection with any claims or lawsuits, such amounts could be significant and could have a material adverse impact on our liquidity, business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, depending on the nature and timing of any such dispute, a resolution of a legal matter could materially affect our future operating results, our cash flows or both.

Our products and services are in the medical imaging field and so may be subject to claims. We are not immune from product liability or other product claim risks, and we may not be able to maintain insurance on acceptable terms against such risks or that such insurance will be sufficient to protect us against potential claims or that insurance will be available in the future in amounts sufficient to protect us. A product liability claim or other claim, as well as any claims for uninsured liabilities or in excess of insured liabilities, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Certain of our directors currently own, operate and manage other entities, which may have similar or different objectives than ours. Such activities could detract from the time these people have to allocate to our affairs. We had previously entered into a consulting agreement and a service agreement with an entity owned by Ran Poliakine, and we are currently party to a service agreement with an entity of which Onn Fenig and Ran

Poliakine each serves as a director and Ran Poliakine is a significant shareholder. Furthermore, Ran Poliakine is a director and Onn Fenig manages the operations of such entity’s controlled subsidiary. See “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions—Agreements With Directors and Officers—Relationship With Six-Eye Interactive Ltd.” and “—Relationship with SixAI Ltd.” Additionally, we lease office space to an entity of which Ran Poliakine serves as a member of senior management, Richard Stone serves as a director and Anat Kaphan serves as a consultant. Each of Ran Poliakine and Richard Stone is also a significant shareholder. See “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions—Agreements With Directors and Officers—Relationship with Illumigyn, Ltd.” Additionally, we lease office space to an entity of which each of Ran Poliakine and Richard Stone is a shareholder of its parent company. See “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions—Agreements With Directors and Officers—Relationship with Wellsense Technologies, Ltd.” The terms of such agreements may not be as favorable to us as those that could be obtained from a third party. Moreover, certain of our directors and officers are affiliated with our current shareholders, and may have different interests than other shareholders. For additional information regarding related party transactions and potential conflicts of interest, see “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions.” Under the Israeli Companies Law, 5759-1999 (the “Companies Law”), office holders must promptly disclose to us any direct or indirect personal interest that he or she may have and all related material information or documents known to him or her relating to any existing or proposed transaction by us. See “Management—Fiduciary Duties and Approval of Specified Related Party Transactions and Compensation Under Israeli Law—Disclosure of Personal Interests of an Office Holder and Approval of Certain Transactions.” In addition, we have adopted a code of ethics and conduct that requires our employees, officers and directors to disclose any situation that reasonably would be expected to give rise to a conflict of interest.

Most members of our management team have limited experience managing a publicly traded company, interacting with public company investors and complying with the increasingly complex laws pertaining to public companies in the United States. Our management team may not successfully or efficiently manage our operations a public company subject to significant regulatory oversight and reporting obligations under the U.S. federal securities laws and the continuous scrutiny of securities analysts and investors. These obligations and constituents require significant attention from our senior management and could divert their attention away from the day-to-day management of our business, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We rely upon a combination of patents and trade secrets to protect the intellectual property related to our proprietary technologies. Our success depends significantly on our ability to obtain and maintain intellectual property protection with respect to our technology and products. Patents and other proprietary rights provide uncertain protections, and we may be unable to protect our intellectual property for reasons including those that result from complex factual and legal issues such as those that create uncertainty as to the validity, scope and enforceability of any particular patent that we hold or for which we have applied. As a result, we may be unsuccessful in defending our patents and other proprietary rights against third-party challenges, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Although we are attempting to obtain patent coverage for our technology where available and where we believe appropriate, there are aspects of the technology for which patent coverage may never be sought or received. Additionally, we have obtained, and may in the future obtain, certain intellectual property related to our technology from third parties, and we cannot be certain that such third parties took the necessary actions to maintain such rights or that the transfer of such rights to us was proper and effective. We may, as a result, be subject to claims challenging the ownership or enforceability of such rights. Furthermore, we may not possess the resources to, or for other reasons may not choose to, pursue patent protection on every invention or in any or every country where we may eventually decide to sell our future products. Our ability to prevent others from making or selling duplicate or similar technologies will be impaired for those technologies with respect to which, and in those countries where, we have no patent protection. In addition, there is no assurance that all potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found, which can prevent a patent from

issuing from a pending patent application or later invalidate or narrow the scope of an issued patent. Even if patents do successfully issue and even if such patents cover our technology, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability or scope, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable. Any successful challenge to these patents or any other patents owned by or licensed to us could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of our technology.

In addition, for patents that do issue based on our applications or future applications, any issued patents may not provide us with any competitive advantages. Competitors may be able to design around our patents and develop products that provide outcomes comparable or superior to ours. Any changes we make to our product or any future products, including designs that may be required for commercialization or that cause them to have what we view as more advantageous properties, may not be covered by patents and patent applications we have licensed or own, and we may be required to file new applications and/or seek other forms of protection for any such altered products if any such protection is available. In addition, the patent prosecution process is expensive, time-consuming and complicated, and we and our current or future licensors, licensees or collaborators may not be able to prepare, file, prosecute and maintain all necessary or desirable patents or patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we or our current or future licensors, licensees or collaborators will fail to identify patentable aspects of inventions before it is too late to obtain patent protection for them. In addition, if we choose to and are able to secure patent protection in countries outside the U.S., the laws of some foreign countries may not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States. For instance, the legal systems of some countries, including India, China and other developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property rights. This could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or the misappropriation of our other intellectual property rights.

Some countries also have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, some countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. If we or any of our licensors is forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired.

Changes in either the patent laws or their interpretation in the United States and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our inventions and enforce our intellectual property rights, and more generally could affect the value of our intellectual property. Our efforts to seek patent protection for our technology could be negatively impacted by any such changes, which could have a material adverse effect on our existing patent rights and our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property in the future. In particular, our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing products that infringe our intellectual property will depend in part on our success in obtaining and enforcing patent claims that cover our technology, inventions and improvements.

We may come to believe that third parties are infringing on, or otherwise violating, our patents or other proprietary rights. To prevent infringement or unauthorized use, we may need to file infringement and/or misappropriation suits, which are very expensive and time-consuming, could result in meritorious counterclaims against us and would distract management’s attention. Also, in an infringement or misappropriation proceeding, a court may decide that one or more of our patents is invalid, unenforceable, or both, in which case third parties may be able to use our technology without paying license fees or royalties. Even if the validity of our patents is upheld, a court may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that the other party’s activities are not covered by our patents.

In addition to patents, we rely on trade secrets to protect our technology; however, the policies we use to protect our trade secrets may not be effective in preventing misappropriation of our trade secrets by others. In addition, confidentiality agreements executed by our employees, consultants and advisors may not be enforceable or may not provide meaningful protection for our trade secrets or other proprietary information in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure. Litigating a trade secret claim is expensive and time consuming, and the outcome may be unexpected. In addition, courts outside the United States are sometimes less willing to protect trade secrets. Moreover, our competitors may independently develop knowledge, methods and know-how that allow them to create substantially similar products or services without misappropriating our trade secrets. If we are unable to protect our trade secrets, we may be unable to prevent competitors from using our own inventions and intellectual property to compete against us, and our business may be harmed.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our future products are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products.

Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new products, patents protecting our future products might expire before or shortly after we or our future partners commercialize those products. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours for a sufficient amount of time, and, as a result, we may not be able to obtain adequate protection from our patent portfolio against competition, in spite of the time and effort invested in the commercialization of our future products.

Because our industry is characterized by competing intellectual property, we may be subject to legal actions for violating the intellectual property rights of others, including claims that former employees, collaborators or third parties have an interest in our patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property. For example, we may have inventorship or ownership disputes arising from conflicting obligations of employees, consultants or others who are involved in developing our technology or our products.

We also may be required to participate in interference, derivation or opposition proceedings that concern disputes regarding priority of inventions disclosed in our patents. Determining whether a product infringes a patent, as well as priority of inventions and other patent-related disputes, involves complex legal and factual issues and the outcome is often uncertain. We have not conducted any significant search of patents issued to third parties, and third-party patents containing claims covering our technology or methods that predate our patents may exist. Because of the number of patents issued and patent applications filed in our technical areas or fields (including some pertaining specifically to medical imaging technologies), our competitors or other third parties may assert that our technology and the methods we employ in the use of products incorporating our technology are covered by United States or foreign patents held by them. In addition, because patent applications can take many years to issue and because publication schedules for pending applications vary by jurisdiction, there may be applications now pending of which we are unaware, and which may result in issued patents that our technology or other future products would infringe. Also, because the claims of published patent applications can change between publication and patent grant, there may be published patent applications that may ultimately issue with claims that we infringe.

As the number of competitors in the market for medical imaging technologies increases, and as the number of patents issued in this area grows, the possibility of patent infringement claims against us increases. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can, including if they have substantially greater resources. Defending against such litigation is costly and time consuming, and would distract our management from our business. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations.

In the event that we become subject to a patent infringement or other intellectual property lawsuit and if the relevant patents or other intellectual property were upheld as valid and enforceable and we were found to infringe or violate those rights or the terms of a license to which we are a party, we could be prevented from selling any infringing products of ours unless we could obtain a license or were able to redesign the product to avoid infringement. If we were unable to obtain a license or successfully redesign, we might be prevented from selling our technology or other future products. If we are able to redesign, we may need to invest substantial resources in the redesign process. If there is an allegation or determination that we have infringed the intellectual

property rights of a competitor or other person, we may be required to pay damages, or a settlement or ongoing royalties, or we may be required to enter into cross-licenses with our competitors. In any of these circumstances, we may be unable to sell our products at competitive prices or at all, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be harmed.

In addition, we may be required to indemnify our customers and distributors against claims relating to the infringement of intellectual property rights of third parties related to our products. Third parties may assert infringement claims against our customers or distributors. These claims may require us to initiate or defend protracted and costly litigation on behalf of our customers or distributors, regardless of the merits of these claims. If any of these claims succeed, we may be forced to pay damages on behalf of our customers or distributors, or may be required to obtain licenses for the products or services they use. If we cannot obtain all necessary licenses on commercially reasonable terms, our distributors may be forced to stop distributing our products or services, and our customers may be forced to stop using our products or services.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during discovery. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, which could have a material adverse effect on the price of our ordinary shares. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our ordinary shares.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on a patent and patent application are due to be paid to the patent offices and agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent and patent application. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. In certain circumstances, we may be required to rely on our licensing partners to take the necessary action to comply with these requirements with respect to patents or other intellectual property they have licensed to us. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance, which could include failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents, can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, our competitors may be able to enter the market and compete with our products, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

Many of our employees, consultants and advisers, including our senior management, were previously employed at other companies that may have proprietary rights related to our business. Some of these employees, consultants and advisers, including members of our senior management, executed proprietary rights, non-disclosure and non-competition agreements in connection with such previous employment. Although we try to ensure that such individuals do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these employees have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such individual’s former employer. We are not aware of any such disclosures, or threatened or pending claims related to these matters, but in the future, litigation may be necessary to defend against such claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, in addition to possibly paying monetary damages and being enjoined from conducting our business as contemplated. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

Additionally, a licensor, collaborator, employee, consultant, adviser or other third party may dispute our or our licensor’s ownership of certain intellectual property rights. We seek to address these concerns in our

contractual agreements; however, we may not have contractual arrangements with the party in question and/or such provisions may not be effective. If these provisions prove to be ineffective, we may not be able to achieve our business objectives. If we or our licensors fail in defending any such claims, we may have to pay monetary damages and may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, intellectual property, which could adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our unregistered trademarks or trade names are valuable assets and may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to infringe third party’s marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which may be necessary to build name recognition among potential collaborators or customers in our markets of interest. At times, competitors may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our unregistered trademarks or trade names. We have not conducted any registrability studies for possible future trademarks to assess whether such marks would be successfully registered. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. In addition, we may license our trademarks and trade names to third parties, such as distributors. Though these license agreements may provide guidelines for how our trademarks and trade names may be used, a breach of these agreements or misuse of our trademarks and tradenames by our licensees may jeopardize our rights in or diminish the goodwill associated with our trademarks and trade names. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade names, trade secrets, domain names, copyrights or other intellectual property may be ineffective and could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and adversely affect our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We rely on licenses and sublicenses to certain patent rights and other intellectual property from third parties that are important or necessary to the development of our products, including the software modules that we expect to integrate into the Nanox.CLOUD. These and other licenses may not provide exclusive rights to use such intellectual property in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our products and the underlying patents may fail to provide the intended exclusivity. As a result, we may not be able to prevent competitors from developing and commercializing competitive products in the markets that we hope to address. Moreover, we would not own at least some of the underlying intellectual property rights related to these products, and as a result our rights would be subject to the continuation and compliance with the terms of those agreements. If such in-licenses were terminated, competitors would have the freedom to develop, seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products similar or identical to ours.

In addition, these license agreements may not grant us the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution or maintenance of patents and patent applications covering our products. Therefore, we cannot be certain that these patents and patent applications will be prepared, filed, prosecuted or maintained in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. If our current or future licensing partners fail to file, prosecute or maintain such patents, including the payment of applicable fees, or otherwise lose rights to those patents or patent applications, the intellectual property we have licensed or exclusivity we have been granted may be reduced or eliminated, and our right to develop and commercialize any of our future products that are subject of such licensed rights, and our ability to prevent competitors from developing or commercializing such products, could be adversely affected. In addition, even where we have the right to control patent prosecution and maintenance of patents and patent applications we have licensed from third parties, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensees, our licensors and their counsel that took place prior to the date upon which we assumed control over patent prosecution.

Pursuant to the terms of such license agreements, the licensors may also have the right to control enforcement of our licensed patents or defense of any claims asserting the invalidity or unenforceability of these patents. Even if we are permitted to pursue the enforcement or defense of our licensed patents, we may require the cooperation of our future licensors or collaboration partners and any other applicable patent owners and we

cannot be certain that such cooperation will be provided to us. We also cannot be certain that our licensors will allocate sufficient resources or prioritize their or our enforcement of such patents or defense of such claims to protect our interests in the licensed patents. Even if we are not a party to these legal actions, an adverse outcome could harm our business because it might prevent us from continuing to license intellectual property that we may need to operate our business. If we lose any of our licensed intellectual property, our right to develop and commercialize any of our products that are subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected.

In addition, our future licensors may rely on third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties such that our licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-license. If other third parties have ownership rights to our in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technologies. In addition, if our licensors have not obtained adequate rights from these third parties, we may need to obtain additional rights from these third parties or we could be prevented from developing and commercializing the related products. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

In spite of our best efforts, our licensors might conclude that we have materially breached our license agreements and might therefore terminate the license agreements, in which event we may have to cease developing, manufacturing or marketing any product covered by these agreements and we may face other additional penalties or be required to grant our licensors additional rights. In addition, we may seek to obtain additional licenses from our licensors and, in connection with obtaining such licenses, we may agree to amend our existing licenses in a manner that may be more favorable to the licensors, including by agreeing to terms that could enable third parties (potentially including our competitors) to receive licenses to a portion of the intellectual property that is subject to our existing licenses. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

We may be required to pay milestones and royalties related to our development or commercialization activities of our products utilizing the technologies licensed or sublicensed from third parties under license agreements we may enter into with them. These payments could adversely affect our overall profitability related to any future products that we may seek to develop or commercialize. In order to maintain our license rights under our license agreements, we may need to meet certain specified milestones or fulfill certain obligations, including to devote a certain amount of resources, in the development of our products. Failure to satisfy such obligations could result in the termination of our rights under such agreements.

We may also in the future, as one of our strategies, deploy our technology into the market and license patents and other intellectual proprietary rights to third parties. Disputes with our licensees may arise, including regarding the scope and content of these licenses. Additionally, a licensee may use our intellectual property without our permission, dispute our ownership of certain intellectual property rights or argue that our intellectual property does not cover our product. Regardless of whether we pursue legal action to enforce any such dispute, a dispute with a licensee or customer over intellectual property rights may damage our relationship with that licensee or customer and may also harm our reputation in the industry. Our ability to expand into additional fields with our technologies also may be restricted by licenses or other rights we may grant to third parties in the future, including if the licenses are exclusive, the licensee is assigned ownership of intellectual property that we develop or rights of first negotiation or refusal are granted. For instance, pursuant to the Right of First Negotiation Agreement with FUJIFILM Corporation, dated May 21, 2019, we granted FUJIFILM Corporation a right of first negotiation to obtain an exclusive license to certain of our intellectual property for use in the field of mammography. See “Business—Our Business Model—The Licensing Model” for a description of the terms of such agreement. If we choose to use this intellectual property in the field of mammography in the future, our ability would be limited by these rights and any related rights granted in the future to FUJIFILM Corporation.

We expect the Nanox.ARC and other future products we develop to be regulated by the FDA as medical devices. Our product candidate is subject to extensive regulation in the United States and elsewhere, including by the FDA and its foreign counterparts, the U.S. Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Office of the Inspector General (“HHS-OIG”). The FDA and foreign regulatory agencies regulate, among other things, with respect to medical devices: design, development and manufacturing; testing, labeling, content and language of instructions for use and storage; clinical trials; product safety; establishment registration and device listing; marketing, sales and distribution; pre-market clearance and approval; conformity assessment procedures; record keeping procedures; advertising and promotion; recalls and field safety corrective actions; post-market surveillance, including reporting of deaths or serious injuries and malfunctions that, if they were to occur, could lead to death or serious injury; post-market approval studies; and product import and export.

The regulations our product candidate is subject to are complex and have tended to become more stringent over time. Regulatory changes could result in restrictions on our ability to carry on or expand our operations, higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales for any approved product. Failure to comply with applicable regulations could jeopardize our ability to sell our future products, if cleared or approved, and result in enforcement actions such as: warning or untitled letters; fines; injunctions; consent decrees; civil penalties; customer notifications; termination of distribution; recalls or seizures of products; administrative detention of medical devices believed to be adulterated or misbranded; delays in the introduction of products into the market; operating restrictions; total or partial suspension of production; refusal to grant future clearances or approvals for new products, new intended uses or modifications to our products; withdrawals or suspensions of current approvals, resulting in prohibitions on sales of our products; and in the most serious cases, criminal prosecution or penalties. The occurrence of any of these events would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and could result in shareholders losing their entire investment.

In the United States, before we can market a new medical device, or a new use of, new claim for or significant modification to an existing product, we must first receive either clearance under Section 510(k) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the “FDCA”) or approval of a pre-market approval application (a “PMA”) from the FDA, unless an exemption applies. In the 510(k) clearance process, before a device may be marketed, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is “substantially equivalent” to a legally-marketed “predicate” device, which includes a device that has been previously cleared through the 510(k) process, a device that was legally marketed prior to May 28, 1976 (pre-amendments device), a device that was originally on the U.S. market pursuant to an approved PMA and later down-classified, or a 510(k)-exempt device. To be “substantially equivalent,” the proposed device must have the same intended use as the predicate device, and either have the same technological characteristics as the predicate device or have different technological characteristics and not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness than the predicate device. Clinical data are sometimes required to support substantial equivalence. In the process of obtaining PMA approval, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is safe and effective for its intended use based, in part, on extensive data, including, but not limited to, technical, pre-clinical, clinical trial, manufacturing and labeling data. The PMA process is typically required for devices that are deemed to pose the greatest risk, such as life-sustaining, life-supporting or implantable devices.

Modifications to products that are approved through a PMA application generally require FDA approval. Similarly, certain modifications made to products cleared through a 510(k) may require a new 510(k) clearance. Both the PMA approval and the 510(k) clearance process can be expensive, lengthy and uncertain. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance process usually takes from three to 12 months, but can last longer. The process of obtaining a PMA is generally much more costly and uncertain than the 510(k) clearance process and generally takes from one to three years, or even longer, from the time the application is submitted to the FDA. In addition, a PMA generally requires the performance of one or more clinical trials. Despite the time, effort and cost, a device may

not be approved or cleared by the FDA. Any delay or failure to obtain necessary regulatory clearances or approvals could harm our business. Furthermore, even if we are granted regulatory clearances or approvals, they may include significant limitations on the indicated uses for the device or other restrictions or requirements, which may limit the market for the device.

In the United States, we are taking a multi-step approach to the regulatory clearance process. As a first step, we submitted a 510(k) premarket notification for a single-source version of the Nanox.ARC to an accredited Review Organization under the Third Party Review Program in January 2020. As part of the review process, in March 2020, we received an information request, referred to as a major deficiency letter, from the Review Organization, which among other things, required us to provide additional data and other information to complete the application and to address certain deficiencies highlighted by the reviewer, including the results of certain performance tests. On September 3, 2020, we submitted our response to the Review Organization. The response included additional data and other information to complete the application and to address certain deficiencies identified by the reviewer, including the results of certain performance tests. On September 10, 2020, the Review Organization requested that we include a second predicate device in our 510(k) premarket notification. On September 26, 2020, we submitted our revised 510(k) premarket notification to the Review Organization, which the Review Organization subsequently recommended to the FDA for clearance on December 28, 2020. On January 1, 2021, we received an information request from the FDA through the Review Organization regarding our submission, which we responded to on January 4, 2021. On January 30, 2021, we received additional information requests from the FDA which, among other things, require us to address certain deficiencies and questions, including requests that we provide additional support regarding the intended use of the Nanox.ARC and the comparability of the Nanox.ARC to the predicate device. We plan to respond to these requests promptly. In addition, we will continue to work to address further information requests, if any. We will continue to optimize and develop features of the Nanox.ARC, and plan to submit an additional 510(k) premarket notification to the FDA with respect to the multi-source Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD during 2021. If cleared by the FDA, we expect to commercialize the multi-source Nanox.ARC and we may seek alternatives for commercialization of our single-source Nanox.ARC. The review process may be more costly and time consuming than we expect and we may not ultimately be successful in completing the review process and our 510(k) premarket notification may not be cleared by the FDA in a timely manner or at all. If cleared, any modification to these systems that has not been previously cleared may require us to submit a new 510(k) premarket notification and obtain clearance, or submit a PMA and obtain FDA approval prior to implementing the change. Specifically, any modification to a 510(k)-cleared device that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change in its intended use, design or manufacture, requires a new 510(k) clearance or, possibly, approval of a PMA. The FDA requires every manufacturer to make this determination in the first instance, but the FDA may review any manufacturer’s decision. The FDA may not agree with our decisions regarding whether new clearances or approvals are necessary. We may make modifications or add additional features in the future that we believe do not require a new 510(k) clearance or approval of a PMA. If the FDA disagrees with our determination and requires us to submit new 510(k) notifications or PMA applications for modifications to our previously cleared products for which we have concluded that new clearances or approvals are unnecessary, we may be required to cease marketing or to recall the modified product until we obtain clearance or approval, and we may be subject to significant regulatory fines or penalties. If the FDA requires us to go through a lengthier, more rigorous examination for future products or modifications to existing products than we had expected, product introductions or modifications could be delayed or canceled, which could adversely affect our ability to grow our business.

The FDA can delay, limit or deny clearance or approval of a medical device for many reasons, including:

In order to sell our products in member countries of the European Economic Area (“EEA”), our products must comply with the essential requirements of the EU Medical Devices Directive (Council Directive 93/42/EEC). Compliance with these requirements is a prerequisite to be able to affix the Conformité Européene (“CE”) mark to our products, without which they cannot be sold or marketed in the EEA. To demonstrate compliance with the essential requirements we must undergo a conformity assessment procedure, which varies according to the type of medical device and its classification. Except for low-risk medical devices (Class I non-sterile, non-measuring devices), where the manufacturer can issue a European Community (“EC”) Declaration of Conformity based on a self-assessment of the conformity of its products with the essential requirements of the EU Medical Devices Directive, a conformity assessment procedure requires the intervention of an organization accredited by a member state of the EEA to conduct conformity assessments, or a Notified Body. Depending on the relevant conformity assessment procedure, the Notified Body would typically audit and examine the technical file and the quality system for the manufacture, design and final inspection of our devices. The Notified Body issues a certificate of conformity following successful completion of a conformity assessment procedure conducted in relation to the medical device and its manufacturer and their conformity with the essential requirements. This certificate entitles the manufacturer to affix the CE mark to its medical devices after having prepared and signed a related EC Declaration of Conformity.

As a general rule, demonstration of conformity of medical devices and their manufacturers with the essential requirements must be based, among other things, on the evaluation of clinical data supporting the safety and performance of the products during normal conditions of use. Specifically, a manufacturer must demonstrate that the device achieves its intended performance during normal conditions of use, that the known and foreseeable risks, and any adverse events, are minimized and acceptable when weighed against the benefits of its intended performance, and that any claims made about the performance and safety of the device are supported by suitable evidence. If we fail to remain in compliance with applicable European laws and directives, we would be unable to continue to affix the CE mark to our products, which would prevent us from selling them within the EEA.

If we receive regulatory clearance or approval of the Nanox.ARC or other future products, we will remain subject to ongoing and pervasive regulatory requirements governing, among other things, the manufacture, marketing, advertising, medical device reporting, sale, promotion, import, export, registration, and listing of devices. For example, we will be required to submit periodic reports to the FDA as a condition of 510(k) clearance. These reports include information about failures and certain adverse events associated with the device after its clearance. Failure to submit such reports, or failure to submit the reports in a timely manner, could result in enforcement action by the FDA. Following its review of the periodic reports, the FDA might ask for additional information or initiate further investigation.

The regulations to which we are subject are complex and have become more stringent over time. Regulatory changes could result in restrictions on our ability to continue or expand our operations, higher than anticipated costs, or lower than anticipated sales. Even after we have obtained the proper regulatory clearance or approval to market a device, we have ongoing responsibilities under FDA regulations and applicable foreign laws and regulations. The FDA, state and foreign regulatory authorities have broad enforcement powers. Our failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in enforcement action by the FDA, state or foreign regulatory authorities, which may include any of the following sanctions:

Any of these sanctions could result in higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales and have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the FDA or state or foreign authorities may change their clearance and approval policies, adopt additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, which may prevent or delay clearance or approval of our future products under development on a timely basis. Such policy or regulatory changes could impose additional requirements upon us that could delay our ability to obtain new clearances or approvals, increase the costs of compliance or restrict our ability to maintain any approvals we are able to obtain. For example, the FDA has announced steps that the FDA intends to take to modernize the premarket notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. For more information, see “—Legislative or regulatory reforms in the United States or the EU may make it more difficult and costly for us to obtain regulatory clearances or approvals for our products or to manufacture, market or distribute our products after clearance or approval is obtained.”

The methods used in, and the facilities used for, the manufacture of our products must comply with the Quality System Regulation (“QSR”), which is a complex regulatory scheme that covers the procedures and documentation of the design, testing, production, process controls, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, handling, storage, distribution, installation, servicing and shipping of medical devices. As manufacturers of electron radiation-emitting products, we are also responsible for compliance with the radiological health regulations and certain radiation safety performance standards.

Furthermore, we are required to verify that our suppliers maintain facilities, procedures and operations that comply with our quality standards and applicable regulatory requirements. The FDA enforces the QSR through periodic announced or unannounced inspections of medical device manufacturing facilities, which may include the facilities of subcontractors. Our products are also subject to similar state regulations and various laws and regulations of foreign countries governing manufacturing.

Our third-party manufacturers may not take the necessary steps to comply with applicable regulations, which could cause delays in the delivery of our products. In addition, failure to comply with applicable FDA or state or foreign requirements or later discovery of previously unknown problems with our products or manufacturing processes could result in, among other things: warning letters or untitled letters; fines, injunctions or civil penalties; suspension or withdrawal of approvals; seizures or recalls of our products; total or partial suspension of production or distribution; administrative or judicially imposed sanctions; the FDA’s refusal to grant pending or future clearances or approvals for our products; clinical holds; refusal to permit the import or export of our products; and criminal prosecution of us, our suppliers or our employees.

Any of these actions could significantly and negatively affect supply of our products. If any of these events occurs, our reputation could be harmed, we could be exposed to product liability claims and we could lose customers and experience reduced sales and increased costs.

Advertising and promotion of our future products that obtains approval in the United States may be heavily scrutinized by the FDA, the DOJ, HHS, state attorneys general, members of Congress, and the public. In addition, advertising and promotion of any future product that obtains approval outside of the United States will be heavily scrutinized by comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

We expect that, if cleared or approved, our products, including the Nanox.ARC, will be cleared by the requisite regulatory authorities for specific indications. We expect to train our marketing personnel and direct sales force to not promote our devices for uses outside of the FDA-approved indications for use, known as “off-label uses.” We cannot, however, prevent a physician from using our devices off-label, when in the physician’s independent professional medical judgment he or she deems it appropriate. There may be increased risk of injury to patients if physicians attempt to use our devices off-label. Furthermore, the use of our devices for indications other than those approved by the FDA or approved by any foreign regulatory body may not effectively treat such conditions, which could harm our reputation in the marketplace among healthcare providers and patients.

If the FDA or any state or foreign regulatory body determines that our promotional materials or training constitute promotion of an off-label use, it could request that we modify our training or promotional materials or subject us to regulatory or enforcement actions, including the issuance or imposition of an untitled letter, which is used for violators that do not necessitate a warning letter, injunction, seizure, civil fine or criminal penalties. It is also possible that other federal, state or foreign enforcement authorities might take action under other regulatory authority, such as false claims laws, if they consider our business activities to constitute promotion of an off-label use, which could result in significant penalties, including, but not limited to, criminal, civil and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs and the curtailment of our operations. We may become subject to such actions and, if we are not successful in defending against such actions, those actions may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Equivalent laws and potential consequences exist in foreign jurisdictions.

In addition, if our products are cleared or approved, healthcare providers may misuse our products or use improper techniques if they are not adequately trained, potentially leading to injury and an increased risk of product liability. If our devices are misused or used with improper technique, we may become subject to costly litigation by our customers or their patients. As described above, product liability claims could divert management’s attention from our core business, be expensive to defend and result in sizeable damage awards against us that may not be covered by insurance.

If the Nanox.ARC or our other future products receive clearance or approval, we will be subject to the FDA’s medical device reporting regulations and similar foreign regulations, which require us to report to the FDA when we receive or become aware of information that reasonably suggests that one or more of our products may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that, if the malfunction were to recur, could cause or contribute to a death or serious injury. The timing of our obligation to report is triggered by the date we become aware of the adverse event as well as the nature of the event. We may fail to report adverse events of which we become aware within the prescribed timeframe. We may also fail to recognize that we have become aware of a reportable adverse event, especially if it is not reported to us as an adverse event or if it is an adverse event that is unexpected or removed in time from the use of the product. If we fail to comply with our reporting obligations, the FDA or other regulatory bodies could take action, including warning letters, untitled letters, administrative actions, criminal prosecution, imposition of civil monetary penalties, revocation of our device clearance or approval, seizure of our products or delay in clearance or approval of future products.

The FDA and foreign regulatory bodies have the authority to require the recall of commercialized products in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture of a product or in the event that a product poses an unacceptable risk to health. The FDA’s authority to require a recall must be based on a finding that there is reasonable probability that the device could cause serious injury or death. We may also choose to voluntarily recall a product if any material deficiency is found. A government-mandated or voluntary recall by us could occur as a result of an unacceptable risk to health, component failures, malfunctions, manufacturing defects, labeling or design deficiencies, packaging defects or other deficiencies or failures to comply with applicable regulations. Product defects or other errors may occur in the future.

Depending on the corrective action we take to redress a product’s deficiencies or defects, the FDA may require, or we may decide, that we will need to obtain new clearances or approvals for the device before we may market or distribute the corrected device. Seeking such clearances or approvals may delay our ability to replace the recalled devices in a timely manner. Moreover, if we do not adequately address problems associated with our devices, we may face additional regulatory enforcement action, including FDA warning letters, product seizure, injunctions, administrative penalties or civil or criminal fines.

Companies are required to maintain certain records of recalls and corrections, even if they are not reportable to the FDA. We may initiate voluntary withdrawals or corrections for our products in the future that we determine do not require notification of the FDA. If the FDA disagrees with our determinations, it could require us to report those actions as recalls and we may be subject to enforcement action. A future recall announcement could harm our reputation with customers, potentially lead to product liability claims against us and negatively affect our sales. Any corrective action, whether voluntary or involuntary, as well as defending ourselves in a lawsuit, will require the dedication of our time and capital, distract management from operating our business and may harm our reputation and financial results.

Physicians, other healthcare providers, and third-party payors will play a primary role with respect to any future products for which we obtain marketing approval. Our arrangements with third-party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell and distribute our product. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include the following:

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations involve substantial costs. Additionally, it is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Exclusion, suspension and debarment from government funded healthcare programs would significantly impact our ability to commercialize, sell or distribute any product. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business are found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

We expect to receive health information and other highly sensitive or confidential information and data of patients and other third parties (e.g., healthcare providers who refer patients for scans), which we expect to compile and analyze. Collection and use of this data might raise privacy and data protection concerns, which could negatively impact our business. There are numerous federal, state and international laws and regulations regarding privacy, data protection, information security, and the collection, storing, sharing, use, processing, transfer, disclosure, and protection of personal information and other data, and the scope of such laws and regulations may change, be subject to differing interpretations, and may be inconsistent among countries and regions we intend to operate in (e.g., the United States, the European Union and Israel), or conflict with other laws and regulations. The regulatory framework for privacy and data protection worldwide is, and is likely to remain for the foreseeable future, uncertain and complex, and this or other actual or alleged obligations may be interpreted and applied in a manner that we may not anticipate or that is inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another and may conflict with other rules or practices including ours. Further, any significant change to applicable laws, regulations, or industry practices regarding the collection, use, retention, security, or disclosure of data, or their interpretation, or any changes regarding the manner in which the consent of relevant users for the collection, use, retention, or disclosure of such data must be obtained, could increase our costs and require us to modify our services and candidate products, possibly in a material manner, which we may be unable to complete, and may limit our ability to store and process patients’ data or develop new services and features.

In particular, we will be subject to U.S. data protection laws and regulations (i.e., laws and regulations that address privacy and data security) at both the federal and state levels. The legislative and regulatory landscape for data protection continues to evolve, and in recent years there has been an increasing focus on privacy and data security issues. Numerous federal and state laws, including state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws, govern the collection, use, and disclosure of health-related and other personal information. Failure to comply with such laws and regulations could result in government enforcement actions and create liability for us (including the imposition of significant civil or criminal penalties), private litigation and/or adverse publicity that could negatively affect our business. For instance, California enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) on June 28, 2018, which took effect on January 1, 2020. The CCPA creates individual privacy rights for California consumers and increases the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal data. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. Further, the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), recently passed in California. The CPRA will impose additional data protection obligations on covered businesses, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It will also create a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. The majority of the provisions will go into effect on January 1, 2023, and additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. The CCPA and the CPRA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability, and many similar laws have been proposed at the federal level and in other states.

In addition, we expect to obtain health information that is subject to privacy and security requirements under HITECH and its implementing regulations. The Privacy Standards and Security Standards under HIPAA establish a set of standards for the protection of individually identifiable health information by health plans, health care clearinghouses and certain health care providers, referred to as Covered Entities, and the business associates with whom Covered Entities enter into service relationships pursuant to which individually identifiable health information may be exchanged. Notably, whereas HIPAA previously directly regulated only Covered Entities, HITECH makes certain of HIPAA’s privacy and security standards also directly applicable to Covered Entities’ business associates. As a result, both Covered Entities and business associates are now subject to significant civil and criminal penalties for failure to comply with Privacy Standards and Security Standards. As part of our normal operations, we expect to collect, process and retain personal identifying information regarding patients, including as a business associate of Covered Entities, so we expect to be subject to HIPAA, including changes implemented through HITECH, and we could be subject to criminal penalties if we knowingly obtain or disclose

individually identifiable health information in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA. A data breach affecting sensitive personal information, including health information, also could result in significant legal and financial exposure and reputational damages that could potentially have an adverse effect on our business.

HIPAA requires Covered Entities (like many of our potential customers) and business associates, like us, to develop and maintain policies and procedures with respect to protected health information that is used or disclosed, including the adoption of administrative, physical and technical safeguards to protect such information. HITECH expands the notification requirement for breaches of patient-identifiable health information, restricts certain disclosures and sales of patient-identifiable health information and provides for civil monetary penalties for HIPAA violations. HITECH also increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against Covered Entities and business associates and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and its implementing regulations and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. Additionally, certain states have adopted comparable privacy and security laws and regulations, some of which may be more stringent or broader in scope than HIPAA.

Internationally, many jurisdictions have or are considering enacting privacy or data protection laws or regulations relating to the collection, use, storage, transfer, disclosure and/or other processing of personal data, as well as certification requirements for the hosting of health data specifically. Such laws and regulations may include data hosting, data residency or data localization requirements (which generally require that certain types of data collected within a certain country be stored and processed within that country), data export restrictions, international transfer laws (which prohibit or impose conditions upon the transfer of such data from one country to another), or may require companies to implement privacy or data protection and security policies, enable users to access, correct and delete personal data stored or maintained by such companies, inform individuals of security breaches that affect their personal data or obtain individuals’ consent to use their personal data. For example, European legislators adopted the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (2016/679) (“GDPR”), which became effective on May 25, 2018, and are now in the process of finalizing the ePrivacy Regulation to replace the European ePrivacy Directive (Directive 2002/58/EC as amended by Directive 2009/136/EC). The GDPR, supplemented by national laws and further implemented through binding guidance from the European Data Protection Board, imposes more stringent European Union data protection requirements and provides for significant penalties for noncompliance. Further, following the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Economic Area and the European Union, and the expiry of the transition period, companies have to comply with both the GDPR and the GDPR as incorporated into United Kingdom national law, the latter regime having the ability to separately fine up to the greater of £17.5 million or 4% of global turnover. The relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union in relation to certain aspects of data protection law remains unclear, for example around how data can lawfully be transferred between each jurisdiction, which may expose us to further compliance risk.

Virtually every jurisdiction in which we expect to operate has established its own data security and privacy legal framework with which we must, and our target customers will need to, comply, including the rules and regulation mentioned above. We may also need to comply with varying and possibly conflicting privacy laws and regulations in other jurisdictions. As a result, we could face regulatory actions, including significant fines or penalties, adverse publicity and possible loss of business.

While we are preparing to implement various measures intended to enable us to comply with applicable privacy or data protection laws, regulations and contractual obligations, these measures may not always be effective and do not guarantee compliance. Any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with our contractual or legal obligations or regulatory requirements relating to privacy, data protection, or information security may result in governmental investigations or enforcement actions, litigation, claims, or public statements against us by consumer advocacy groups or others and could result in significant liability, cause our customers, partners or patients to lose trust in us, and otherwise materially and adversely affect our reputation and business. Furthermore, the costs of compliance with, and other burdens imposed by, the laws, regulations, and policies that are applicable to the businesses of our customers or partners may limit the adoption and use of, and reduce the overall demand for, our products and services. Additionally, if third parties we work with violate applicable laws, regulations, or agreements, such violations may put the data we have received at risk, could result in governmental investigations or enforcement actions, fines, litigation, claims, or public statements against us by consumer advocacy groups or others and could result in significant liability, cause our customers, partners or

patients to lose trust in us, and otherwise materially and adversely affect our reputation and business. Further, public scrutiny of, or complaints about, technology companies or their data handling or data protection practices, even if unrelated to our business, industry or operations, may lead to increased scrutiny of technology companies, including us, and may cause government agencies to enact additional regulatory requirements, or to modify their enforcement or investigation activities, which may increase our costs and risks.

Sales of our products outside of the United States are subject to foreign regulatory requirements that vary widely from country to country. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional testing. The time required to obtain approval outside of the United States may differ substantially from that required to obtain FDA approval. In addition, the FDA regulates exports of medical devices from the United States. While the regulations of some countries may not impose barriers to marketing and selling our products or only require notification, others require that we obtain the clearance or approval of a specified regulatory body. Complying with foreign regulatory requirements, including obtaining registrations, clearances or approvals, can be expensive and time-consuming, and we may not receive regulatory clearances or approvals in each country in which we plan to market our products or we may be unable to do so on a timely basis. The time required to obtain registrations, clearances or approvals, if required by other countries, may be longer than that required for FDA clearance or approval, and requirements for such registrations, clearances or approvals may significantly differ from FDA requirements. If we modify our products, we may need to apply for additional regulatory clearances or approvals before we are permitted to sell the modified product. In addition, we may not continue to meet the quality and safety standards required to maintain the authorizations that we have received. If we are unable to maintain our authorizations in a particular country, we will no longer be able to sell the applicable product in that country.

Regulatory clearance or approval by the FDA does not ensure registration, clearance or approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, and registration, clearance or approval by one or more foreign regulatory authorities does not ensure registration, clearance or approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. However, a failure or delay in obtaining registration or regulatory clearance or approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in others.

From time to time, legislation is drafted and introduced in Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the regulation of medical devices. In addition, the FDA may change its clearance and approval policies, adopt additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, which may prevent or delay approval or clearance of our future products under development or impact our ability to modify our currently cleared products on a timely basis. Over the last several years, the FDA has proposed reforms to its 510(k) clearance process, and such proposals could include increased requirements for clinical data and a longer review period, or could make it more difficult for manufacturers to utilize the 510(k) clearance process for their products. For example, in November 2018, FDA officials announced forthcoming steps that the FDA intends to take to modernize the premarket notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. Among other things, the FDA announced that it planned to develop proposals to drive manufacturers utilizing the 510(k) pathway toward the use of newer predicates. These proposals included plans to potentially sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway, and to potentially publish a list of devices that have been cleared on the basis of demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices that are more than 10 years old. In May 2019, the FDA solicited public feedback on these proposals. The FDA requested public feedback on whether it should consider certain actions that might require new authority, such as whether to sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway. These proposals have not yet been finalized or adopted, and the FDA may work with Congress to implement such proposals through legislation. Accordingly, it is unclear the extent to which any proposals, if adopted, could impose additional regulatory requirements on us that could delay our ability to obtain new 510(k) clearances, increase the costs of compliance, or restrict our ability to maintain our current clearances, or otherwise create competition that may negatively affect our business.

More recently, in September 2019, the FDA finalized guidance describing an optional “safety and performance based” premarket review pathway for manufacturers of “certain, well-understood device types” to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway by showing that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, thereby obviating the need, in the case of applicable products, for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process. The FDA intends to develop and maintain a list device types appropriate for the “safety and performance based” pathway and will continue to develop product-specific guidance documents that identify the performance criteria for each such device type, as well as the testing methods recommended in the guidance documents, where feasible. The FDA may establish performance criteria for classes of devices for which we or our competitors seek or currently have received clearance, and it is unclear the extent to which such performance standards, if established, could impact our ability to obtain new 510(k) clearances or otherwise create competition that may negatively affect our business.

In addition, FDA regulations and guidance are often revised or reinterpreted by the FDA in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. Any new statutes, regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of any future products or make it more difficult to obtain clearance or approval for, manufacture, market or distribute our products. We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations, statutes, legal interpretation or policies, when and if promulgated, enacted or adopted may have on our business in the future. Such changes could, among other things, require: additional testing prior to obtaining clearance or approval; changes to manufacturing methods; recall, replacement or discontinuance of our products; or additional record keeping.

The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be promulgated that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory clearance or approval of our future products. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval or clearance that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

On April 5, 2017, the European Parliament passed the Medical Devices Regulation (Regulation 2017/745), which repeals and replaces the EU Medical Devices Directive. Unlike directives, which must be implemented into the national laws of the EEA member states, the regulations would be directly applicable, i.e., without the need for adoption of EEA member state laws implementing them, in all EEA member states and are intended to eliminate current differences in the regulation of medical devices among EEA member States. The Medical Devices Regulation, among other things, is intended to establish a uniform, transparent, predictable and sustainable regulatory framework across the EEA for medical devices and ensure a high level of safety and health while supporting innovation.

The Medical Devices Regulation will, however, only become applicable three years after publication (in 2020). Once applicable, the new regulations will, among other things:

These modifications may have an effect on the way we conduct our business in the EEA.

During the past several years, the U.S. healthcare industry has been subject to an increase in governmental regulation at both the federal and state levels. Efforts to control healthcare costs, including limiting access to care, alternative delivery models and changes in the methods used to determine reimbursement scenarios and rates, are ongoing at the federal and state government levels.

In March 2010, former President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the “ACA”), which included measures that significantly changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. While a primary goal of these healthcare reform efforts was to expand coverage to more individuals, it also involved additional regulatory mandates and other measures designed to constrain medical costs. The ACA significantly impacts the medical device industry. Among other things, the ACA:

In addition, the ACA and related healthcare reform laws, regulations and initiatives have significantly increased regulation of managed care plans and decreased reimbursement under Medicare managed care. Moreover, to alleviate budget shortfalls, states have reduced or frozen payments to Medicaid managed care plans. We cannot accurately predict the complete impact of these healthcare reform initiatives, but they could lead to a decreased demand for medical devices and other outcomes that could adversely impact our business and financial results.

Some of the provisions of the ACA have yet to be fully implemented, and certain provisions have been subject to judicial and Congressional challenges. In addition, there have been efforts by the Trump administration to repeal or replace certain aspects of the ACA and to alter the implementation of the ACA and related laws. For example, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act enacted on December 22, 2017, or TCJA, eliminated the shared responsibility payment for individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage under section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, commonly referred to as the “individual mandate,” effective January 1, 2019. On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court Judge in the Northern District of Texas, or the Texas District Court Judge, ruled that the individual mandate is a critical and inseverable feature of the ACA, and therefore, because it was repealed as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. This decision was subsequently appealed, and on December 18, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the decision of the district court that the individual mandate, as amended by the TCJA, was unconstitutional. The Fifth Circuit remanded the case to the district court to consider a remedy, including to consider and explain which provisions of the ACA are inseverable and invalid. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing the case. A decision is expected during the current Supreme Court term in 2021, and the ACA remains in effect while judicial review of the decision is pending. It is unclear how this litigation, including all future hearings and appeals, and other efforts to challenge, repeal or replace the ACA, or portions thereof, will affect our future products or our business. It is possible that the ACA, as currently enacted or as it may be amended in the future, and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, could have an adverse effect on our industry generally and on our ability to commercialize our future products and achieve profitability.

The ability of the FDA to review and clear or approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, the FDA’s ability to

hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new medical devices or modifications to cleared or approved medical devices to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, including for 35 days beginning on December 22, 2018, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities.

Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, on March 10, 2020 the FDA announced its intention to postpone most inspections of foreign manufacturing facilities, and on March 18, 2020, the FDA temporarily postponed routine surveillance inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities. Subsequently, on July 10, 2020 the FDA announced its intention to resume certain on-site inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities subject to a risk-based prioritization system. The FDA intends to use this risk-based assessment system to identify the categories of regulatory activity that can occur within a given geographic area, ranging from mission critical inspections to resumption of all regulatory activities. Regulatory authorities outside the United States may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Under applicable employment laws, we may not be able to enforce covenants not to compete and therefore may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of some of our former employees.

Our employment agreements generally include covenants not to compete. These agreements prohibit our employees, if they cease working for us, from competing directly with us or working for our competitors for a limited period. We may be unable to enforce these agreements under the laws of the jurisdictions in which our employees work at all or for a sufficient duration of time to prevent members of our management team from competing with us. For example, Israeli courts have required employers seeking to enforce covenants not to compete to demonstrate that the competitive activities of a former employee will harm one of a limited number of material interests of the employer, such as the secrecy of a company’s confidential commercial information or the protection of its intellectual property. In Israel, if we cannot demonstrate that such an interest will be harmed, we may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of our former employees or consultants and our competitiveness may be diminished.

To continue to execute our business and our growth plan, we must attract and retain highly qualified personnel. Competition for these personnel is intense. We may not be successful in attracting and retaining qualified personnel. If we fail to attract new personnel or fail to retain and motivate our current personnel, our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects could be severely harmed.

The market price for our shares may be volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to factors including the following:

In particular, the market prices of pre-commercial-stage companies like ours have been highly volatile due to factors, including, but not limited to:

These and other market and industry factors may cause the market price and demand for our ordinary shares to fluctuate substantially, regardless of our actual operating performance, which may limit or prevent investors from readily selling their ordinary shares and may otherwise negatively affect the liquidity of our ordinary shares. In addition, the stock market in general, and Nasdaq Global Market and emerging growth companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. Such broad market fluctuations, and other factors (such as variations in quarterly and yearly operating results, general trends in the medical imaging industry, and changes in state, federal or other applicable regulations affecting us and our industry) may adversely affect the market price of our ordinary shares. Additionally, the underwriters have not been granted an option to purchase additional shares in connection this offering, which may impact the underwriters’ decision-making process and ability to stabilize our ordinary shares, which could have a negative impact on our share price.

In the past, when the market price of shares has been volatile, holders of those shares have instituted securities class action litigation against the company that issued the shares. If any of our shareholders brought a lawsuit against us, we could incur substantial costs defending the lawsuit. Such a lawsuit could also divert resources and the time and attention of our management.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act, and for so long as we continue to be an “emerging growth company” we may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies” including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a non-binding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. In addition, under the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can delay adopting new or revised financial accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have elected to “opt out” of this provision and, as a result, we will comply with new or revised accounting standards as required when they are adopted for public companies.

Because of the exemptions from various reporting requirements provided to us as an “emerging growth company,” we may be less attractive to investors and it may be difficult for us to raise additional capital as and when we need it. Investors may be unable to compare our business with other companies in our industry if they believe that our reporting is not as transparent as the reporting of other companies in our industry. If we are unable to raise additional capital as and when we need it, our financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of: (i) the last day of our fiscal year during which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion; (ii) December 31, 2025; (iii) the date on which we have, during the previous three-year period, issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt; or (iv) the date on which we are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer” under the Exchange Act. Once we cease to be an emerging growth company, we will not be entitled to the exemptions provided to emerging growth companies under the JOBS Act.

We report under the Exchange Act as a non-U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. Because we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, we are exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including (1) the sections of the Exchange Act regulating the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations in respect of a security registered under the Exchange Act, (2) the sections of the Exchange Act requiring insiders to file public reports of their share ownership and trading activities and liability for insiders who profit from trades made in a short period of time and (3) the rules under the Exchange Act requiring the filing with the SEC of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q containing unaudited financial and other specified information, although we intend to furnish comparable quarterly information on Form 6-K. In addition, foreign private issuers are not required to file their annual report on Form 20-F until 120 days after the end of each fiscal year, while U.S. domestic issuers that are accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 75 days after the end of each fiscal year and U.S. domestic issuers that are large accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 60 days after the end of each fiscal year. Foreign private issuers are also exempt from Regulation FD, which is intended to prevent issuers from making selective disclosures of material information.

In addition, as a foreign private issuer, we will be permitted to follow certain home country corporate governance practices instead of those otherwise required under the listing rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market for domestic issuers. For instance, we may follow home country practice in Israel with regard to, among other things, composition of the board of directors, director nomination procedure, approval of compensation of officers, and quorum at shareholders’ meetings. For example, under Israeli law, as currently applicable to us, there is no requirement for a majority of our directors to be independent. In addition, we may follow our home

country law, instead of the listing rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market, which require that we obtain shareholder approval for certain dilutive events, such as for the establishment or amendment of certain equity based compensation plans, an issuance that will result in a change of control of the company, certain transactions other than a public offering involving issuances of a 20% or more interest in the company and certain acquisitions of the stock or assets of another company.

As a result of all of the above, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of a company that is not a foreign private issuer.

As discussed above, we are a foreign private issuer and therefore we are not required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. We will remain a foreign private issuer until our board determines that we no longer meet the qualification set forth in Securities Act Rule 405 and Exchange Act Rule 3b-4, with such determinations to be made on an annual basis as of the end of our second fiscal quarter. In order to maintain our current status as a foreign private issuer, either (a) a majority of our ordinary shares must be either directly or indirectly owned of record by non-residents of the United States or (b)(i) a majority of our executive officers or directors must not be U.S. citizens or residents, (ii) more than 50 percent of our assets cannot be located in the United States and (iii) our business must be administered principally outside the United States. If we lose this status, we would be required to comply with the Exchange Act reporting and other requirements applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, which are more detailed and extensive than the requirements for foreign private issuers. We may also be required to make changes in our corporate governance practices in accordance with various SEC and Nasdaq rules. The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws if we are required to comply with the reporting requirements applicable to a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly higher than the costs we would incur as a foreign private issuer. As a result, we expect that a loss of foreign private issuer status would increase our legal and financial compliance costs and would make some activities highly time consuming and costly. We also expect that if we were required to comply with the rules and regulations applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, it would make it more difficult and expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors.

We plan to reinvest all of our future earnings, to the extent we have earnings, in order to develop and commercialize our technology and products and to cover operating costs, finance operations and to otherwise become and remain competitive. We have never declared or paid any dividends on our ordinary shares and we do not plan to pay any cash dividends with respect to our securities in the foreseeable future. As we are a development-stage company with limited operating history, we may not be able to generate, at any time, sufficient surplus cash that would be available for distribution to the holders of our ordinary shares as a dividend. Therefore, you should not expect to receive cash dividends on the ordinary shares we are offering. Consequently, investors may need to rely on sales of their ordinary shares after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any future gains on their investment. In addition, the Companies Law imposes restrictions on our ability to declare and pay dividends. See “Description of Share Capital—Dividend and Liquidation Rights” for additional information.

As a public company reporting to the SEC, we incur significant legal, insurance, director compensation, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. We are subject to reporting requirements of the Exchange Act and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules subsequently implemented by the SEC that impose significant requirements on public companies, including requiring establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and changes in corporate governance practices. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) imposes

various other requirements on public companies. There are significant corporate governance and executive compensation-related provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act that may increase our legal and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming or costly and may also place undue strain on our personnel, systems and resources. Our management and other personnel may need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. In addition, we expect these rules and regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult and expensive for us to attract and retain qualified people to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.

We also incur costs associated with corporate governance requirements, including requirements under rules implemented by the SEC and the Nasdaq Global Market, and provisions of Israeli corporate law applicable to public companies. These rules and regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs, introduce costs such as investor relations and stock exchange listing fees, and make some activities more time-consuming and costly. Our board and other personnel may need to devote a substantial amount of time to these initiatives. For example, if required by the Companies Law, our board of directors must include at least two external directors who must be nominated within three months of the closing of the initial public offering, and our audit committee and compensation committee must consist of a majority of independent directors. We exceeded this three-month period. Prior to the Shareholder Meeting, we were not in compliance with the Companies Law because we did not have a majority of independent directors on our audit committee and compensation committee. To the extent we would not be in compliance with the Companies Law or Nasdaq Global Market rules, we may be subject to additional costs or delisting. We are continuously evaluating and monitoring developments with respect to these rules, and we cannot estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur or the timing of such costs.

As an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act, we may take advantage of certain temporary exemptions from various reporting requirements, including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (and the rules and regulations of the SEC thereunder). When these exemptions cease to apply, we expect to incur additional expenses and devote increased management effort toward ensuring compliance with them. We cannot estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur as a result of being a public company or the timing of such costs.

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the related rules adopted by the SEC and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, starting with the second annual report that we file with the SEC, our management will be required to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. In addition, once we no longer qualify as an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act and lose the ability to rely on the exemptions related thereto discussed above and depending on our status as per Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act, our independent registered public accounting firm may also need to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting under Section 404. We have not yet commenced the process of determining whether our existing internal controls over financial reporting systems are compliant with Section 404. This process will require the investment of substantial time and resources, including by our chief financial officer and other members of our senior management. As a result, this process may divert internal resources and take a significant amount of time and effort to complete. In addition, the outcome of this determination may be unexpected and we may need to implement remedial actions in order to implement effective controls over financial reporting. The determination and any remedial actions required could result in us incurring additional costs that we did not anticipate, including the hiring of outside consultants. Irrespective of compliance with Section 404, any failure of our internal controls could have a material adverse effect on our stated results of operations and harm our reputation. As a result, we may experience higher than anticipated operating expenses, as well as higher independent auditor fees during and after the implementation of these changes. If we are unable to implement any of the required changes to our internal control over financial reporting effectively or efficiently or are required to do so earlier than anticipated, it could adversely affect our operations, financial reporting and/or results of operations and could result in an adverse opinion on internal controls from our independent auditors.

From time to time, certain of our shareholders are eligible to sell all or some of their ordinary shares by means of ordinary brokerage transactions in the open market pursuant to Rule 144, promulgated under the Securities Act, subject

to certain limitations. In general, pursuant to Rule 144, non-affiliate shareholders may sell freely after six months subject only to the current public information requirement (which disappears after one year). Of the 46,100,173 ordinary shares outstanding as of December 31, 2020, approximately 36,230,263 shares are held by “non-affiliates” and are freely tradable without restriction pursuant to Rule 144, although a substantial majority of such shares are subject to a 180-day lock-up that expires on February 16, 2021, and to the extent such shareholders participate in this offering, they will be subject to the new lock-up agreements entered into in connection with this offering. See “Shares Eligible for Future Sale—Lock-up Agreements.” In addition, certain shareholders have the ability to cause us to register the resale of their shares under the Registration Rights Agreement (as defined below) or the terms of certain warrants, and certain of such shareholders have exercised these rights in connection with this offering. See “Description of Share Capital—Registration Rights” for a description of the registration rights.

Any substantial sale of our ordinary shares pursuant to Rule 144 or pursuant to any resale prospectus, including this offering, may have a material adverse effect on the market price of our ordinary shares.

The price of our ordinary shares may not be indicative of our actual value or any future market price for our securities. This price may not accurately reflect the value of the ordinary shares or the value that potential investors will realize upon their disposition of ordinary shares. The price does not necessarily bear any relationship to our assets, earnings, book value per share or other generally accepted criteria of value.

If equity research analysts discontinue research or reports about us or our business or if they issue unfavorable commentary or downgrade our ordinary shares, or if other market participants such as short sellers issue unfavorable reports about us, the price of our ordinary shares could decline.

The trading market for our ordinary shares relies in part on the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. The analysts’ estimates are based upon their own opinions and are often different from our estimates or expectations. If our results of operations are below the estimates or expectations of public market analysts and investors, the price of our ordinary shares could decline. Moreover, the price of our ordinary shares could decline if one or more securities analysts downgrade our ordinary shares or if those analysts issue other unfavorable commentary or cease publishing reports about us or our business.

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures are designed to prevent fraud. Our management will be required to assess the effectiveness of our internal controls and procedures and disclose changes in these controls on an annual basis. However, for as long as we are an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act, our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404.

Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404, or any subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our ordinary shares.

We have identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting in connection with the audit of our financial statements as of and for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2019. As defined in Regulation 12b-2 under the Exchange Act, a “material weakness” is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual financial statements will not be prevented, or detected on a timely basis. Specifically, we

determined that the material weakness is related to having an insufficient number of financial reporting personnel with an appropriate level of knowledge, experience and training in application of U.S. GAAP and SEC rules and regulations commensurate with our reporting requirements.

We have taken action toward remediating this material weakness by hiring additional qualified personnel with U.S. GAAP accounting and reporting experience, and intend to provide enhanced training to existing financial and accounting employees on related U.S. GAAP issues. In addition, to remediate this material weakness, we are implementing measures including the following:

However, the implementation of these initiatives may not fully address any material weakness or other deficiencies that we may have in our internal control over financial reporting.

Furthermore, we have not yet commenced the process of determining whether our existing internal control over financial reporting systems are compliant with Section 404 and whether there are any other material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our existing internal controls. These controls and other procedures are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file with the SEC is disclosed accurately and is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms.

Even if we develop effective internal control over financial reporting, these controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or the degree of compliance with these policies or procedures may deteriorate, and material weaknesses and deficiencies may be discovered in them. We are working with our legal, independent accounting and financial advisors to identify those areas in which changes should be made to our financial and management control systems to manage our growth and our obligations as a public company. These areas include corporate governance, corporate control, disclosure controls and procedures and financial reporting.

We have made, and will continue to make, changes in these and other areas. In any event, the process of determining whether our existing internal controls are compliant with Section 404 and sufficiently effective will require the investment of substantial time and resources, including by our chief financial officer and other members of our senior management. As a result, this process may divert internal resources and take a significant amount of time and effort to complete, even more so after we are no longer an “Emerging Growth Company.” In addition, we cannot predict the outcome of this process and whether we will need to implement remedial actions in order to implement effective controls over financial reporting. The determination of whether or not our internal controls are sufficient and any remedial actions required could result in us incurring additional costs that we did not anticipate, including the hiring of outside consultants. We may also fail to complete our evaluation, testing and any required remediation needed to comply with Section 404 in a timely fashion. Irrespective of compliance with Section 404, any additional failure of our internal controls could have a material adverse effect on our stated results of operations and harm our reputation. As a result, we may experience higher than anticipated operating expenses, as well as higher independent auditor fees during and after the implementation of these changes. If we are unable to implement any of the required changes to our internal control over financial reporting effectively or efficiently or are required to do so earlier than anticipated, it could adversely affect our operations, financial reporting or results of operations and could result in an adverse opinion on internal controls from our independent auditors.

Furthermore, if we are unable to certify that our internal control over financial reporting is effective and in compliance with Section 404, we may be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities, such as the SEC or stock exchanges, and we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, which could hurt our business, the price of our ordinary shares and our ability to access the capital markets.

A non-U.S. corporation will be a PFIC for any taxable year if either (1) at least 75% of its gross income for such year consists of certain types of passive income; or (2) at least 50% of the value of its assets (generally determined based on an average of the quarterly values of the assets) during such year is attributable to assets that produce passive income or are held for the production of passive income. For this purpose, cash and assets readily convertible into cash are categorized as passive assets and our goodwill and other unbooked intangibles will generally be taken into account in determining our asset value.

A non-U.S. corporation’s PFIC status is a factual determination made annually after the close of each taxable year. Based upon our income and assets (including goodwill) and the market price of our ordinary shares during 2020, it is likely that we will be classified as a PFIC for the taxable year ended December 31, 2020. Depending upon the composition of our income and assets and the market price of our ordinary shares during 2021 and subsequent taxable years and whether we start generating a substantial amount of active revenue, we could continue to be classified as a PFIC for 2021 and subsequent taxable years. In addition, it is possible that any subsidiary that we own would also be classified as a PFIC for such taxable years. Accordingly, prospective investors should be willing to assume the risks of investing in a PFIC.

If we were to be, or become, classified as a PFIC for any taxable year during which a U.S. Holder (as defined in the section headed “Material Tax Considerations—U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations”) holds our ordinary shares, certain adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences could apply to such U.S. Holder. See “Material Tax Considerations—U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations.”

You are strongly urged to consult your tax advisors regarding the impact of our being a PFIC in any taxable year on your investment in our ordinary shares as well as the application of the PFIC rules.

Our executive offices are located in Neve Ilan, Israel. In addition, a number of our officers and directors are residents of Israel. Accordingly, political, economic and military conditions in Israel and the surrounding region may directly affect our business and operations. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, a number of armed conflicts have taken place between Israel and its neighboring countries, as well as terrorist acts committed within Israel by hostile elements. During the last decade, there have been extended hostilities in 2009, 2012 through 2014, with additional small flare-ups as recently as 2018 and 2019.

Since February 2011, Egypt has experienced political turbulence and an increase in terrorist activity in the Sinai Peninsula. Such political turbulence and violence may damage peaceful and diplomatic relations between Israel and Egypt, and could affect the region as a whole. Similar civil unrest and political turbulence has occurred in other countries in the region, including Syria, which shares a common border with Israel, and is affecting the political stability of those countries. Since April 2011, internal conflict in Syria has escalated and chemical weapons have been used in the region. Foreign actors have intervened and may continue to intervene in Syria. This instability and any intervention may lead to deterioration of the political and economic relationships that exist between the State of Israel and some of these countries and may lead to additional conflicts in the region. In addition, Iran has threatened to attack Israel and may be developing nuclear weapons. Iran also has a strong influence among extremist groups in the region, including Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon and various rebel militia groups in Syria. These situations have escalated at various points in recent years and may escalate in the future to more violent events, which may affect Israel and us. Any armed conflicts, terrorist activities or political instability in the region could adversely affect business conditions and could harm our

results of operations and could make it more difficult for us to raise capital. In addition, the political and security situation in Israel may result in parties with whom we have agreements involving performance in Israel claiming that they are not obligated to perform their commitments under those agreements pursuant to force majeure provisions in such agreements.

We currently do not, and we do not expect to, carry any commercial insurance that covers losses resulting from events associated with war and terrorism. Although the Israeli government currently covers the reinstatement value of direct damages that are caused by terrorist attacks or acts of war, we cannot be assured that this government coverage will be maintained or, if maintained, that it will be sufficient to compensate us fully for damages incurred and the government may cease providing such coverage or the coverage might not suffice to cover potential damages. Any losses or damages incurred by us could have a material adverse effect on our business. Any armed conflicts or political instability in the region would likely negatively affect business conditions and could harm our results of operations.

Further, in the past, the State of Israel and Israeli companies have been subjected to economic boycotts. Several countries still restrict business with the State of Israel and with Israeli companies. These restrictive laws and policies may have an adverse impact on our operating results, financial condition or the expansion of our business. A campaign of boycotts, divestment and sanctions has been undertaken against Israel, which could also adversely impact our business.

In addition, many Israeli citizens are obligated to perform several days, and in some cases more, of annual military reserve duty each year until they reach the age of 40 (or older for certain reservists) and, in the event of a military conflict, may be called to active duty. In response to increases in terrorist activity, there have been periods of significant call-ups of military reservists. It is possible that there will be military reserve duty call-ups in the future. Our operations could be disrupted by such call-ups, which may include the call-up of members of our management. Such disruption could materially adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

The Israeli government currently provides tax and capital investment incentives to Israeli companies, as well as grant and loan programs relating to research and development and marketing and export activities (see “Material Tax Considerations—Israeli Tax Considerations and Government Programs”). In recent years, the Israeli government has reduced the benefits available under these programs and the Israeli governmental authorities may in the future further reduce or eliminate the benefits of these programs. We may take advantage of these benefits and programs in the future; however, there can be no assurance that such benefits and programs will be available to us. If we qualify for such benefits and programs and fail to meet the conditions thereof, the benefits could be canceled and we could be required to refund any benefits we might already have enjoyed and become subject to penalties. Additionally, if we qualify for such benefits and programs and they are subsequently terminated or reduced, it could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Many of our directors and officers are not residents of the United States and a significant portion of their and our assets are located outside the United States. Service of process upon us or our non-U.S. resident directors and officers may be difficult to obtain within the United States. We have been informed by our legal counsel in Israel that it may be difficult to assert claims under U.S. securities laws in original actions instituted in Israel or obtain a judgment based on the civil liability provisions of U.S. federal securities laws. Israeli courts may refuse to hear a claim based on a violation of U.S. securities laws against us or our directors and officers because Israel may not be the most appropriate forum to bring such a claim. In addition, even if an Israeli court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that Israeli law and not U.S. law is applicable to the claim. If U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law must be proved as a fact, which can be a time-consuming and costly process. Certain matters of procedure will also be governed by Israeli law. There is little binding case law in Israel addressing the matters described above. Additionally, Israeli courts might not enforce judgments obtained in the United States against us or our directors and officers, which may make it difficult to collect on judgments rendered against us or our directors and officers.

Moreover, an Israeli court will not enforce a non-Israeli judgment if it was given in a state whose laws do not provide for the enforcement of judgments of Israeli courts (subject to exceptional cases), if its enforcement is likely to prejudice the sovereignty or security of the State of Israel, if it was obtained by fraud or in the absence of due process, if it is at variance with another valid judgment that was given in the same matter between the same parties, or if a suit in the same matter between the same parties was pending before a court or tribunal in Israel at the time the foreign action was brought. For more information, see “Enforceability of civil liabilities.”

We are incorporated under Israeli law. The rights and responsibilities of holders of our ordinary shares are governed by our amended and restated articles of association and the Companies Law. These rights and responsibilities differ in some respects from the rights and responsibilities of shareholders in typical U.S. corporations. In particular, pursuant to the Companies Law, each shareholder of an Israeli company has to act in good faith and in a customary manner in exercising his or her rights and fulfilling his or her obligations toward the company and other shareholders and to refrain from abusing his or her power in the company, including, among other things, in voting at the general meeting of shareholders on amendments to a company’s articles of association, increases in a company’s authorized share capital, mergers and certain transactions requiring shareholders’ approval under the Companies Law. In addition, under Israeli law, a controlling shareholder of an Israeli company or a shareholder who knows that it possesses the power to determine the outcome of a shareholder vote or who has the power to appoint or prevent the appointment of a director or officer in the company or has other powers toward the company has a duty of fairness toward the company. However, Israeli law does not define the substance of this duty of fairness. There is little case law available in Israel to assist in understanding the implications of these provisions that govern shareholder behavior.

Our amended and restated articles of association provides that the federal district courts of the United States of America will, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act (the “Federal Forum Provision”). Our decision to adopt a Federal Forum Provision followed a decision by the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware holding that such provisions are facially valid under Delaware law. While there can be no assurance that U.S. federal or state courts or Israeli courts will follow the holding of the Delaware Supreme Court or determine that the Federal Forum Provision should be enforced in a particular case, application of the Federal Forum Provision means that suits brought by our shareholders to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act must be brought in federal court and cannot be brought in state court. Section 27 of the Exchange Act creates exclusive federal jurisdiction over all claims brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder and the Federal Forum Provision does not apply to suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act. Accordingly, actions by our shareholders to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder must also be brought in federal court. Our shareholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the regulations promulgated thereunder.

Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring or holding any interest in any of our securities shall be deemed to have notice of and consented to the Federal Forum Provision. This provision may limit our shareholders’ ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum they find favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and other employees. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in our amended and restated articles of association to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, operating results and financial condition.

Israeli corporate law regulates mergers, requires tender offers for acquisitions of shares if such acquisitions cause the acquirer to hold more than specified thresholds, requires special approvals for certain transactions

involving directors, officers or significant shareholders and regulates other matters that may be relevant to these types of transactions. For example, under Israeli law, a merger may not be consummated unless at least 50 days have passed from the date that a merger proposal was filed by each merging company with the Israel Registrar of Companies and at least 30 days have passed from the date that the shareholders of both merging companies approved the merger. See “Description of Share Capital—Acquisitions under Israeli Law.”

Furthermore, Israeli tax considerations may make potential transactions unappealing to us or to our shareholders, especially for those shareholders whose country of residence for tax purposes does not have a tax treaty with Israel which exempts such shareholders from Israeli tax. For example, Israeli tax law does not recognize tax-free share exchanges to the same extent as U.S. tax law. With respect to mergers, Israeli tax law allows for tax deferral in certain circumstances but makes the deferral contingent on the fulfillment of a number of conditions, including, in some cases, a holding period of two years from the date of the transaction during which sales and dispositions of shares of the participating companies are subject to certain restrictions. Moreover, with respect to certain share swap transactions, the tax deferral is limited in time, and when such time expires, the tax becomes payable even if no disposition of the shares has occurred. In order to benefit from the tax deferral, a pre-ruling from the Israeli Tax Authority may be required.

These provisions of Israeli law and Israeli tax laws may delay, prevent or make difficult a merger with, or an acquisition of us, or all or a significant portion of our assets, which could prevent a change of control and may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if doing so would be beneficial to our shareholders. These provisions may limit the price that investors may be willing to pay in the future for our ordinary shares and therefore depress the price of our shares.

Our amended and restated articles of association provide that our directors (other than external directors) are elected on a staggered basis, such that a potential acquirer cannot readily replace our entire board of directors at a single annual general shareholders meeting.

This prospectus contains forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. All statements that are not historical facts contained in this prospectus are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements include information about possible or assumed future results of our business, financial condition, results of operations, prospects, liquidity, plans and objectives. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “can,” “might,” “believe,” “may,” “estimate,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “should,” “plan,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “predict,” “potential,” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are based on information we have when those statements are made or our management’s good faith belief as of that time with respect to future events, and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual performance or results to differ materially from those expressed in or suggested by the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements concerning:

Many important factors, in addition to the factors described above and in other sections of this prospectus, could adversely impact our business and financial performance. The forward-looking statements contained in this prospectus speak only as of the date of this prospectus and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those described under the sections in this prospectus entitled “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and elsewhere in this prospectus. Because forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted or quantified and some of which are beyond our control, you should not rely on these forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Moreover, we operate in an evolving environment. New risks and uncertainties emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for our management to predict all risks and uncertainties, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from estimates or forward-looking statements. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements after the date of this prospectus to conform these statements to actual results or to changes in our expectations.

The selling shareholders will receive all of the net proceeds from the sale of our ordinary shares offered pursuant to this prospectus. We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of ordinary shares in this offering. The selling shareholders will bear the underwriting commissions and discounts, if any, attributable to their sale of our ordinary shares, and we will bear the remaining expenses. See “Principal and Selling Shareholders.”

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our ordinary shares and we anticipate that, for the foreseeable future, we will retain any future earnings to support operations and to finance the growth and development of our business. Therefore, we do not expect to pay cash dividends for at least the next several years.

The distribution of dividends may also be limited by the Companies Law, which permits the distribution of dividends only out of retained earnings or earnings derived over the two most recent fiscal years, whichever is higher, provided that there is no reasonable concern that payment of a dividend will prevent a company from satisfying its existing and foreseeable obligations as they become due. Our amended and restated articles of association provide that dividends will be paid at the discretion of, and upon resolution by, our board of directors, subject to the provision of the Companies Law. See “Description of Share Capital—Dividend and Liquidation Rights.”

The following table sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and total capitalization as of September 30, 2020.

You should read this table in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes as appearing elsewhere in this prospectus and the sections of this prospectus titled “Selected Consolidated Financial Data,” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this prospectus.

As of September 30, 2020, we did not have any indebtedness.

The table above excludes:

The following tables set forth our selected consolidated historical financial data which is derived from our audited financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The selected statement of operations and balance sheet data for the years ended or as of December 31, 2019 and 2018 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. The selected statement of operations data for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019 and the selected balance sheet data as of September 30, 2020 have been derived from our unaudited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus and have been prepared on the same basis as the audited financial statements. For periods and at dates prior to the Asset Purchase, our financial statements were prepared based on the historical financial statements of Nanox Gibraltar, with certain adjustments as described under “Basis of Presentation.” You should read this selected consolidated financial data section in conjunction with, and it is qualified in its entirety by, reference to our historical financial information and other information provided in this prospectus including “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. The historical results set forth below are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected in future periods.

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with the “Selected Consolidated Financial Data” section of this prospectus and our consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. Some of the information contained in this discussion and analysis or set forth elsewhere in this prospectus, including information with respect to our plans and strategy for our business and related financing, includes forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. As a result of many factors, including those factors set forth in the “Risk Factors” section of this prospectus, our actual results could differ materially from the results described in or implied by the forward-looking statements contained in the following discussion and analysis.

Early detection saves lives—and we at Nanox are focused on applying our proprietary medical imaging technology to make diagnostic medicine more accessible and affordable across the globe. Our vision is to increase early detection of medical conditions that are discoverable by X-ray, which we believe is key to increasing early treatment, improving health outcomes and, ultimately, saving lives.

To further our vision, we have developed a working prototype of the Nanox.ARC, a medical imaging system incorporating our novel X-ray source, and we have developed a prototype of the Nanox.CLOUD, a companion cloud software. If cleared, we plan to market and deploy the Nanox System broadly across the globe at a substantially lower cost compared to currently available medical imaging systems, such as CT. We believe that, if cleared, our technology’s relatively low cost will enable us to increase accessibility and affordability of early-detection medical imaging systems globally.

Since our inception, we have devoted substantially all of our financial resources to acquiring the base technology for our X-ray source and related know-how, conducting research and development activities, organizing and staffing our company, developing our business plan, securing related intellectual property rights and raising capital. We do not have any product approved for sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales. We have funded our operations to date primarily with proceeds from the sale of our ordinary shares and warrants (after September 3, 2019) and those of our predecessor company (prior to September 3, 2019). During the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019 and the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, we received net cash proceeds of $71.0 million, $9.3 million, $14.0 million and $3.7 million, respectively, from the sales of our and our predecessor’s ordinary shares.

We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception. Our ability to achieve profitability depends on the successful development and commercialization of our technology and our products. We incurred net losses of $24.8 million, $3.5 million, $22.6 million and $1.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019 and the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. As of September 30, 2020 and December 31, 2019, we had an accumulated deficit of $65.4 million and $40.6 million, respectively. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses for at least the next several years as we advance the Nanox System through further development and regulatory approval. If we obtain marketing approval for the Nanox.ARC, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution. In addition, we incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company, including significant legal, accounting, investor relations and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company.

We plan to jumpstart the MSaaS-based medical imaging market by producing and deploying an initial wave of approximately 15,000 Nanox.ARC units by the end of 2024. We estimate that effectively stimulating market interest in our Nanox System will require deploying at least 5,000 to 10,000 Nanox.ARC units. In addition, we believe that a minimum installed base of at least 1,000 Nanox.ARC units will be required to support our business during the initial wave of deployment, assuming we enter into at least one licensing agreement on commercially reasonable terms. We expect to incur significant expenses for the manufacture, installation, deployment and maintenance of the Nanox System. As a result, we need substantial funding to support our continuing operations and pursue our business strategy before we can generate significant revenues. Until such time as we can generate significant revenue from product sales, if ever, we expect to finance our operations through the sale of equity, debt financings or other capital sources, including collaborations, strategic partnerships or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties. We may be unable to raise additional funds or enter into such other

agreements or arrangements when needed on favorable terms, or at all. If we fail to raise capital or enter into such agreements as and when needed, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development and commercialization of one or more of our products or delay our pursuit of potential in-licenses or acquisitions.

As of September 30, 2020, we had cash and cash equivalents of $240.0 million. We believe that our cash on hand, cash equivalents and short-term investments will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements for at least the next twelve months. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our capital resources sooner than we expect. See “—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

The Company (NANO-X IMAGING LTD), an Israeli limited liability company, was formed on December 20, 2018. Pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement, as amended on December 3, 2019 and December 31, 2019, substantially all of the assets of Nanox Gibraltar, including all patents, patent applications and all other intellectual property rights, but not including the shares of Nanox Japan, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Nanox Gibraltar (“Nanox Japan (predecessor)”), were sold to the Company for an aggregate consideration of $13.3 million, reflecting the fair market value of the transferred assets, which was estimated to be $6.1 million (excluding cash) based on an independent valuation report, plus the cash balance less $200,000, which cash amount totaled $7.2 million as of the date of the Asset Purchase Agreement.

Under the terms of the Asset Purchase Agreement, the consideration for the transferred assets will be paid only on the occurrence of one of the following events: (a) the closing of a transaction involving the sale of all or substantially all of the Company’s assets; (b) the acquisition of the Company by, or the merger of the Company with, another entity, consolidation, reorganization, recapitalization, sale, assignment or disposal by the Company of all or substantially all of the issued and outstanding shares of the Company; (c) the transfer, sale, lease, grant or other disposition of or the grant of an exclusive license over all or substantially all of Company’s assets, including, but not limited to, intellectual property, with the same economic effect to that of a sale and/or cessation of its business; (d) any other transaction, except for a financing round, following which the shareholders of the Company prior to the closing of such transaction own, directly or indirectly, less than 50% of the voting power of the surviving entity; (e) the closing of the first underwritten public offering of the Company pursuant to a registration statement under the Securities Act or the Securities Law (or under equivalent securities law of another jurisdiction) or any other securities laws world-wide with the same effects and results; and (f) an equity financing of the Company at a minimum pre-money valuation of $100.0 million, with proceeds to the Company of at least $30.0 million. In the events of (e) or (f) above, the Company will have the option to pay the consideration in cash or by the issuance to Nanox Gibraltar of the Company’s securities of the same series to be issued upon such event, in an amount reflecting a 25% discount on the price per share to be determined in connection with (e) and (f) above. If the Company elects to pay such consideration in cash, Nanox Gibraltar will have the right, at its sole discretion and in good faith, to reject such payment in cash, and require that the Company pay such consideration in the form of the Company’s securities in such amount and with such discount described above. In connection with this, the Company recorded a related party liability in an amount of $17.8 million in its financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019.

In January 2020, the board of directors of the Company and the board of directors and shareholders of Nanox Gibraltar approved the issuance of shares in accordance with the terms of the Asset Purchase Agreement described above. As a result, 1,109,245 of the Company’s ordinary shares were issued to Nanox Gibraltar, representing an aggregate consideration of approximately $17.8 million, and the Company has no further obligations to Nanox Gibraltar under the Asset Purchase Agreement.

As of the date of this prospectus, we have not generated any revenue from product sales or otherwise.

Research and development expenses consist primarily of costs incurred in connection with the research and development of our products. These expenses include:

We recognize external development costs based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using information provided to us by our suppliers and service providers. Upfront payments, milestone payments (other than those deemed contingent consideration in a business combination) and annual maintenance fees under license agreements are expensed in the period in which they are incurred.

Research and development activities are central to our business. We expect that our research and development expenses will increase substantially over the next several years as we continue development of the Nanox System. We expect to continue to devote a substantial portion of our resources to the Nanox.ARC hardware, the Nanox.CLOUD software and our underlying technology for the foreseeable future.

The successful development and commercialization of our products are highly uncertain. At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate or know the nature, timing and costs of the efforts that will be necessary to complete the development of any of our products. This uncertainty is due to the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with product development and commercialization, including the uncertainty of:

Any changes in the outcome of any of these variables with respect to the development of our products could result in a significant change in the costs and timing associated with the development of these products. For example, if the FDA or another regulatory authority were to require us to conduct clinical trials or other testing beyond what we currently expect, we could be required to expend significant additional financial resources and time to complete development of our products. We may never obtain regulatory approval for any of our products and third parties may never obtain regulatory approvals for any products containing our technology.

Marketing expenses consist of public relations and general marketing expenses. General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries, related benefits and share-based compensation expense for personnel in executive, finance and administrative functions. General and administrative expenses also include facilities, depreciation and other expenses, which include direct or allocated expenses for rent and maintenance of facilities and insurance, as well as professional fees for legal, patent, consulting, investor and public relations, accounting and audit services.

We anticipate that our marketing, general and administrative expenses will increase as we increase our headcount to support our continued research activities and development of our products. We also incur accounting, audit, legal, regulatory, compliance, director and officer insurance and investor and public relations costs associated with being a public company.

The table below summarizes the results of operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019, respectively, together with the changes in those items in dollars:

The table below summarizes our research and development expenses incurred during the periods presented:

Research and development expenses increased by $5.6 million to $6.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 from $0.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. The increase in research and development expenses was primarily attributable to increases in salaries and wages, share-based compensation and professional services as we continue to expand our research and development activities relating to the Nanox System.

The table below summarizes our marketing expenses incurred during the periods presented:

Marketing expenses increased by $3.7 million to $4.4 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 from $0.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. The increase in marketing expenses was primarily attributable to increases in share-based compensation and professional services as we continue to expand our business and to build management infrastructure to move toward the commercial stage of our business.

The table below summarizes our general and administrative expenses incurred during the periods presented:

General and administrative expenses increased by $12.1 million to $14.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2020, from $2.1 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. The increase in general and administrative expenses was primarily attributable to increases in share-based compensation and professional services as we continue to expand our business and to build management infrastructure to move toward the commercial stage of our business.

The table below summarizes the results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, together with the changes in those items in dollars:

The table below summarizes our research and development expenses incurred during the periods presented:

Research and development expenses increased by $2.0 million to $2.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 from $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase in research and development expenses was primarily attributable to increases in salaries and wages, share-based compensation and professional services as we continue to expand our research and development activities relating to the Nanox System.

The table below summarizes our marketing expenses incurred during the periods presented:

Marketing expenses increased by $1.35 million to $1.56 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 from $0.21 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase in marketing expenses was primarily attributable to increases in share-based compensation and professional services as we continue to expand our business and to build management infrastructure to move toward the commercial stage of our business.

The table below summarizes our general and administrative expenses incurred during the periods presented:

General and administrative expenses increased by $17.3 million to $18.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 from $1.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase in general and administrative expenses was primarily attributable to increases in share-based compensation and professional

services as we continue to expand our business and to build management infrastructure to move toward the commercial stage of our business.

Since our inception, we have not generated any revenue from product sales or otherwise, and have incurred significant operating losses and negative cash flows from our operations. We have not yet commercialized any products or technologies, and we do not expect to generate revenue from sales of any products in the near term, if at all. We have funded our operations to date primarily with proceeds from the sale of our and our predecessor company’s ordinary shares.

The following table provides information regarding our cash flows for the periods presented:

During the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019, net cash used in operating activities was $8.2 million and $2.0 million, respectively, resulting from our net loss of $24.8 million and $3.5 million, respectively, adjusted for stock-based compensation changes of $14.3 million and changes in components of working capital of $2.4 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and $0 million and $1.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. The increase in cash used in operating activities was primarily due to activities related to our business expansion.

During the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, net cash used in operating activities was $5.5 million and $3.7 million, respectively, resulting from our net loss of $22.6 million and $1.9 million, respectively, adjusted for non-cash charges and changes in components of working capital of $17.0 million and $1.8 million, respectively. The increase in cash used in operating activities was primarily due to activities related to our business expansion.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019, net cash used in investment activities was $1.5 million and $0.1 million, respectively, primarily due to purchases of property and equipment.

During the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, net cash used in investment activities was $0.1 million and $0.1 million, respectively, without significant change.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019, net cash provided by financing activities was $241.7 million and $9.3 million, respectively, primarily due to proceeds from the issuance of ordinary shares and warrants, net of issuance costs.

During the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, net cash provided by financing activities was $13.9 million and $3.7 million, respectively, primarily due to proceeds from the issuance of ordinary shares and warrants, net of issuance costs.

We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we continue the research and development of the Nanox System and seek marketing approval for this product. In addition, we

incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company. Our expenses will also increase if, and as, we:

We believe that our cash on hand, cash equivalents and short-term investments will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements for at least the next twelve months. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our available capital resources sooner than we expect.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with manufacture, research, development and commercialization of products, we are unable to estimate the exact amount of our working capital requirements. Our future funding requirements will depend on, and could increase significantly as a result of, many factors, including:

A change in any of these or other variables with respect to the development of any of our products could significantly change the costs and timing associated with the development of that product. Further, our operating plans may change in the future, and we may need additional funds to meet operational needs and capital requirements associated with such operating plans.

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic partnerships or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest may be materially diluted, and the terms of such securities could include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as an ordinary shareholder. Debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, may

involve agreements that include restrictive covenants that limit our ability to take specified actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. In addition, debt financing would result in increased fixed payment obligations.

If we raise funds through collaborations, strategic partnerships or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or products or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us.

If we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may be required to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development or future commercialization efforts, or grant rights to develop and market products that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2019 and the effects that such obligations are expected to have on our liquidity and cash flows in future periods:

We have entered into contracts in the normal course of business with third parties. These contracts do not contain any minimum purchase commitments and are cancelable by us upon prior notice and, as a result, are not included in the table of contractual obligations and commitments above. Payments due upon cancellation consist only of payments for services provided and expenses incurred, including non-cancelable obligations of our service providers, up to the date of cancellation.

Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. The preparation of our consolidated financial statements and related disclosures requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, costs and expenses and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities in our financial statements. We base our estimates on historical experience, known trends and events and various other factors that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. We evaluate our estimates and assumptions on an ongoing basis. Our actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

While our significant accounting policies are described in more detail in Note 2 to our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and Note 2 to our audited consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this prospectus, we believe that the following accounting policies are those most critical to the judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results may differ from those estimates and such differences may have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. As applicable to the consolidated financial statements, the most significant estimates relate to fair value of share-based payments and the fair value of the liability to related party.

The U.S. dollar is the currency of the primary economic environment in which our operations is conducted. A substantial portion of the operational costs are denominated in U.S. dollars. Accordingly, our functional currency is the U.S. dollar (“primary currency”).

Foreign currency assets and liabilities are translated into the primary currency using the exchange rates in effect on the consolidated balance sheet date. Equity accounts are translated at historical rates, except for the change in accumulated deficit during the year, which is the result of the income statement translation process. Expense accounts are translated using the weighted average exchange rate during the period. Currency transaction gains and losses are presented in financial income and expenses.

As of January 1, 2018, we adopted ASU 2016-18 “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash,” which requires companies to include amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents in cash and cash equivalents when reconciling beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows.

We consider all short-term, highly liquid investments as cash equivalents, which include short-term bank deposits with original maturities of three months or less from the date of purchase that are not restricted as to withdrawal or use and are readily convertible to known amounts of cash.

As of September 30, 2020 and December 31, 2019, our restricted cash consisted of a bank deposit that was denominated in New Israeli Shekel. Restricted deposit is presented at cost including accrued interest. This bank deposit is used as security for credit card use.

Property and equipment are stated at cost, net of accumulated depreciation. Depreciation is calculated on a straight-line basis over the following estimated useful lives:

Our long-lived assets are reviewed for impairment in accordance with ASC No. 360, “Property, Plant and Equipment,” whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. The recoverability of assets to be held and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of an asset to the future undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by such assets. If such assets are considered to be impaired, the impairment to be recognized is measured by the amount by which the carrying amount of the assets exceeds the fair value of the assets. During the years ended September 30, 2020 and December 31, 2019, no impairment triggering events were identified.

Israeli labor law generally requires severance pay be granted upon dismissal of an employee or upon termination of employment under certain other circumstances. Pursuant to Section 14 of the Severance Compensation Act, 1963 (“Section 14”), all of our employees in Israel are entitled to monthly deposits, at a rate of 8.33% of their monthly salary, made in their name with insurance companies.

Payments under Section 14 relieve us from any future severance payment obligation with respect to those employees and, as such, we may only utilize the insurance policies for the purpose of disbursement of severance pay. As a result, we do not recognize an asset nor liability for these employees.

In 2019 and 2020, all of our employees in Israel were subject to Section 14.

We are involved in claims and other legal proceedings that arise from time to time in the ordinary course of business. We record accruals for these types of contingencies to the extent that we conclude their occurrence is probable and that the related liabilities are estimable. When accruing these costs, we will recognize an accrual in the amount within a range of loss that is the best estimate within the range. When no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, we accrue for the minimum amount within the range. We record anticipated recoveries under existing insurance contracts that are virtually certain of occurring at the gross amount that is expected to be collected.

We review the adequacy of the accruals on a periodic basis and may determine to alter our reserves at any time in the future if we believe it would be appropriate to do so. As such accruals are based on management’s judgment as to the probability of losses and, where applicable, actuarially determined estimates, accruals may materially differ from actual verdicts, settlements or other agreements made with regards to such contingencies.

Research and development expenses are charged to the statement of operations as incurred and consist primarily of personnel, materials and supplies for research and development activities.

Marketing expenses consist primarily of marketing campaigns and business development expenses. Marketing expenses are charged to the statement of operations, as incurred. Marketing expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and 2019 and the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, amounted to $4.4 million, $0.7 million, $1.6 million and $0.2 million, respectively.

We account for income taxes in accordance with ASC 740, “Income Taxes” (“ASC 740”). ASC 740 prescribes the use of the liability method whereby deferred tax asset and liability account balances are determined based on differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. We provide a valuation allowance, if necessary, to reduce deferred tax assets to the assets’ estimated realizable value if it is more likely than not that a portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized, based on the weight of available positive and negative evidence. Deferred tax liabilities and assets are classified as non-current in accordance with ASU 2015-17.

Taxes that would apply in the event of disposal of investments in our foreign subsidiary have not been taken into account in computing the deferred income taxes, as it is our intent and ability to hold these investments.

We account for uncertain tax positions in accordance with ASC 740-10. ASC 740-10 contains a two-step approach to recognizing and measuring uncertain tax positions. The first step is to evaluate the tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return by determining if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that, on an evaluation of the technical merits, the tax position will be sustained on audit, including resolution of any related appeals or litigation processes. The second step is to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% (cumulative probability) likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement. We accrue interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits under taxes on income (tax benefit).

We measure and recognize share-based compensation expense in our consolidated financial statements based on the grant date fair value for all share-based payment awards made to non-employees, employees, officers and directors. We recognize the grant date fair value of the award as an expense based on the straight-line method over the requisite service periods in our consolidated statements of operations.

We estimated the grant date fair value of share options for the nine months ended September 30, 2020 and the year ended December 31, 2019 using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Our use of the Black-Scholes option-pricing model requires the input of highly subjective assumptions, including estimated fair value of our ordinary share price, expected share price volatility and expected term.

Any changes in these highly subjective assumptions would significantly impact our share-based compensation expense.

Basic earnings per share are computed by dividing net income (loss) attributable to our ordinary shareholders by the weighted average number of ordinary shares outstanding for each reporting period.

In computing our diluted earnings per share, the denominator for diluted earnings per share is a computation of the weighted-average number of ordinary shares and the potential dilutive ordinary shares outstanding during the period. Potential dilutive ordinary shares outstanding include the dilutive effect of in-the-money options using the treasury stock method.

We did not take into account any dilutive instruments, such as share-based payments, since their effect, on a fully diluted basis, is anti-dilutive.

Fair value is based on the price that would be received from the sale of an asset or that would be paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. In order to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements, the guidance establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes observable and unobservable inputs used to measure fair value into three broad levels, which are described as follows:

In determining fair value, we utilize valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs to the extent possible and considers counterparty credit risk in its assessment of fair value.

Deferred offering costs directly relating to our initial public offering are capitalized. No amounts were capitalized as of December 31, 2018. As of September 30, 2020 and December 31, 2019, we capitalized $0 thousand and $1,197 thousand, respectively, of deferred offering costs on the consolidated balance sheet.

The JOBS Act permits an “emerging growth company” such as us to take advantage of an extended transition period to comply with new or revised accounting standards applicable to public companies until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We have elected to “opt out” of such extended transition period and, as a result, we will comply with new or revised accounting standards as required when they are adopted for public companies.

In connection with the audit of our financial statements as of and for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, we identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting. The material weakness is related to having an insufficient number of financial reporting personnel with an appropriate level of knowledge, experience and training in application of U.S. GAAP and SEC rules and regulations commensurate with our reporting requirements.

We have taken action toward remediating this material weakness by hiring additional qualified personnel with U.S. GAAP accounting and reporting experience, and intend to provide enhanced training to existing financial and accounting employees on related U.S. GAAP issues. However, the measures we have taken to date and are continuing to implement may not be sufficient to remediate the material weakness we have identified or avoid potential future material weaknesses. If the steps we take do not correct the material weakness in a timely manner, we will be unable to conclude that we maintain effective internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, there could continue to be a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our financial statements would not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

We did not have during the periods presented, and we do not currently have, any off-balance sheet arrangements, as defined in the rules and regulations of the SEC.

A description of recently issued accounting pronouncements that may potentially impact our financial position and results of operations is disclosed in Note 2 to our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and Note 2 to our audited consolidated financial statements, included elsewhere in this prospectus.

As of September 30, 2020, we had cash equivalents consisting primarily of U.S. Dollar bank deposits. Our primary exposure to market risk is interest income sensitivity, which is affected by changes in the general level of U.S. interest rates. Consequently, changes in market interest rates would not have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

As of September 30, 2020, we had no debt outstanding and are therefore not exposed to interest rate risk with respect to the cost of servicing and repaying debt.

We do not believe that the rate of inflation in Israel has had a material impact on our business to date, however, our costs in Israel will increase if the inflation rate in Israel exceeds the devaluation of the NIS against the U.S. dollar or if the timing of such devaluation lags behind inflation in Israel.

Our statements of operations and cash flows could be adversely affected in the future due to changes in foreign exchange rates. We expect to have cash and cash equivalents denominated in U.S. Dollars. As a result, changes in foreign currency exchange rates would not have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

Early detection saves lives—and we at Nanox are focused on applying our proprietary medical imaging technology to make diagnostic medicine more accessible and affordable across the globe. Our vision is to increase early detection of medical conditions that are discoverable by X-ray, which we believe is key to increasing early treatment, improving health outcomes and, ultimately, saving lives.

As a first step to producing a new class of affordable medical imaging systems, we have focused on identifying and developing a novel X-ray source. Our X-ray source is based on a novel digital MEMs semiconductor cathode that we believe can achieve the same functionalities as legacy X-ray analog cathodes, while allowing for lower-cost production than existing medical imaging systems. We developed this technology over eight years to reach commercial applicability. This novel digital X-ray source is the basis of core technology in the Nanox.ARC, the imaging system we are developing, and we believe it also has the potential to replace the legacy X-ray source in other existing imaging systems.

Our solution, which we refer to as the Nanox System, has two integrated components—hardware (Nanox.ARC) and software (Nanox.CLOUD). We have developed a working prototype of the Nanox.ARC, a medical imaging system incorporating our novel digital X-ray source. Subject to receiving regulatory clearance, the first version of the Nanox.ARC that we expect to introduce to the market will be a 3D tomosynthesis imaging system. Tomosynthesis is an imaging technique widely used for early detection, that is designed to produce a high-resolution, 3D X-ray image reconstruction of the scanned human body part for review by a professional diagnostics expert. In parallel, we have developed a prototype of the Nanox.CLOUD, a companion cloud-based software that is designed to provide an end-to-end medical imaging service, including services such as image repository, radiologist matching, online and offline diagnostics review and annotation, connectivity to diagnostic assistive AI systems, billing and reporting. The Nanox System is designed to enable MSaaS to improve accessibility and affordability of early-detection services worldwide.

If cleared, we plan to market and deploy the Nanox System globally at a substantially lower cost than currently available medical imaging systems, such as CT, because our digital X-ray source will allow the Nanox.ARC to have a simpler structure without the costly cooling equipment or the complex rotating mechanism used in legacy CT devices. See “—Our Technology—The Nanox System.” We believe that the Nanox System could increase the accessibility and affordability of early-detection medical imaging systems worldwide.

As we continue to develop the Nanox.ARC, we are taking a multi-step approach to the regulatory clearance process. As a first step, we submitted a 510(k) premarket notification for a single-source version of the Nanox.ARC to an accredited Review Organization under the Third Party Review Program in January 2020. As part of the review process, in March 2020, we received an information request, referred to as a major deficiency letter, from the Review Organization which, among other things, required us to provide additional data and other information to complete the application and to address certain deficiencies highlighted by the reviewer, including the results of certain performance tests. On September 3, 2020, we submitted our response to the Review Organization. The response included additional data and other information to complete the application and to address certain deficiencies identified by the reviewer, including the results of certain performance tests. On September 10, 2020, the Review Organization requested that we include a second predicate device in our 510(k) premarket notification. On September 26, 2020, we submitted our revised 510(k) premarket notification to the Review Organization, which the Review Organization subsequently recommended to the FDA for clearance on December 28, 2020. On January 1, 2021, we received an information request from the FDA through the Review Organization regarding our submission, which we responded to on January 4, 2021. On January 30, 2021, we received additional information requests from the FDA which, among other things, require us to address certain deficiencies and questions, including requests that we provide additional support regarding the intended use of the Nanox.ARC and the comparability of the Nanox.ARC to the predicate device. We plan to respond to these requests promptly. In addition, we will continue to work to address further information requests, if any. In addition, we will continue to optimize and develop features of the Nanox.ARC, and plan to submit an additional 510(k) premarket notification to the FDA with respect to the multi-source Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD during 2021. If cleared by the FDA, we expect to commercialize the multi-source Nanox.ARC and we may seek alternatives for commercialization of our single-source Nanox.ARC. We believe that our novel digital X-ray source will not require FDA approval or clearance. However, to date, we have not obtained feedback from the

FDA regarding our regulatory strategy with respect to our digital X-ray source. We first demonstrated a working prototype of the Nanox.ARC in February 2020 and, if cleared by the FDA and authorized by similar regulatory agencies in other jurisdictions, we are targeting shipment of 1,000 Nanox Systems by the first quarter of 2022, with the goal to finalize deployment of the initial 15,000 Nanox Systems by the end of 2024.

The main categories of current medical imaging systems that use X-ray sources include CT, mammography, fluoroscopy, angiogram and dental. The analog X-ray source used by these systems produces X-rays by accelerating electrons to high energies, causing them to hit a metal target from which the X-rays are emitted.

This requires a significant amount of electrical energy to be transferred to the X-ray tube. Due to the heat generated by this process, one of the most complex mechanical challenges is cooling the analog X-ray source. In addition, for CTs, the mechanical structure is even more complex because the analog X-ray source needs to rotate in a heavy gantry at high speed. We believe these are key factors leading to the high cost and complexity of existing medical imaging systems, which in turn significantly limits the availability of medical imaging for early detection globally. According to a report from the Pan-American Health Organization and WHO in 2012, approximately two-thirds of the world population did not have access to medical imaging, while many people with access to medical imaging face substantial wait times for scanning.

In addition, most market participants, including medical imaging manufacturing companies, medical imaging providers and radiologists, among others, have not provided the same level of end-to-end medical imaging services. One of the reasons is that the scanning process is currently not integrated with the diagnostics process, which contributes to extended wait times for image diagnostics by experts.

We estimate that the total annual capital expenditures on existing X-ray-based medical imaging systems, not including support, maintenance, insurance and ancillary services, will reach approximately $21 billion by 2021, which we believe represents a significant market opportunity for the Nanox System.

We believe the Nanox System addresses the limitations of existing medical imaging systems on three levels:

The X-ray tube technology has essentially remained unchanged since its inception in 1895. For any type of imaging system to generate X-rays, the system must use X-ray tubes as a source for the X-rays. The X-ray tube converts electrical power into X-rays by accelerating electrons to high energies, causing them to hit a metal target from which the X-rays are emitted. X-rays can only be produced if the X-ray tube is energized, which has historically required a significant amount of electrical energy to be transferred to the X-ray tube. However, only a small amount of the energy deposited into the X-ray tube is actually converted into X-rays; the majority of the energy turns into heat. This is called a thermionic (heat-based) mode of operation where a metal filament needs to be heated up to approximately 2,000°C to generate the electron stream (a “cathode”) that will hit a metal target (an “anode”) to generate the photon-based X-ray stream resulting from that high-energy impact.

Heating the filament to approximately 2,000°C requires the mechanical cathode support systems to withstand high temperatures within a high vacuum, high voltage environment. Tungsten was introduced into the X-ray tube in 1903 for its properties of a high melting point and ductility. The tungsten filaments still used today are critical components of X-ray tubes, but they limit the lifetime of the X-ray tube due to the progressive evaporation of filament material under these high temperatures. At temperatures of up to 2,000°C, the filament evaporates in a hot spot close to the peak temperature location which over time can cause a catastrophic failure of the filament.

We believe that the use of the legacy analog X-ray source is one of the key factors for the high cost of existing medical imaging systems. The main categories of medical imaging systems that use X-ray sources include CT (3D cross-sectional 360° “slicing” X-ray imaging), mammography (2D and 3D breast X-ray imaging), fluoroscopy (real-time X-ray video imaging), angiogram (blood vessels, contrast X-ray imaging) and dental (2D and panoramic X-ray imaging). CT scanners, for example, are complex diagnostic imaging systems that use X-rays to take pictures of a patient’s internal structures and organs. Due to the limitations of the analog X-ray source described above, general radiographic X-ray tubes are not well suited for use in a CT scanner. CT scanners instead use a specialized X-ray tube designed to withstand the excessive amount of heat produced by continuous energization. This X-ray tube is located in the gantry, which is the largest part of a CT scanner and consists of the X-ray detectors, the mechanical supports and the scanner housing. Due to the heat generated by this process, one of the most complex mechanical challenges is cooling the analog X-ray source while rotating it in a heavy gantry at high-speed. One solution used is the rotating anode, where a tungsten metal disk rotates at high revolutions per minute so the electron beam hits a different spot on the disk on a continuous basis to prevent the concentration of heat in one spot on the disk and reduce the likelihood of overheating or burning. In addition, CT scanners require a long continuous exposure time to create 3D photographs of the patient’s body

using multiple X-ray images, which means that the X-ray tube must be continually energized and that patients are continuously exposed to radiation throughout that period. As a result of these complexities, most high-quality X-ray tubes for a CT scanner weigh between approximately 50 and 100 kilograms with the cooling mechanism and generally cost over $150,000 each.

Realizing that the X-ray tube technology has essentially not changed in more than 100 years and remains a significant source of complexity and cost-driver of existing X-ray-based medical imaging systems, we developed a novel digital X-ray source that we believe addresses these drawbacks and will enable a new class of medical imaging systems that can be produced at a significantly lower cost than the existing systems.

Our technology has its roots in field emission display (“FED”) technology. FED technology was originally developed by Sony with other technology partners, for television screens and monitors, offering a novel way of lighting screen pixels compared to traditional cathode-ray tubes that were based on a one-source electron gun beam. The field emission display innovation used multiple nano-scale electron guns to achieve a much higher quality image with significantly reduced motion blur effects. In 2009, after having invested substantial resources in the development of this technology for over a decade including through a joint venture called Field Emission Technologies, Inc. (“FET”), Sony ceased development of the project.

In 2009, FET dissolved and transferred certain assets to FET Japan Inc. (“FETJ”). Scientists on our team, who worked at FETJ, applied their expertise to develop non-display related applications, including our X-ray source technology. In 2011, our predecessor company acquired certain non-display related know-how from FETJ and certain members of the FETJ technical team joined us.

After acquiring the technology, we spent over eight years developing a digital X-ray source for the medical imaging industry that could be produced on a commercial scale. Our X-ray source is a MEMs-based semiconductor cathode that achieves electron emission by a non-thermionic low-voltage trigger to approximately 100 million nano-scale molybdenum cones that act as multiple electron “guns,” instead of a single heated filament. The cathode is housed in a customized X-ray tube.

We believe our X-ray source has the following technological advantages over the analog X-ray source:

Reduced duration of radiation exposure. Our X-ray source uses a digital chip that is designed to provide better control and enables near-instantaneous on/off toggling of the electron beam. This source control also enables a precise “stop and start” operation, which we believe can potentially result in significantly reduced duration of radiation exposure compared to an analog X-ray source that exposes patients to continuous radiation exposure.

Multi-spectral imaging capacity using one X-ray source. Our X-ray source is designed to create multi-spectral imaging using one X-ray source chip because there is complete independence and separation between the strength of X-ray penetration and the amount of photons for illumination (referred to as “KvP / mA”). KvP represents the speed of electrons that gives the X-ray its penetrating power, and higher KvP means the X-rays can penetrate higher density materials such as bones. mA represents the amount of photons or brightness levels of the X-ray image. For legacy X-ray sources, KvP / mA ratios were codependent in a linear relationship and each X-ray source could only produce one set of KvP / mA combinations dedicated for a particular use (for example, either tissue images or bone images, but not both simultaneously). We believe our X-ray source technology can produce multi-spectral imaging from one X-ray source, which allows for variable energy levels to be controlled during one scan. With multi-spectral imaging, one source chip can be used for multiple types of scans, such as head-scans, abdomen, mammography and angiograms, involving both soft and hard tissues at variable densities, simultaneously. We believe this multi-spectral imaging could also be applied to real-time video imaging. The image below is a general illustration of the functionality and capability of multi-spectral imaging. Our working prototype uses 60 KvP / mA, and we intend to commercialize the multi-source Nanox.ARC with a range of 60 - 120 KvP / mA.

Higher frequency use over a longer lifetime. Our X-ray source is based on a field of multiple electron guns on our MEMs-based cathode that spread the load of electron generation among many “producers” compared to a single filament that heats to a high temperature in the analog X-ray tube. As a result, our digital X-ray source is designed to shoot an electron beam at different locations on a stationary anode during each duty cycle without the need for the complex, high precision rotating mechanism. In addition, the near instant on/off toggling feature of our digital X-ray source is designed to allow us to reduce the duration of each operation. As a result, we believe our medical imaging system will have higher stability and a longer lifetime, with a longer mean time between failures.

Simplified hardware structure. Because our X-ray source is designed to direct an electron beam at different locations for each duty-cycle as described above, we are able to have multiple stationary tubes arranged around the patient as opposed to one tube that rotates around the patient. We believe this could reduce the complexity and cost of the Nanox.ARC compared to legacy CT devices. In addition, the current approach to increase durability of the tungsten anode in CT devices, the rotating anode mechanism discussed above, requires both a significant increase in tube size and cost to allow for the complex movements of the components. In contrast, we believe by using our X-ray source we will be able to significantly reduce the size of X-ray tubes and simplify the structure of our medical imaging system.

We believe our X-ray source has the potential to replace the legacy X-ray source in other existing imaging systems, as well as the X-ray source in systems used in other industries, such as security scanners.

We have generated the images below with the Nanox.ARC using a single X-ray tube on an imaging phantom. An imaging phantom is a specially designed object that is scanned or imaged to evaluate and analyze the performance of an imaging device. The comparisons below show the X-ray images taken by our novel X-ray source (single tube) that is expected to be used in the Nanox.ARC and a commercial alternative, the DigitalDiagnost Rel. 3.x by Philips, Germany, each at the same source-to-image distance (100 cm), at the same source-detector angle (90^◦) and with the same detector. “KvP” represents the penetrating power of the X-ray generated by the device. “mAs” represents the quantity of X-rays used during a given exposure time. The KvP and mAs numbers shown in the images below are based on the machine reading.

The Nanox System has two integrated components — hardware (Nanox.ARC) and software (Nanox.CLOUD).

We have developed a working prototype of the Nanox.ARC, a medical device that integrates our proprietary and novel X-ray source. Subject to receiving regulatory clearance, the first version of the Nanox.ARC that we expect to introduce to the market is expected to be a 3D tomosynthesis imaging system that produces a 3D reconstruction of the scanned human body part, as illustrated in the image below. The Nanox.ARC, using our X-ray source, is being designed to produce partial and full-body scans, with remote operation capability, and to have a full kVp/mA energy throughout range as per industry standards, multi-spectral imaging range, as well as quiet operation, cloud connectivity and standard compliance safety mechanisms. It is being designed for easy

setup and operation with multiple stationary X-ray tubes arranged around the patient. The substantial majority of operational software that we anticipate will be used to run the Nanox.ARC will be cloud-computing based and integrated with the Nanox.CLOUD, as further explained below.

In addition to the Nanox.ARC, we have developed a working prototype of the Nanox.CLOUD, a companion cloud software that will allow for the delivery of medical screening as a service. With the Nanox.CLOUD, we anticipate that the high-cost components of existing medical imaging systems, such as analytics and computing software that are traditionally installed via multiple licenses on-premise and on a per-system basis, will become centralized through the cloud. We believe this will significantly reduce on-going software and IT licensing costs and enable a wide range of functionalities, such as per-body-part vertical analysis, multiple AI diagnostics and remote support. The Nanox.CLOUD is also expected to be able to provide an end-to-end medical imaging service, including services such as image repository, radiologist matching, online and offline diagnostics review and annotation, connectivity to medical imaging AI systems and billing and reporting.

A reliable and streamlined, post-scan imaging service is central to the delivery of effective clinical services. Today, even patients in developed countries experience delays of weeks and sometimes months for medical imaging and subsequent diagnostics results. For example, in Canada, access to medical imaging procedures is a growing problem with months of reported wait times for magnetic resonance imaging (“MRI”) and CT screening. Long wait times not only negatively impact patient outcomes but also add significant costs to the Canadian healthcare system each year due to delays in detection and treatment. Wait times for a CT scan can be longer than six weeks in Scotland, over 12 months in Ireland, and in the UK, tens of thousands of suspected cancer patients face month-long wait times to discover whether they have a particular illness due to delays in analyzing scans and X-rays. The Nanox System is designed to address such gaps and inefficiencies between completion of the scan and follow-on diagnostics.

We believe the Nanox System, if successfully developed, will streamline the entire medical screening process ranging from scanning to support diagnostics, and solve the bottleneck of imaging-to-diagnostics. The image below illustrates the potential interplay among the Nanox.ARC, the Nanox.CLOUD and third-party participants.

We also expect to be able to offer the Nanox System for a substantially lower cost than existing medical imaging systems, which we believe is key to achieving our goal of making early-detection medical imaging systems more accessible globally. We believe our novel X-ray source is crucial to our ability to substantially reduce the manufacturing cost of the Nanox.ARC. Our digital X-ray source generates X-ray radiation that is measurably identical in all key metrics to the X-ray radiation generated by existing analog X-ray sources, but without creating the high temperature that results from the filament used in the analog X-ray tube, thereby eliminating the need for the costly cooling equipment. In addition, our digital X-ray source is designed to enable the Nanox.ARC to have multiple stationary tubes arranged around the patient, which allows for a more simplified structure, as opposed to requiring the heavy, complex, high-precision rotating mechanisms used in legacy CT devices. We currently estimate the aggregate cost of purchasing and assembling the components of the Nanox.ARC will be approximately $8,000 to $12,000 per unit, assuming at least 15,000 Nanox.ARC units will be manufactured. We believe this will enable us to offer the Nanox System at a substantially lower cost than the cost of existing medical imaging systems based on analog X-ray sources. For example, a new high-end CT scanner sells for $1,350,000 to $2,100,000, with an additional $35,000 to $100,000 for cardiac software, $15,500 to $35,000 for lung software and approximately 10% to 14% of the capital expenditure cost for annual support and maintenance services, reaching a total cost of ownership in the millions of dollars.

Our estimated manufacturing costs of the Nanox.ARC are subject to a number of assumptions and uncertainties and the actual cost per unit could vary significantly from our estimate, which would have a negative impact on our business. See “Risk Factors—We are a development-stage company with limited operating history. We may never be able to effectuate our business plan or achieve any revenue or reach profitability. Therefore, at this stage of our business, potential investors have a high probability of losing their entire investment,” “Risk Factors—The success of our primary business model, the Subscription Model, is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties,” “Risk Factors—We may experience development or manufacturing problems and higher costs, or delays that could limit our revenue, if any, or increase our losses” and “Risk Factors—We may not be able to successfully execute our business models.”

We do not believe that our novel digital X-ray source will require FDA approval or clearance because we believe it falls within a category of radiology vacuum tubes converting electrical input power into X-rays that utilize the same energy levels, radiation types and throughputs as already existing and approved X-ray tubes applied in a wide range of radiology medical procedures. As a result, we expect that there will be no novel claim or methodology related to the X-ray radiation produced by the digital X-ray source. As we continue to develop the Nanox.ARC, we are taking a multi-step approach to the regulatory clearance process. As a first step, we submitted a 510(k) premarket notification to an accredited Review Organization under the Third Party Review Program in January 2020 to seek clearance of a medical imaging system that incorporates a single digital X-ray source. The submission was based on a predicate filing for an equivalence claim to an existing FDA-approved

X-ray imaging system by another market participant. Because our novel digital X-ray source incorporated into this system generates X-ray radiation that is measurably identical in all key characteristics to the X-ray radiation generated by the analog X-ray source incorporated into existing FDA-cleared X-ray imaging systems, we made no new claims as to the operation, image quality or functionality of this system versus the predicate device. As part of the review process, in March 2020, we received an information request, referred to as a major deficiency letter, from the Review Organization which, among other things, required us to provide additional data and other information to complete the application and to address certain deficiencies highlighted by the reviewer, including the results of certain performance tests. On September 3, 2020, we submitted our response to the Review Organization. The response included additional data and other information to complete the application and to address certain deficiencies identified by the reviewer, including the results of certain performance tests. On September 10, 2020, the Review Organization requested that we include a second predicate device in our 510(k) premarket notification. On September 26, 2020, we submitted our revised 510(k) premarket notification to the Review Organization, which the Review Organization subsequently recommended to the FDA for clearance on December 28, 2020. On January 1, 2021, we received an information request from the FDA through the Review Organization regarding our submission, which we responded to on January 4, 2021. On January 30, 2021, we received additional information requests from the FDA which, among other things, require us to address certain deficiencies and questions, including requests that we provide additional support regarding the intended use of the Nanox.ARC and the comparability of the Nanox.ARC to the predicate device. We plan to respond to these requests promptly. In addition, we will continue to work to address further information requests, if any. In addition, we will continue to optimize and develop features of the Nanox.ARC, and plan to submit an additional 510(k) premarket notification to the FDA with respect to the multi-source Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD during 2021. If cleared by the FDA, we expect to commercialize the multi-source Nanox.ARC and we may seek alternatives for commercialization of our single-source Nanox.ARC. To date, we have not obtained feedback from the FDA regarding the regulatory pathways for the novel digital X-ray source.

We plan to commercialize our X-ray source technology through three simultaneous business models: (i) the Subscription Model, (ii) the Sales Model and (iii) the Licensing Model. The chart below illustrates the various revenue streams we expect to derive from these three business models. We expect the Subscription Model to be our primary business model and the key vehicle to achieving our vision of increasing early-detection of medical conditions that are discoverable by X-ray.

The foundation of the Subscription Model is our integrated offering of the Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD, which we refer to as the “Nanox System.” Under the Subscription Model, we expect to sell the Nanox System, if cleared or approved by the requisite regulatory authorities, either at low cost or at no cost, and

to receive a portion of the proceeds from each scan as the right-to-use licensing fee, and fees for usage of the Nanox.CLOUD, artificial intelligence capability and maintenance support, with the remaining amount allocated among our partners, including the local operators, radiologists, cloud storage providers, medical AI software providers and others, on a case by case basis. While the actual pricing charged by local operators may be greater than our suggested retail price, the retail price per scan in all markets other than the United States is still expected to be substantially less than the global average of approximately $300. In the United States, we expect the retail price to represent a significant reduction compared to the $3,275 average cost of a CT scan. We expect the Nanox System will be operated by local operators independent from us, but we would contract with third parties to provide the day-to-day maintenance of the Nanox System.

While we believe our novel X-ray source could provide existing market participants with the paradigm shift needed for preventive healthcare disruption, we also believe existing market participants are not likely to undertake the change-leadership route and will be slow to adopt the MSaaS model. Accordingly, we plan to produce and deploy approximately 15,000 Nanox.ARC units broadly across the globe over three to four years to jumpstart the MSaaS-based medical imaging market, including in the United States and certain countries in Asia, Europe, Africa, Latin America and Australia. We estimate that effectively stimulating market interest in our Nanox System will require deploying 5,000 to 10,000 Nanox.ARC units. We believe that this strategy will help initiate market disruption and accelerate the adoption of our novel X-ray source technology by traditional industry leaders.

In certain countries, such as China, we intend to commercialize our technology using the Sales Model to accommodate specific local regulatory requirements. Under this model, we expect to sell the Nanox System, if cleared or approved by the requisite regulatory authorities, for a one-time charge. We expect this retail price to be higher than the upfront sales price under the Subscription Model but still substantially lower than the cost of existing medical imaging systems. We expect to enter into arrangements with third-party cloud vendors which will be responsible for providing the Nanox.CLOUD services, and be paid separately by the owner-operators of the Nanox Systems. In addition, we expect to contract with third-party service providers to provide maintenance services for the Nanox Systems at the owner-operators’ own costs.

While we believe the medical imaging industry will eventually migrate towards the recurring revenue-based MSaaS model, we expect certain leading market participants will be slower to adopt this model. For these market participants, we expect to provide an intermediate solution through which they will adopt our X-ray source technology for their existing systems. Under the Licensing Model, we would be engaged to tailor our X-ray source to the specific systems of medical imaging device manufacturers or to license our X-ray source technology to them to develop new types of imaging systems for a one-time licensing fee upfront for the X-ray source, as well as recurring royalty payments for each system sold. The licensees would be responsible for the operation of the medical imaging systems integrating our X-ray source. Although we expect to initially rely on the Licensing Model, in part, we view the Licensing Model as a transitional phase, aimed at maximizing the commercial value of our technology and strategic buy-in from market participants to our vision through partnership and commercial relationships.

FUJIFILM Corporation was the first medical imaging device manufacturer to participate in our licensing model. On May 21, 2019, Nanox Gibraltar, our predecessor company, entered into a Right of First Negotiation Agreement with FUJIFILM Corporation. Under the terms of such agreement, the parties agreed to exclusively negotiate in good faith the terms and conditions of a potential commercial agreement until December 31, 2019. The terms of the commercial agreement are intended to cover the exclusive, worldwide licensing of certain patents and know-hows related to mammography medical devices and solutions owned by us to FUJIFILM Corporation to develop, manufacture, market, distribute, operate and use mammography equipment and services (the “field of use”). Under the Right of First Negotiation Agreement, if such commercial agreement was not entered into by December 31, 2019, and if we later become involved in any negotiation to enter into an agreement for the grant of license of the patents covered by the agreement in the field of use to any third party, FUJIFILM Corporation would have a right of first negotiation for six months with respect to such proposed transaction under terms and conditions no less favorable to us than those proposed or offered by or to such third party. In accordance with the terms of the Right of First Negotiation Agreement, we assumed all of Nanox

Gibraltar’s obligations under such agreement upon the transfer of Nanox Gibraltar’s assets to us. We are currently discussing the terms of a potential commercial agreement with FUJIFILM Corporation.

We plan to commercialize our technology using the three simultaneous business models described above broadly across the globe by the end of 2024, including in the United States and certain countries in Asia, Europe, Africa, Latin America and Australia. Our sales and marketing strategy varies depending on specific geographical regions, as different regions generally require different marketing approaches.

In most countries, other than the United States, we expect to primarily market through local partnerships with strong national branding and operational market participants in the target region. These local partners would be engaged in deploying and operating our medical imaging systems, training and recruiting a local medical professional workforce to operate the systems and providing medical imaging diagnostics for the systems’ scan results.

In the United States, because we expect our systems will be relatively simple and cost effective to deploy compared to existing medical imaging systems, many urgent care units, outpatient clinics and retail locations could potentially become medical imaging service providers with the support of the appropriate partners and radiologists. We have already initiated discussions with some of the largest urgent care units, private clinic chains and retail locations for the potential deployment of thousands of units in the United States.

In addition, we also expect to engage local value-added resellers or integrators in different geographic regions to facilitate the local integration of our systems with health maintenance organizations, electronic health record systems, payment methods and insurance coverage companies. We estimate that it will take approximately three to six months of integration and localization efforts before we can generate sales in a given region.

We have optimized the MEMs proprietary manufacturing process and currently use our own equipment in the clean rooms located at the University of Tokyo to manufacture the MEMs X-ray chip, as shown in the picture below. As we further expand our business in connection with the commercialization of our technology, we expect to obtain access to other clean rooms provided by third parties. We plan to retain our core X-ray source technology production activities for the foreseeable future, and we intend to expand our manufacturing capacity, including through the establishment of the Korean Subsidiary, to meet our currently anticipated needs.

We have entered into direct arrangements on a purchase order basis with a manufacturer for the production of our X-ray tubes. In addition, we are evaluating, subject to completion of testing, a transition from glass-based X-ray tubes to ceramics-based tubes for cost efficiency purposes, which are the tubes to be used in the multi-source version of the Nanox.ARC, and we intend to enter into an agreement for such ceramics-based tubes with a new manufacturer in the future. We also expect to rely on third-party manufacturers for the commercial production of the other components of the Nanox.ARC, if cleared or approved by the requisite regulatory authorities.

Due, in part, to travel restrictions as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we expect to manufacture a small number of Nanox.ARC units in Israel on a purchase order basis that will be used for the acceptance tests under our MSaaS agreements, demonstrations, regulatory approvals and for the initial global deployment, among other purposes. We expect to enter into a formal agreement for the manufacture of these Nanox.ARC units. Furthermore, we have entered into a contract manufacturing agreement with FITI, as further described below, for mass production of the Nanox.ARC, with a goal to enable the commercial production of approximately 15,000 Nanox.ARC units that we plan to deploy by the end of 2024. Under the contract manufacturing agreement, FITI will negotiate and subcontract with other third parties for the commercial supply of the components of the Nanox.ARC in accordance with the pre-approved supplier list and on the terms to be agreed upon by both parties, except for the MEMs X-ray chip and the X-ray tube. As we further expand our business in connection with the commercialization of our technology, we also expect to seek to engage alternative manufacturers of the Nanox.ARC.

On May 26, 2020, we entered into a Contract Manufacturing Agreement with FITI. Under the terms of the agreement, FITI agrees to manufacture, package, distribute and ship, and we agree to purchase, certain products and procurement and assembly services, including a minimum of 1,000 Nanox Systems per year. We agree to provide FITI with a rolling forecast of our estimated monthly purchases, which FITI will use to prepare its supply chain to cover the material and manufacturing needs. Subsequently, we will send purchase orders to FITI for certain products and services. Prices for the products will be agreed by the parties at least 90 days prior to the first expected delivery date. FITI will be entitled to order materials in accordance with an approved supplier list and on the terms that the parties agree upon on a quarterly basis, and FITI must obtain our prior written consent if it procures materials from other suppliers. FITI may also purchase materials from us to support orders pursuant to our requests. The parties also agree to enter into a quality agreement, which will set forth the manufacturing standards applicable to FITI. The agreement will be in effect for three years from the date of the agreement and is renewable for successive terms of one year unless or until either party notifies the other in writing of its intention not to renew with 90 days’ prior notice. The agreement may be terminated by notice of the non-breaching party in case of a material breach of a party’s material obligations, or by either party in case of the bankruptcy or insolvency of the other party.

We have worked with a third party to develop the initial prototype of the Nanox.CLOUD and we plan to continue to develop the Nanox.CLOUD internally.

We have entered into nine MSaaS agreements to deploy 5,150 Nanox Systems in 13 regions as described in the table below. Under the terms of each agreement, we grant the other party a limited, non-transferable, exclusive, sub-licensable right to access and operate the Nanox System in the region indicated for such party. We undertake to provide the specified number of Nanox Systems to each entity as indicated in the table below based on agreed shipment schedules, subject to local regulatory approval and material compliance with acceptance test protocol (the “conditions precedent”). The other party undertakes to deploy the systems to provide a minimum number of scans per year (based on 7 scans per day and 23 days per month) on a pay-per-scan basis at a minimum of $14 per scan, and to pay a minimum annual fee (including payments to our partners) in the amount indicated in the table below. The MSaaS agreements require each of our counterparties to deliver to us a standby letter of credit or financial guarantee in the amount equal to the minimum annual fee in favor of us after receipt of the conditions precedent. However, there can be no guaranty that our counterparties will be able to obtain such letters of credit or financial guarantees.

The Nanox Systems provided under each agreement will remain our property, and the other party will only have a limited license to use the Nanox Systems. In addition, we must approve in writing any sublicense granted

under this agreement. We undertake to provide billing, radiology and maintenance services and to provide training for a local medical professional workforce to operate the Nanox.ARC.

Each agreement will be in effect for multiple years, ranging from three to seven years from the date of the applicable agreement, and is renewable for an additional multi-year term with both parties’ mutual consent as indicated in the table below. Each agreement may be terminated by notice of the non-breaching party in case of a material breach of a party’s material obligations, or by either party in case of the bankruptcy or insolvency of the other party.

We have entered into certain business development agreements with finders to obtain MSaaS agreements in specified countries. Once the standby letter of credit or financial guarantee has been issued in connection with each MSaaS agreement above, we will grant warrants to purchase our ordinary shares to the finder who caused

such MSaaS agreement to be signed between the Company and the entity. The warrants will be granted in an amount equal to 30% of the amount of the standby letter of credit or financial guarantee divided by 35.36 and have an exercise price equal to the fair market value of our ordinary shares at the time of the grant. The finder will also be entitled to 5% of the gross amount that we receive from scans made by the Nanox Systems under the MSaaS agreement. If a finder causes an MSaaS agreement to be signed between us and an entity with a minimum of 23 scans per day at a minimum of $30 per scan, once the standby letter of credit or financial guarantee has been issued, we will grant the finder warrants to purchase our ordinary shares in an amount equal to 5% of the amount of the standby letter of credit or financial guarantee divided by the fair market value of the ordinary shares at the time of issuance of the warrant. If a finder causes a letter of intent to be signed with an entity that will cooperate to deploy Nanox Systems, we will grant the finder warrants to purchase our ordinary shares in an amount equal to $300,000 divided by $18, the market price of our ordinary shares at the time of the closing of our initial public offering.

On October 26, 2020, we entered into an amendment to a certain business development agreement with certain finders in Russia, Belarus, South Africa, Brazil, Mexico and Guatemala, pursuant to which the Company paid the finders an aggregate one-time payment of $400,000, plus value-added tax and issued to them warrants to purchase an aggregate of 650,000 ordinary shares at an exercise price of $18 per share, which may be exercised on a cashless basis. The finders waived any and all past, present and future compensation to which they are or may be entitled pursuant to the agreements and all activities undertaken on our behalf, including the right to a percentage of future revenues we receive from scans made by the Nanox Systems and the issuance of warrants. These finders and their assigns also agree not to sell the shares underlying the warrants in excess of 10% of the daily average trading volume of our shares during the five trading days preceding such sale. In addition, these finders became party to the Registration Rights Agreement with respect to the ordinary shares underlying their warrants. In December 2020, 390,000 of such warrants were exercised for a net of 271,630 ordinary shares and in February 2021, 260,000 of such warrants were exercised for a net of 200,283 ordinary shares.

We believe our MSaaS business model has the potential to expand the total size of the X-ray-based medical imaging market. We plan to measure the success of our MSaaS business model by annual capacity for Above-the-Line (“ATL”) scans which represent the increased capacity of imaging care we can provide to people that originally had no meaningful access to medical imaging. As we expand our operations and deploy more units of the Nanox Systems in an increasing number of countries using the MSaaS model, we expect our ATL scans metric to increase accordingly.

We have entered into a Collaboration Agreement, dated September 8, 2019, with Hadasit Medical Research Services and Development Ltd. (“Hadasit”), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Hadassah Medical Organization (“HMO”). Under the terms of the agreement, the parties agreed to collaborate with respect to our medical imaging technology and resulting medical images devices (the “Company Products”), by way of (a) joint research and development projects (each, a “Research Project”); and (b) the provision by Hadasit of services in connection with Company Products, such as testing and consulting work, where no innovative research will be carried out (each, a “Service”). Each Research Project and Service will be rendered under a separate project agreement to be entered into between the parties in writing from time to time (collectively, the “Project Agreements”). Prior to entering into any Project Agreement, a joint steering committee to be established shall be responsible for determining whether such Project Agreement constitutes a Research Project or a Service. The parties envisage the collaboration to continue over a period of five years, unless extended in writing. Under this agreement, Hadasit has agreed to extend competitive prices comparable to prices that it offers to other commercial entities with respect to the Research Projects and Services. We made a non-refundable payment to Hadasit as an advance on account of the Research Projects and Services in the amount of $250,000, plus value-added tax, which amount will be credited against payments due from time to time to Hadasit under the Project Agreements. We have no obligation to enter into any Project Agreements with Hadasit that will cause us to pay Hadasit any payments in excess of the amount advanced, and we are not permitted to use funding from the Israel Innovation Authority for any Research Projects or Services.

Under this agreement, Hadasit has granted us an exclusive, worldwide license, with the right to sublicense, under Hadasit’s rights in proprietary information created within the framework of a Research Project (collectively, the “Collaboration Intellectual Property”), to develop, have developed, manufacture, have

manufactured, use, market, offer for sale, sell, have sold, distribute, export and import Company Products. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Hadasit reserves for itself, HMO and other non-commercial third parties, rights to Collaboration Intellectual Property for teaching or academic research purposes.

In consideration for Hadasit’s license to us, Hadasit is entitled to compensation, on a country-by-country basis, for all commercial scans (each, a “Scan”) carried out with the use of Covered Products (as defined below) throughout the applicable revenue sharing period at the rate of ten cents per Scan, which period commences upon the first Scan conducted in a country and ending on the later of: (i) the expiration of the last to expire valid claim of the applicable jointly owned patent; and (ii) 15 years from the date of the first Scan conducted in such country with a Covered Product after receipt of required regulatory approvals in such country. No royalty is due for Scans that are carried out with the use of Covered Products without consideration for internal, testing, training or demonstration purposes. “Covered Products” are those Company Products which (i) comprise, contain or incorporate, and/or use, in whole or in part, Collaboration Intellectual Property; (ii) the development, production and/or sale of which, is based on, or involves, in whole or in part, the use of the Collaboration Intellectual Property; or (iii) are produced or manufactured in whole or in part, using a process, method or system covered by, or included within the Collaboration Intellectual Property. If we, our affiliate or sublicensee challenges the validity, enforceability or scope of any patents jointly owned by us and Hadasit, Hadasit may terminate such license with respect to Covered Products covered by such patents and double the revenue sharing rate owed Hadasit under the agreement as described above.

In addition, under this agreement, we have granted Hadasit a royalty-free, worldwide, non-exclusive license, with the right to sublicense only to permitted contractors, to use, copy, maintain, modify and prepare derivative works of our intellectual property as necessary to conduct the Research Projects and Services.

The term of the agreement will continue until the expiration of all payment obligations thereunder. The agreement may be terminated by mutual consent, by the non-breaching party in case of a material breach of a party’s material obligations, or by either party in case of the bankruptcy or insolvency of the other party.

We also granted Hadasit a warrant to purchase 23,957 of our ordinary shares at a price of $20.87 per share with a total exercise price of $500,000. The shares will be fully vested after two years, with one-third vested on September 8, 2019, another one-third vested on September 8, 2020 and the remainder to be vested after September 8, 2021. The warrant was exercised on a cashless basis in September 2020.

We entered into a Non-Exclusive Collaboration Agreement, dated January 22, 2020, with USARAD. Under the terms of the agreement, USARAD will use best efforts to contact official public health authorities of governments and/or medical center operators in the United States (“Medical System Operators”), to facilitate the closing of commercial agreements between us and the Medical System Operator for the deployment of 3,000 Nanox Systems and to promote the Nanox.CLOUD services with radiologists for joining the Nanox diagnostics services platform. We must approve any engagement of a Medical System Operator that USARAD contacts.

We undertake to provide the deployed Nanox Systems on a pay-per-scan subscription basis using the Nanox.CLOUD. Subject to FDA clearance and a satisfactory Nanox System pilot testing by the Medical System Operator, USARAD undertakes to use best efforts to engage Medical System Operators that will undertake an annual subscription to a minimum number of scans per year. USARAD also undertakes to establish connections with the radiologist community in the United States. USARAD will receive a fee-per-scan, which will be subject to an upfront subscription commitment and fees.

We undertake to fully finance the cost of the Nanox Systems to be deployed in accordance with any commercial agreements between us and a Medical System Operator and their ongoing maintenance, as well as to provide training for the Nanox System operations. USARAD undertakes to make introductions to local maintenance contractors that are qualified to maintain medical equipment for the purpose of providing ongoing maintenance services for the Nanox Systems on our behalf.

The agreement will be in effect for 12 months from the date of the agreement and will be automatically renewed for additional 12-month periods. The agreement may be terminated by 90 days’ advance written notice by either party, by notice of the non-breaching party in case of a material breach of a party’s material obligations, or by either party in case of the bankruptcy or insolvency of the other party.

On January 5, 2021, we announced the extension of our collaboration with USARAD, under which we intend to launch, jointly with USARAD pursuant to an oral agreement, an advanced radiology diagnostics service, combining over 300 expert radiologists and AI decision support algorithms and solutions. We plan to use X-ray based algorithms, including 2D and 3D tomosynthesis, to provide analysis of large datasets combined with expert radiologists’ interpretations through a unique proprietary workflow that prioritizes urgent cases. The service is planned to be launched after strategically partnering with several leading AI companies. We plan to target insurance companies and other key constituents within the healthcare ecosystem, including outpatient imaging centers, throughout United States with the advanced radiology diagnostics service. We aim for this program to become an integral part of our service offering, subject to FDA 510(k) clearance of the Nanox.ARC.

The program is intended to launch in three categories:

On June 4, 2020, we entered into a collaboration agreement with SK Telecom, pursuant to which we and SK Telecom continue to explore and engage in good faith to develop a definitive agreement for the deployment of 2,500 Nanox Systems in South Korea and Vietnam, and we have established a wholly-owned subsidiary in South Korea with the support of SK Telecom for the purpose of manufacturing MEMs X-ray chips for the Nanox.ARC.

In 2019 and 2020, we entered into collaboration agreements with certain AI partners, including Brainomix Limited (“Brainomix”), CureMetrix, Inc. (“CureMetrix”), IMedis AI Ltd. (“IMedis”) and Qure.ai Technologies Pyt. Ltd. (“Qure.ai”). In 2020, we entered into non-binding agreements with Lunit Inc., (“Lunit”) and VUNO Inc. (“VUNO”). CureMetrix will support the development and testing of our technology together with medical imaging scans, in a diagnostic advisory capacity. Brainomix, IMedis and Qure.ai will each collaborate with us in the testing of the Nanox.ARC and the Nanox.CLOUD together with proprietary AI algorithms used for the analysis of brain damage caused by stroke, chest and abdomen X-rays, and chest and head X-rays, respectively, in medical imaging scans. Lunit and VUNO will each cooperate with us to jointly conduct research and development for commercializing medical AI solutions based on digital X-ray and CT technology.

We entered into a Software-as-a-Service Agreement, dated October 21, 2020, with DICOM Grid, Inc. d/b/a Ambra Health. Ambra is a medical data and image management cloud software company, whose network includes thousands of imaging providers in the U.S., including seven of the top ten hospitals and six of the top ten children’s hospitals, as well as leading radiology practices, subspecialty groups and life sciences companies.

Under the terms of the agreement, Ambra grants us a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensable, worldwide, royalty-free and fully paid license to use its software for uploading, viewing, sending and archiving diagnostic imaging and reports to be integrated into the Nanox.CLOUD.

The term of the agreement is for one year from the date of the agreement, and shall be automatically renewed for additional periods of the same duration, unless either party requests termination at least sixty days prior to the end of the then-current term.

On January 29, 2019, Nanox Gibraltar and A-Labs Advisory & Finance Ltd. (“A-Labs”) entered into a Letter of Engagement. On October 18, 2019, we entered into an Amendment to the Letter of Engagement with A-Labs, in which we replaced and succeeded Nanox Gibraltar in all matters relating to the agreement. Under the terms of the agreement, A-Labs will provide consulting services to us in connection with various transactions, such as a private placement or our initial public offering.

In October 2019, we paid A-Labs an advanced payment of $1 million after the signing of the amendment to the agreement, which constituted the full and final payment for A-Labs’ services under the agreement. In connection with our initial public offering, in August 2020, we paid A-Labs $4,750,000, representing 2.5% of the gross proceeds received from our initial public offering. The advanced payment and any fees received under the original agreement were set off from the cash payment to A-Labs as part of our initial public offering.

In addition, at the closing of our initial public offering, we issued to A-Labs an amount of warrants to purchase 263,889 ordinary shares, representing 2.5% of all shares issued in our initial public offering, at an exercise price equal to the price per ordinary share in such offering. At that time, A-Labs agreed not to sell or transfer any of our ordinary shares during the one-year period commencing from the closing of our initial public offering, which was later shortened to 180 days in order to align the lock-up period with other locked-up parties.

Several large companies, such as General Electric, Siemens, Philips, Hologic, Varian, Fuji, Toshiba and Hitachi currently dominate the medical imaging market. High regulatory, distribution, manufacturing and service-related long-term contractual costs represent significant barriers to entry for any new player. We expect that the existing market participants will remain key players in the future and we aim to form alliances with several of these leading market participants, including through licensing.

Over time, we anticipate that the evolution in the industry will bring new players into the market. Digital healthcare disruptors such as cloud computing companies or leading IT companies may enter the industry and we believe that they may become strong partners through our Subscription Model.

As a general matter, we view competition on two levels:

In terms of digital X-ray sources, the field emission display technology is known and a wide range of industry leaders have used it to attempt to create an alternative, digital source of X-ray. We are not aware of any competing company that has achieved a commercial grade, stable digital X-ray source, either based on field emission display technology or otherwise. The most well-known attempt was the use of carbon nano tubes (“CNT”) as the base material for a potential field emission-based solution. To our knowledge, there are several companies currently in the process of developing this technology, including Carestream, XinRay Systems and Varex Imaging. Branded as a “cold cathode,” CNT solutions have been proven to be unstable and, to date, no commercially available solution has been implemented after significant investment.

There are two main differences between our MEMs-based X-ray source and CNT-based X-ray sources. First, carbon, which is used in CNT-based X-ray sources, is much easier to burn than metal, which is used in our X-ray source. The carbon edges of CNT are extremely small. If these carbon edges are not controlled precisely, so that the maximum current is below their burn temperature, they burn out. Further, the edges of CNT are randomly positioned and cannot position nano-tubes in precise locations. Therefore, the edges burn first under high electric field voltage and cause a chain reaction of all edges burning, which renders the CNT useless. In contrast, we believe our molybdenum cones are a far more resistant base and our X-ray source positions metal cone edges in the precise location of the electric field using our MEMs with negligible positioning error deviation. Second, others have tried to prevent the deterioration of the CNT-based X-ray sources by using “mesh” as an electric field to extract electrons. “Mesh” is a grid-electrode set a few millimeters above of CNTs. However, the distance between the metal edges and their gates is extremely large compared to our X-ray source, and it requires 1,000 volts to extract electrons, while our X-ray source only needs 50 volts. High voltage is costly and imprecise. Moreover, the mesh grid traps 50% of the electron emission, meaning the mesh-based solution is costly and extracts only a small number of electrons, many of which are wasted.

In terms of the MSaaS business model, we currently seek a first-mover advantage by introducing the Subscription Model, as the main pre-requisite for this model is the low cost of the X-ray source. However, the primary competition comes from established market participants. While in developing countries we are experiencing keen interest, the United States and other Western regions already have major market participants that are well entrenched in the market with strong political influence and the ability to delay deployment of our systems.

As of January 3, 2021, we had three issued patents in the United States and six provisional or pending U.S. patent applications. We also had three patents issued in each of Israel, Japan and China, two patents pending in each of Israel, Japan and China, five pending patent applications in the European Patent Office, five pending patent applications in Korea and two pending Patent Cooperation Treaty patent applications, which are the counterparts of our U.S. patent applications. Our issued patents expire between the years 2032 and 2034, and are directed to various features and combinations of features of the Nanox.ARC. We also have three trademarks granted and three trademarks pending in Israel.

We intend to continue filing for patents on new technologies as they are developed and to actively pursue any infringement upon our patents. We believe that our know-how and trade secrets represent de facto barriers to potential competition.

The Nanox System is being designed and developed with personal privacy, data security and protection in mind as a top priority for all development parties. Medical imaging information and other health information is highly personal and sensitive and thus regarded as a prime target for hacks and malicious theft. As part of our normal operations, we expect to collect, process and retain personal identifying information regarding patients.

We believe we will likely be subject to U.S. rules and regulations governing data protection, including HIPAA. See “—Government Regulation—Healthcare Regulatory Laws—Data Privacy and Security.”

In addition, we believe we will likely be subject to the GDPR to the extent that our business involves personal data of persons within the EEA. Data protection legislation, including the GDPR, regulates the manner in which we may hold and communicate personal data of our employees and patients (including, in our case, sensitive health data). We are likely to be defined as a “Data Controller” with respect to the personal data of patients that we intend to collect and are therefore likely to be subject to a number of key legal obligations under the GDPR. In addition to reflecting existing requirements that already existed under the old data protection regime, such as, among other things, requirements to provide users with a “fair processing notice” if we process their data, ensure that inaccurate data is corrected, only retain data for so long as is necessary and not transfer data outside the EEA to jurisdictions which do not ensure an adequate level of protection of personal data without taking certain safeguards, the GDPR also implemented new, more stringent operational and procedural requirements for our use of personal data. These include expanded prior information requirements in light of the transparency principle to tell patients how we may use their personal data, increased controls on profiling such persons, increased rights for patients to access, control and delete their personal data and mandatory data breach notification requirements. In addition, there are significantly increased administrative fines of the greater of €20 million and 4% of global turnover (as well as the right to compensation for financial or non-financial damages claimed by any individuals under Article 82 of the GDPR). Further, following the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Economic Area and the European Union, and the expiry of the transition period, companies have to comply with both the GDPR and the GDPR as incorporated into United Kingdom national law, the latter regime having the ability to separately fine up to the greater of £17.5 million or 4% of global turnover. The relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union in relation to certain aspects of data protection law remains unclear, for example around how data can lawfully be transferred between each jurisdiction, which may expose us to further compliance risk.

Separate from, and in addition to, the GDPR requirements, certification requirements for the hosting of health data will vary by jurisdiction (and may or may not apply to hosts of health data). As the Nanox System is projected to operate in various EEA countries, we may be required to comply with other national healthcare regulations or regulatory requirements. For example, in France, there is a procedure as of April 1, 2018, for hosts of health data to obtain a prior certification with the competent certification body.

We are dedicated to making our systems and software both HIPAA and GDPR compliant. We intend to submit our systems to an independent external audit on a regular basis as required by HHS. We also intend to develop our privacy protocols to comply with the GDPR. In addition, we are undertaking intendant measures to ensure a high-level of imaging data encryption, complete separation between the imaging data and personal

information (anonymization) as well as three-factor authentication procedures during on-boarding and usage of the Nanox System. We also intend to undertake to perform periodic Pen-Tests by external cyber security professionals and publish the results of such audits publicly and without delay on our website and via public relations channels.

The Nanox System and our operations will be subject to extensive regulation by the FDA, and other federal and state authorities in the United States, as well as comparable authorities in foreign jurisdictions. The Nanox.ARC will be subject to regulation as medical devices and radiation-emitting devices in the United States under the FDCA, as implemented and enforced by the FDA, and under comparable regulatory schemes in foreign jurisdictions.

The FDA regulates the development, design, non-clinical and clinical research, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, labeling, packaging, storage, installation, servicing, recordkeeping, premarket clearance or approval, adverse event reporting, advertising, promotion, marketing and distribution, and import and export of medical devices to ensure that medical devices distributed within the United States are safe and effective for their intended uses or are substantially equivalent to a predicate device and otherwise meet the requirements of the FDCA.

Subject to certain exceptions, each medical device commercially distributed in the United States requires either FDA clearance of a 510(k) premarket notification, or approval of a PMA application. Under the FDCA, medical devices are classified into one of three classes—Class I, Class II or Class III—depending on the degree of risk associated with each medical device and the extent of manufacturer and regulatory control needed to ensure its safety and effectiveness. Class I includes devices with the lowest risk to the patient and are those for which safety and effectiveness can be assured by adherence to the FDA’s General Controls for medical devices, which include compliance with the applicable portions of QSR, facility registration and product listing, reporting of adverse medical events and truthful and non-misleading labeling, advertising and promotional materials. Class II devices are subject to the FDA’s General Controls, and special controls as deemed necessary by the FDA to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device. These special controls can include performance standards, post-market surveillance, patient registries and FDA guidance documents.

While most Class I devices are exempt from the 510(k) premarket notification requirement, manufacturers of most Class II devices are required to submit to the FDA a premarket notification under Section 510(k) of the FDCA requesting permission to commercially distribute the device. The FDA’s permission to commercially distribute a device subject to a 510(k) premarket notification is generally known as 510(k) clearance. Devices deemed by the FDA to pose the greatest risks, such as life sustaining, life supporting or some implantable devices, or devices that have a new intended use, or use advanced technology that is not substantially equivalent to that of a legally marketed device, are placed in Class III, requiring approval of a PMA. Some pre-amendment devices are unclassified, but are subject to the FDA’s premarket notification and clearance process in order to be commercially distributed.

We expect the Nanox.ARC will be a Class II device subject to premarket notification and clearance under section 510(k) of the FDCA. To obtain 510(k) clearance, we must submit to the FDA a premarket notification submission demonstrating that the proposed device is “substantially equivalent” to a predicate device already on the market. A predicate device is a legally marketed device that is not subject to premarket approval, i.e., a device that was legally marketed prior to May 28, 1976 (pre-amendments device), and for which a PMA is not required, a device that has been reclassified from Class III to Class II or I, or a device that was found substantially equivalent through the 510(k) process. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance process usually takes from three to twelve months, but often takes longer. The FDA may require additional information, including clinical data, to make a determination regarding substantial equivalence. In addition, the FDA collects user fees for certain medical device submissions and annual fees and for medical device establishments. For fiscal year 2020, the standard user fee for a 510(k) premarket notification application is $11,594.

If the FDA agrees that the device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device currently on the market, it will grant 510(k) clearance to commercially market the device. If the FDA determines that the device is “not substantially equivalent” to a previously cleared device, the device is automatically designated as a Class III device. The device sponsor must then fulfill more rigorous PMA requirements, or can request a risk-based classification determination for the device in accordance with the “de novo” process, which is a route to market for novel medical devices that are low to moderate risk and are not substantially equivalent to a predicate device.

After a device receives 510(k) marketing clearance, any modification that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change or modification in its intended use, will require a new 510(k) clearance or, depending on the modification, PMA approval or de novo reclassification. The FDA requires each manufacturer to determine whether the proposed change requires submission of a 510(k), a de novo request or a PMA in the first instance, but the FDA can review any such decision and disagree with a manufacturer’s determination. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturer’s determination, the FDA can require the manufacturer to cease marketing and/or request the recall of the modified device until 510(k) marketing clearance or until PMA approval is obtained or a de novo request is granted. Also, in these circumstances, the manufacturer may be subject to significant regulatory fines or penalties.

Over the last several years, the FDA has proposed reforms to its 510(k) clearance process, and such proposals could include increased requirements for clinical data and a longer review period, or could make it more difficult for manufacturers to utilize the 510(k) clearance process for their products. For example, in November 2018, the FDA officials announced forthcoming steps that the FDA intends to take to modernize the premarket notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. Among other things, the FDA announced that it planned to develop proposals to drive manufacturers utilizing the 510(k) pathway toward the use of newer predicates. These proposals included plans to potentially sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway, and to potentially publish a list of devices that have been cleared on the basis of demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices that are more than 10 years old. In May 2019, the FDA solicited public feedback on these proposals. The FDA requested public feedback on whether it should consider certain actions that might require new authority, such as whether to sunset certain older devices that were used as predicates under the 510(k) clearance pathway. These proposals have not yet been finalized or adopted, and the FDA may work with Congress to implement such proposals through legislation.

More recently, in September 2019, the FDA finalized guidance describing an optional “safety and performance based” premarket review pathway for manufacturers of “certain, well-understood device types” to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway by showing that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, thereby obviating the need, in the case of applicable products, for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process. The FDA maintains a list of device types appropriate for the “safety and performance based” pathway and will continue to develop product-specific guidance documents that identify the performance criteria for each such device type, as well as the testing methods recommended in the guidance documents, where feasible.

Class III devices require PMA approval before they can be marketed, although some pre-amendment Class III devices for which the FDA has not yet required a PMA are cleared through the 510(k) process. The PMA process is more demanding than the 510(k) premarket notification process. In a PMA, the manufacturer must demonstrate that the device is safe and effective, and the PMA must be supported by extensive data, including data from preclinical studies and human clinical trials. The PMA must also contain a full description of the device and its components, a full description of the methods, facilities and controls used for manufacturing and proposed labeling. Following receipt of a PMA, the FDA determines whether the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. If the FDA accepts the application for review, it has 180 days under the FDCA to complete its review of a PMA, although in practice, the FDA’s review often takes significantly longer, and can take up to several years. An advisory panel of experts from outside the FDA may be convened to review and evaluate the application and provide recommendations to the FDA as to the approvability of the device. The FDA may or may not accept the panel’s recommendation. In addition, the FDA will generally conduct a

pre-approval inspection of the applicant or its third-party manufacturers’ or suppliers’ manufacturing facility or facilities to ensure compliance with the QSR. PMA devices are also subject to the payment of user fees, which for fiscal year 2020 includes a standard application fee of $340,995 and an annual establishment registration fee of $5,236.

The FDA will approve the new device for commercial distribution if it determines that the data and information in the PMA constitute valid scientific evidence and that there is reasonable assurance that the device is safe and effective for its intended use(s). The FDA may approve a PMA with post-approval conditions intended to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, including, among other things, restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale and distribution and collection of long-term follow-up data from patients in the clinical study that supported PMA approval or requirements to conduct additional clinical studies post-approval. The FDA may condition PMA approval on some form of post-market surveillance when deemed necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional safety and efficacy data for the device in a larger population or for a longer period of use. In such cases, the manufacturer might be required to follow certain patient groups for a number of years and to make periodic reports to the FDA on the clinical status of those patients. Failure to comply with the conditions of approval can result in material adverse enforcement action, including withdrawal of the approval.

Certain changes to an approved device, such as changes in manufacturing facilities, methods or quality control procedures, or changes in the design performance specifications, which affect the safety or effectiveness of the device, require submission of a PMA supplement. PMA supplements often require submission of the same type of information as a PMA, except that the supplement is limited to information needed to support any changes from the device covered by the original PMA and may not require as extensive clinical data or the convening of an advisory panel. Certain other changes to an approved device require the submission of a new PMA, such as when the design change causes a different intended use, mode of operation, and technical basis of operation, or when the design change is so significant that a new generation of the device will be developed, and the data that were submitted with the original PMA are not applicable for the change in demonstrating a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. We do not expect any of our products to be marketed pursuant to a PMA.

Clinical trials are almost always required to support a PMA and are sometimes required to support a 510(k) submission. All clinical investigations of devices to determine safety and effectiveness must be conducted in accordance with the FDA’s investigational device exemption (“IDE”) regulations which govern investigational device labeling, prohibit promotion of the investigational device and specify an array of recordkeeping, reporting and monitoring responsibilities of study sponsors and study investigators. If the device presents a “significant risk” to human health, as defined by the FDA, the FDA requires the device sponsor to submit an IDE application to the FDA, which must become effective prior to commencing human clinical trials. If the device under evaluation does not present a significant risk to human health, then the device sponsor is not required to submit an IDE application to the FDA before initiating human clinical trials, but must still comply with abbreviated IDE requirements when conducting such trials. A significant risk device is one that presents a potential for serious risk to the health, safety or welfare of a patient and either is implanted, used in supporting or sustaining human life, substantially important in diagnosing, curing, mitigating or treating disease or otherwise preventing impairment of human health, or otherwise presents a potential for serious risk to a subject. An IDE application must be supported by appropriate data, such as animal and laboratory test results, showing that it is safe to test the device in humans and that the testing protocol is scientifically sound. The IDE will automatically become effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA unless the FDA notifies the company that the investigation may not begin. If the FDA determines that there are deficiencies or other concerns with an IDE for which it requires modification, the FDA may permit a clinical trial to proceed under a conditional approval.

Regardless of the degree of risk presented by the medical device, clinical studies must be approved by, and conducted under the oversight of, an Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) for each clinical site. The IRB is responsible for the initial and continuing review of the IDE, and may pose additional requirements for the conduct of the study. If an IDE application is approved by the FDA and one or more IRBs, human clinical trials may begin at a specific number of investigational sites with a specific number of patients, as approved by the FDA. If the device presents a non-significant risk to the patient, a sponsor may begin the clinical trial after obtaining approval for the trial by one or more IRBs without separate approval from the FDA, but must still

follow abbreviated IDE requirements, such as monitoring the investigation, ensuring that the investigators obtain informed consent and labeling and record-keeping requirements. Acceptance of an IDE application for review does not guarantee that the FDA will allow the IDE to become effective and, if it does become effective, the FDA may or may not determine that the data derived from the trials support the safety and effectiveness of the device or warrant the continuation of clinical trials. An IDE supplement must be submitted to, and approved by, the FDA before a sponsor or investigator may make a change to the investigational plan that may affect its scientific soundness, study plan or the rights, safety or welfare of human subjects.

During a study, the sponsor is required to comply with the applicable FDA requirements, including, for example, trial monitoring, selecting clinical investigators and providing them with the investigational plan, ensuring IRB review, adverse event reporting, record keeping and prohibitions on the promotion of investigational devices or on making safety or effectiveness claims for them. The clinical investigators in the clinical study are also subject to FDA regulations and must obtain patient informed consent, rigorously follow the investigational plan and study protocol, control the disposition of the investigational device and comply with all reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Additionally, after a trial begins, we, the FDA or the IRB could suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time for various reasons, including a belief that the risks to study subjects outweigh the anticipated benefits.

After a device is cleared or approved for marketing, numerous and pervasive regulatory requirements continue to apply. These include:

Our manufacturing processes are required to comply with the applicable portions of the QSR, which cover the methods and the facilities and controls for the design, manufacture, testing, production, processes, controls, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, distribution, installation and servicing of finished devices intended for human use. The QSR also requires, among other things, maintenance of a device master file, device history file and complaint files. As a manufacturer, we will be subject to periodic scheduled or unscheduled inspections by the FDA. Our failure to maintain compliance with the QSR requirements could result in the shut-down of, or restrictions on, our manufacturing operations and the recall or seizure of our products, which would have a material adverse effect on our business. The discovery of previously unknown problems with any of our

products, including unanticipated adverse events or adverse events of increasing severity or frequency, whether resulting from the use of the device within the scope of its clearance or off-label by a physician in the practice of medicine, could result in restrictions on the device, including the removal of the product from the market or voluntary or mandatory device recalls.

The FDA has broad regulatory compliance and enforcement powers. If the FDA determines that we failed to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, it can take a variety of compliance or enforcement actions, which may result in any of the following sanctions:

We and our products will also be regulated by the FDA under the Electronic Product Radiation Control provisions of the FDCA because the Nanox.ARC contains radiation emitting components, and because we assemble these components during manufacturing and service activities. The Electronic Product Radiation Control provisions require radiation-producing products to comply with certain regulations and applicable performance standards. Manufacturers are required to certify in product labeling and reports to the FDA that their products comply with all necessary standards as well as maintain manufacturing, testing and sales records for their products. The Electronic Product Radiation Control provisions also require manufacturers to report product defects and affix appropriate labeling to covered products. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in enforcement action by the FDA, which can include any of the sanctions described above.

Within the United States, our products and our customers will be subject to extensive regulation by a wide range of federal and state agencies that govern business practices in the medical device industry. These laws include federal and state anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, transparency and anti-corruption statutes and regulations. Internationally, other governments also impose regulations in connection with their healthcare reimbursement programs and the delivery of healthcare items and services.

U.S. federal healthcare fraud and abuse laws will generally apply to our activities, among other reasons because we expect that our products will be covered under federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. The Anti-Kickback Statute is particularly relevant because of its broad applicability. Specifically, the Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for, or to induce, either the referral of an individual, or the furnishing, arranging for or recommending a good or service for which payment may be made in whole or part under federal healthcare programs, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Almost any financial interaction with a healthcare provider, patient or customer will implicate the Anti-Kickback Statute. Statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protect certain interactions if specific requirements are met. However, only those interactions that represent fair market value exchanges generally are protected by a safe harbor or exception. The government can exercise enforcement discretion in taking action against unprotected activities. Further, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the Anti-Kickback Statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act or federal civil money penalties statute. Penalties for

Anti-Kickback Statute violations may include both criminal penalties such as imprisonment and civil sanctions such as fines, imprisonment and possible exclusion from Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs. Exclusion would mean that diagnostic tests using our products would no longer be eligible for reimbursement under federal healthcare programs.

Many states have adopted laws similar to the Anti-Kickback Statute. Some of these state prohibitions apply to referral of patients for healthcare items or services reimbursed by any payor, not only federal healthcare programs. Insurance companies may also bring a private cause of action for treble damages against a manufacturer for a pattern of causing false claims to be filed under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

Another development affecting the healthcare industry is the increased use of the federal Civil False Claims Act and, in particular, actions brought pursuant to the False Claims Act’s “whistleblower” or “qui tam” provisions. The False Claims Act imposes liability on any person or entity that, among other things, knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment by a federal healthcare program. The qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act allow a private individual to bring actions on behalf of the federal government alleging that the defendant has submitted a false claim to the federal government, and to share in any monetary recovery. In recent years, the number of suits brought against healthcare providers by private individuals has increased dramatically. In addition, various states have enacted false claim laws analogous to the Civil False Claims Act, although many of these state laws apply where a claim is submitted to any third-party payor and not merely a federal healthcare program.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, among other things, created two new federal crimes: healthcare fraud and false statements relating to healthcare matters. The HIPAA healthcare fraud statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private payors. A violation of this statute is a felony and may result in fines, imprisonment and/or exclusion from government-sponsored programs. The HIPAA false statements statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. A violation of this statute is a felony and may result in fines and/or imprisonment. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statutes or specific intent to violate them in order to have committed a violation.

Laws and regulations have also been enacted by the federal government and various states to regulate the sales and marketing practices of medical device and pharmaceutical manufacturers. The laws and regulations generally limit financial interactions between manufacturers and healthcare providers, require pharmaceutical and medical device companies to comply with voluntary compliance standards issued by industry associations and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government and/or require disclosure to the government and/or public of financial interactions (so-called “sunshine laws”). Many of these laws and regulations contain ambiguous requirements or require administrative guidance for implementation. Manufacturers must adopt reasonable interpretations of requirements if there is ambiguity and those interpretations could be challenged. Given the lack of clarity in laws and their implementation, our activities could be subject to the penalty provisions of the pertinent federal and state laws and regulations.

Over the past few years, the growth rate of advanced imaging volumes has slowed in part due to additional patient-related cost-sharing programs and an increasing trend of third-party payors intensifying their utilization management efforts, for example, through benefit managers who require prior authorizations to control the growth rate of imaging services generally. We expect that these trends will continue.

By way of example, in the United States, the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 required CMS, in conjunction with medical specialty societies, to adopt appropriate use criteria (“AUC”) for certain advanced diagnostic imaging services, including MRI, CT, nuclear medicine (including position emission tomography). Beginning in 2022, payment will be made to the furnishing professional for an applicable advanced diagnostic imaging service only if the claim indicates that the ordering professional consulted a qualified clinical decision support mechanism, as identified by HHS, as to whether the ordered service adheres to the applicable AUC. Applicable settings include physician offices, hospital outpatient departments, including emergency departments,

ambulatory surgical centers and independent diagnostic testing facilities. Advanced imaging services ordered by certain physicians identified as having outlier-ordering partners will be subject to prior authorization for applicable imaging services provided to Medicare beneficiaries. The outlier methodology used by CMS will be subject to future notice and comment rulemaking before the prior authorization component is implemented. We cannot predict the full impact of this project.

Third-party payors may impose limits on coverage or reimbursement for diagnostic imaging services, including denying reimbursement for tests that do not follow recommended diagnostic procedures or can only be billed using an unlisted or miscellaneous code. To the extent our customers will depend on third-party payors, unfavorable coding, coverage and reimbursement policies may constrict the profit margins of our provider customers, which may force us to lower our fees to attract and retain customers. If we are required to request new billing codes that more precisely identify and describe our imaging services, coverage is limited or reimbursement rates are inadequate, a healthcare provider might find it financially unattractive to own our diagnostic imaging systems. It is possible that third-party payor coding, coverage and reimbursement policies will affect the need or prices for our products in the future, which could significantly affect our financial performance and our ability to conduct our business.

In the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system. In March 2010, the ACA was signed into law and substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers in the United States. The ACA contains a number of provisions, including those governing enrollment in federal healthcare programs, reimbursement adjustments and fraud and abuse changes. Additionally, the ACA imposed, among other things, a new federal excise tax on the sale of certain medical devices, which, through a series of legislative amendments, was suspended, effective January 1, 2016, and subsequently repealed altogether on December 20, 2019, provided incentives to programs that increase the federal government’s comparative effectiveness research and implemented payment system reforms including a national pilot program on payment bundling to encourage hospitals, physicians and other providers to improve the coordination, quality and efficiency of certain healthcare services through bundled payment models.

Since its enactment, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA, and we expect there will be additional challenges and amendments to the ACA in the future. By way of example, in 2017, Congress enacted the TCJA, which eliminated the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the individual mandate is a critical and inseverable feature of the ACA, and therefore, because it was repealed as part of the TCJA, the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. On December 18, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled that the individual mandate was unconstitutional and remanded the case back to the District Court to determine whether the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing the case. A decision is expected during the current Supreme Court term in 2021, and the ACA remains in effect while judicial review of the decision is pending. It is unclear how these decisions, future decisions, subsequent appeals, and other efforts to repeal and replace the ACA will impact the ACA.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted, including aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which has been temporarily suspended from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021, and reduced payments to several types of Medicare providers. We believe the overall escalating cost of medical products and services being paid for by the government and private health insurance has led to, and will continue to lead to, increased pressures on the healthcare and medical device industry to reduce the costs of products and services.

Medical device companies may be subject to U.S. federal and state and foreign health information privacy, security and data breach notification laws, which may govern the collection, use, disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal information. In the United States, HIPAA imposes privacy, security and breach reporting obligations with respect to individually identifiable health information upon “covered entities” (health

plans, health care clearinghouses and certain health care providers), and their respective business associates, individuals or entities that create, receive, maintain or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity. HIPAA and its respective implementing regulations, including the final omnibus rule published on January 25, 2013, imposes specified requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. HIPAA mandates the reporting of certain breaches of health information to HHS, affected individuals and if the breach is large enough, the media. Entities that are found to be in violation of HIPAA as the result of a breach of unsecured protected health information (“PHI”), a complaint about privacy practices or an audit by HHS, may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative fines and penalties and/or additional reporting and oversight obligations if required to enter into a resolution agreement and corrective action plan with HHS to settle allegations of HIPAA non-compliance. The Health Information Technology For Economic and Clinical Health Act also increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against covered entities, business associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions.

Even when HIPAA does not apply, according to the Federal Trade Commission or the FTC, failing to take appropriate steps to keep consumers’ personal information secure constitutes unfair acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C § 45(a). The FTC expects a company’s data security measures to be reasonable and appropriate in light of the sensitivity and volume of consumer information it holds, the size and complexity of its business, and the cost of available tools to improve security and reduce vulnerabilities. Individually identifiable health information is considered sensitive data that merits stronger safeguards. The FTC’s guidance for appropriately securing consumers’ personal information is similar to what is required by the HIPAA Security Rule.

In addition, certain state and non-U.S. laws, such as the GDPR, govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent or broader in scope than HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. Further, “business associates,” defined as independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive, maintain or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity, are also subject to certain HIPAA privacy and security standards. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil and/or criminal penalties and private litigation. For example, California enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), which went into effect January 1, 2020. The CCPA, among other things, creates new data privacy obligations for covered companies and provides new privacy rights to California residents, including the right to opt out of certain disclosures of their information. The CCPA also creates a private right of action with statutory damages for certain data breaches, thereby potentially increasing risks associated with a data breach. Although the law includes limited exceptions, including for PHI maintained by a covered entity or business associate, it may regulate or impact our expected processing of personal information depending on the context. Further, the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), recently passed in California. The CPRA will impose additional data protection obligations on covered businesses, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It will also create a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. The majority of the provisions will go into effect on January 1, 2023, and additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. In Europe, the GDPR went into effect in May 2018 and introduces strict requirements for processing the personal data of individuals within the EEA. Companies that must comply with the GDPR face increased compliance obligations and risk, including more robust regulatory enforcement of data protection requirements and potential fines for noncompliance of up to €20 million or 4% of the annual global revenues of the noncompliant company, whichever is greater. Relatedly, following the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Economic Area and the European Union, and the expiry of the transition period, companies have to comply with both the GDPR and the GDPR as incorporated into United Kingdom national law, the latter regime having the ability to separately fine up to the greater of £17.5 million or 4% of global turnover. The relationship between the

United Kingdom and the European Union in relation to certain aspects of data protection law remains unclear, for example around how data can lawfully be transferred between each jurisdiction, which exposes us to further compliance risk. The State of Israel has also implemented data protection laws and regulations, including the Israeli Protection of Privacy Law of 1981.

As we plan to market and deploy our Nanox System broadly across the globe, we will be subject to regulations applicable to medical and radiation-emitting devices in the jurisdictions in which we operate, which regulations vary among countries. While some countries’ regulations may not impose barriers to marketing and selling our products or only require certain notification, others may require that we obtain the clearance, registration or approval of a specified regulatory body. Process for obtaining such clearance, registration or approvals may involve additional testing and time. Furthermore, complying with foreign regulatory requirements can be expensive and time-consuming, and we will need to seek for regulatory clearances or approvals in each country in which we plan to market our products.

In addition, depending on the country, if we modify our products, we may need to apply for additional regulatory clearances or approvals before we are permitted to sell the modified product. Also, for maintaining our authorizations in a particular country, we will need to continue meeting quality and safety standards required in such country.

Finally, while regulatory clearance or approval by the FDA does not ensure registration, clearance or approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, registration or regulatory clearance or approval in one country, or denial thereof, may have effects on the regulatory process in others.

As of December 31, 2020, we had 40 employees based in Israel, six employees based in Japan and four employees based in Korea. We have never experienced any employment-related work stoppages and believe our relationship with our employees is good.

Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and new employees, advisors and consultants. The principal purposes of our equity and cash incentive plans are to attract, retain and reward personnel through the granting of stock-based and cash-based compensation awards, in order to increase shareholder value and the success of our company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives.

Our principal executive offices are located in a leased facility in Neve Ilan, Israel. We lease approximately 550 square meters (approximately 5,920 square feet) of office space and warehouses. The lease expires in December 2021, and we have the option to extend our lease for an additional 24 months so long as we meet the terms of the original lease agreement.

We also lease approximately 620 square meters (approximately 6,670 square feet) of office space in Neve Ilan, Israel that may be used for offices and technical development. The lease expires in June 2023. In November 2020, we leased an additional approximately 370 square meters (approximately 3,980 square feet) of office space in Neve Ilan, Israel. This lease also expires in June 2023.

Nanox Japan (predecessor) leases additional facilities of approximately 740 square feet of lab space and approximately 190 square feet of space in a clean room at the premises of the University of Tokyo for research and development activities. The lease automatically renews on a semi-annual basis.

We lease approximately 390 square meters of space for a temporary factory and approximately 200 square meters of space for a research and development center in Korea. The lease for the temporary factory expires in January 2022 and the lease for the research and development center expires in November 2021.

We believe this office space will be sufficient to meet our needs for the next 12-18 months and that suitable additional space will be available as and when needed.

In September 2020, two securities class action complaints were filed, which were subsequently consolidated and captioned as White v. Nano-X Imaging Ltd. et al, Case No. 1:20-cv-04355, filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against us and certain current officers and a director alleging violations of securities laws and seeking unspecified damages. On December 7, 2020, proposed lead plaintiffs submissions were fully briefed. We believe this lawsuit is without merit and intend to defend the case vigorously.

We are unable to estimate a range of loss, if any, that could result were there to be an adverse final decision in this case. If an unfavorable outcome were to occur, it is possible that the impact could be material to our results of operations in the period in which any such outcome becomes probable and estimable.

From time to time, we may become involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business.

The following table sets forth information concerning our executive officers and directors, including their ages as of January 18, 2021:

Ran Poliakine, our founder, has served as a member of our board of directors since our inception and has served as the Chairman of the Board of Directors since the closing of our initial public offering. Mr. Poliakine has served as our Chief Executive Officer since September 2019, and served as Chief Executive Officer of Nanox Gibraltar since August 2018. Prior to that, he served as Chief Strategy Officer in Nanox Gibraltar from June 2015 to August 2018. Mr. Poliakine is a serial entrepreneur and has founded numerous companies over the past two decades, including SixAI Ltd. and its controlled subsidiary (51%) 634 Ai Ltd. (previously known as “Musashi Ai Ltd.”) (“634 Ai”), Powermat Technologies Ltd., Wellsense, Inc., Wellsense Technologies Ltd., Tap Systems, Inc. and Illumigyn Ltd. (“Illumigyn”). Mr. Poliakine is a member of the board of directors of SixAI Ltd., Powermat Technologies Ltd., 634 Ai, and CLKIM Ltd. In addition, Mr. Poliakine currently serves as a member of senior management of Illumigyn.

Itzhak Maayan has served as our Chief Financial Officer since November 2019. Prior to joining us, Mr. Maayan served in different finance leadership roles in Perrigo Company from 2007 to 2019, including Vice President, Financial Services and European Investor Relations, Vice President, International Finance, and Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Perrigo Israel. Prior to Perrigo Company, Mr. Maayan held various finance leadership roles at Cisco Systems Israel from 2003 to 2007, Xtivia, Inc. from 1999 to 2003, Kulick & Soffa from 1995 to 1999 and Elscint Ltd. from 1993 to 1995. Mr. Maayan received his bachelor’s degree in economics and accounting from Haifa University, and is a Certified Public Accountant in Israel.

Gilad Yron has served as our Chief Business Officer since October 2020. Prior to joining us, Mr. Yron served as Executive Vice President of Global Business at Kornit Digital from 2016 to 2020. Prior to Kornit Digital, Mr. Yron held senior managerial positions with Stratasys Ltd from 2008 to 2016, Nur Macroprinters from 2006 to 2008 and Applied Materials from 2005 to 2006. Mr. Yron holds a bachelor of science in Physics Engineering from Tel Aviv University.

James Dara has served as our Chief Operating Officer since January 2021. Prior to joining us, Mr. Dara served as President of myCharge from 2012 to 2020. Prior to myCharge, Mr. Dara served as Vice President of Business Development for Powermat Technologies Ltd. from 2009 to 2014 and as Interim CEO and Vice

President of Business Development of Wellsense Technologies Ltd. from 2009 to 2015. From 2003 to 2009, Mr. Dara served as Chief Sales Officer, Senior Vice President and General Manager of North America for Braintech Inc. In addition, from 1998 to 2002, Mr. Dara served as a Sales Manager and Sales Engineer for ITW Shakeproof Group. Mr. Dara received his bachelor of science in Mechanical Engineering from Michigan State University, and his master’s degree in Finance from Walsh University.

Tal Shank has served as our Vice President of Corporate Development since September 2019. Mr. Shank has served as Head of Corporate Development at Illumigyn from 2017 to date. Mr. Shank currently serves on the board of directors of Nanox Gibraltar. From 2016 to 2017, Mr. Shank was responsible for the corporate and governance aspects of Head Start, a company supplier of services to technology portfolio companies related to Ran Poliakine. Prior to that, Mr. Shank served as Deputy CEO & Legal Counsel of Speech Modules Holdings Ltd. from 2014 to 2015. From 2009 to 2014, Mr. Shank worked at Guy, Bachar & Co. Law Firm, where he started as an associate and became partner in 2011. Mr. Shank has practiced corporate and securities law in Israel since 2003, and he holds an M.B.A. and a LL.M. from Tel Aviv University.

Ofir Koren has served as our Chief Technology Officer since January 2021. Prior to joining us, Mr. Koren served as General Manager Israel and Vice President of Research & Development and Regulatory at ReWalk Robotics from 2013 to 2021. From 2012 to 2013, Mr. Koren served as Research & Development Manager for ReWalk Robotics. Prior to ReWalk Robotics, Mr. Koren served as General Manager at RuggedCOM from 2009 to 2012. From 2007 to 2009, Mr. Koren served as Vice President of Research & Development at Alvarion. Mr. Koren served as Research & Development Director at Alvarion from 2004 to 2007. Mr. Koren received his bachelor of science in Electrical Engineering from Tel Aviv University, and he holds an M.B.A. from Heriot-Watt University.

Tamar Aharon Cohen has served as our Chief Marketing Officer since January 2021. Prior to joining us, Ms. Aharon Cohen served as the Chief Executive Officer of Tempo Beverages Cyprus Ltd from 2017 to 2021. Ms. Aharon Cohen served as a Marketing Manager and a Division Manager at Tempo Beverages Ltd from 2010 to 2017. From 2006 to 2010, Ms. Aharon Cohen served as a Marketing Manager, for L’Oréal Israel. Ms. Aharon Cohen holds a bachelor of Law, a bachelor’s in Management and an executive M.B.A. from Tel Aviv University.

Anat Kaphan has served as our Vice President of Product Marketing since September 2019. Prior to joining us, Ms. Kaphan served as Vice President of Product and Marketing at Mazor Robotics Ltd. from 2015 to 2018, and General Manager at Essence Group from 2014 to 2015. She also served as Marketing Director at Phillips from 2011 to 2014. Prior to that, Ms. Kaphan served as Business Development Director at Lumenis from 2001 to 2011 and Product Manager at Elscint Ltd. from 1991 to 2001. Ms. Kaphan holds an M.B.A. in International marketing from Tel Aviv University and received her bachelor’s degree in Economics and Accounting from Haifa University.

Shirly Kaufman-Kirshenbaum has served as our Vice President Human Resources since April 2020. Prior to joining us, Ms. Kaufman-Kirshenbaum served as Human Resources Director of Israeli-American Council (IAC) from December 2017 to April 2020, and as Regional Human Resources Director and HRBP of EMEA and Canada at ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd. from September 2010 to August 2016. Ms. Kaufman-Kirshenbaum has her bachelor’s degree in Human Resources from Haifa University.

Onn Fenig has served as a member of our board of directors since November 2019. Mr. Fenig has served as the chairman of the board of directors of “Beit Meitar” Waldorf Education Association since 2018. Mr. Fenig is a member of the board of directors of SixAI Ltd. and manages the operations of 634 Ai. Mr. Fenig has served as Chief Executive Officer and a member of the board of directors of Rioglass Solar systems Ltd. since 2014, and as Chief Executive Officer of Rioglass Solar Receivers BU from 2016 to 2018. Prior to that, Mr. Fenig co-founded and served as a member of the board of directors of DUTYFREEBEE LTD from 2013 to 2015. From 2011 to 2014, Mr. Fenig served as Commercial Director, Project Acquisition Finance at Siemens, where he managed finance and commercial matters relating to engineering procurement and construction projects. Prior to joining Siemens, Mr. Fenig served as Finance Manager, Inside Sales European Markets at Cisco Systems from 2008 to 2010, Service Fulfilment Delivery Manager at Amdocs UK from 2006 to 2008, and Systems Analyst, Cyber Security Department at Israeli Ministry of the Prime Minister from 2001 to 2005. Mr. Fenig received his bachelor’s degree in Computer Science from the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya in Herzliya, Israel, and holds an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago Booth School of Business in Chicago, Illinois.

Floyd Katske has served as a member of our board of directors since February 2020. Mr. Katske serves on the board of directors of Floyd A. Katske, M.D., a professional corporation, and Triurol Inc. Since 1983, Mr. Katske has served as President of Floyd A. Katske, M.D. and since 1999, he has served as President of Triurol, Inc. From 2009 to 2011, Mr. Katske served as the President of the Santa Clarita Valley Medical Society and from 1997 to 1999, Mr. Katske served as the President of the California Urologic Association. Mr. Katske is a member of the Medical Board of California and has worked as a professor and as Chief of Staff, Chief of Surgery and Chief of Urology in various hospitals. Mr. Katske received his bachelor’s degree from Rutgers University, and received his medical degree from The George Washington University.

Erez Meltzer has served as a member of our board of directors since December 2019. Mr. Meltzer served as the Executive Chairman of the board of directors of Hadassah Medical and University Center from 2014 to 2020. Since 2008, Mr. Meltzer has served as a teaching professor at the Tel Aviv Faculty of Medicine in the area of crisis management. Meltzer served as Executive Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Gadot Chemicals & Shipping Group from 2008 to 2013. Prior to that, he served as Chief Executive Officer of Africa-Israel Ltd from 2006 to 2008 and President and Chief Executive Officer of Netafim Ltd from 2001 to 2006. Mr. Meltzer also served as Chief Executive Officer of Creo Scitex from 1996 to 2001.

Jung Ho Park has served as a member of our board of directors since August 2020. Mr. Park serves as the chairman of the board of directors of SK Group Global growth committee and SK Hynix Inc. and serves on the board of directors of SK Telecom, GSMA (Global System for Mobile Communications Association), SK China, ADT Caps Co. Ltd, Life & Security Holdings and SK S.E. Asia Pte. Ltd. In 2018, Mr. Park served as the chairman of the board of directors of SK Group ICT committee. Mr. Park has served as the CEO of SK Telecom since March 2017. Prior to that, Mr. Park served as CEO of SK Holdings from 2015 to 2016, Executive Vice President of Corporate Development Division of SK C&C from 2013 to 2014, Executive Vice President of Corporate Development Division of SK Telecom from 2009 to 2014, Managing Director of Business Development of SK Communication from 2007 to 2008, Head of Tokyo office for SK Telecom beginning in 2006, Director of Corporate Relations for the SK Group from 2004 to 2006 and President of the New York Branch Office of SK Telecom from 1995 to 1999. Mr. Park received his bachelor’s degree in Business Administration from Korea University, and received a master’s degree in Business Administration from George Washington University.

Richard Stone has served as a member of our board of directors since November 2019. Professor Stone has taught at Columbia University Law School since 1974, and became Professor Emeritus in 2018. Professor Stone has taught courses in several fields of business law, specializing in federal income taxation. From 1969 to 1973, Professor Stone served in the United States Justice Department as Assistant to the Solicitor General of the United States. Beginning in 1981, Professor Stone began providing consulting to private and public technology start-ups, primarily in the biotechnology field. Professor Stone co-founded several biotechnology companies, including Lev Pharmaceuticals, Siga Technologies and OptMed. In 2007, Professor Stone began working primarily with Israeli technology companies, mostly in the medical space. He is a member of the board of directors of OptMed, Inc., Espro Information Technologies, Quality In Flow, LabStyle Innovations and Illumigyn. Professor Stone received his bachelor’s degree, Magna Cum Laude, from Harvard College, and his Juris Doctor degree, Magna Cum Laude, from Harvard Law School.

Noga Kainan has served as a member of our board of directors since February 2021. Ms. Kainan established in 2008 the forum for owners, chairpersons and CEOs of the leading companies in the Israeli economy. Ms. Kainan also serves as chairperson of the CFO Forum, which brings together the CFOs of the leading companies in the economy, since she established it in 1997. Her public activities include membership in committees in the Israeli Prime Minister's Office, member in the Board of Trustees of Bar Ilan University, the College of Management in Israel, and the council of NGO for IDF soldiers’ welfare. Ms. Kainan heads an association that she founded to promote the integration of autistic students in academia. Ms. Kainan served as a director of the following companies traded on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange: Bizportal Ltd., Poalim I.B.I – Managing & Underwriting Ltd. and Analyst Provident Funds Ltd. She also served as director at Oil Refineries Ltd. before the company was listed on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange. She served as a representative at the International Association of Financial Executives Institutes (IAFEI) and as Chair of the Founding Committee of the Organization of Foreign Companies traded in the U.S. Ms. Kainan, co-authored “ Israel - Success Story,” translated to English under the name: “ Israel - Island of Success.” Ms. Kainan has a bachelor’s degree in art and literature from Haifa University and an M.B.A. from Tel Aviv University.

Dan Suesskind has served as a member of our board of directors since February 2021. Mr. Suesskind served as the Chief Financial Officer of Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (“Teva”) from 1977 to 2008 and as a director of Teva for several periods of time, until 2018. Mr. Suesskind also served as a director of the following companies: Redhill Biopharma Ltd., Syneron Medical Ltd., Migdal Ltd., Ness Technologies Inc., The First International Bank of Israel, First International Selective Investment – Portfolio Management Company LTD, Lanoptics Ltd., ESC Medical Systems and the Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem. Mr. Suesskind is currently a director of Nexfar Limited - China, Israel Corporation Ltd. and The Jerusalem Foundation. His public activities include membership in the Investment Committee of the Israeli Academy of Sciences and Humanities, member in the Board of Trustees of The Hebrew University and the Board of Trustees of the Ben Gurion University. Mr. Suesskind has a bachelor’s degree in economics and political science from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, an M.B.A. from the University of Massachusetts, and a Certificate in Business Administration from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

For so long as we qualify as a foreign private issuer, we are not required to comply with the proxy rules applicable to U.S. domestic companies, including the requirement applicable to emerging growth companies to disclose the compensation of our chief executive officer and other two most highly compensated executive officers on an individual, rather than an aggregate, basis. The aggregate compensation, including bonuses described in more detail below and share-based compensation, paid and granted by us to our executive officers and directors for the year ended December 31, 2020 was approximately $6.5 million. In addition, approximately $274,000 in the aggregate was set aside or accrued to provide pension, severance, retirement or similar benefits or expenses. The figure does not include business travel, relocation, professional and business association dues, meals and expenses reimbursed to officers, and other benefits commonly reimbursed or paid by companies in Israel, on the same basis for all full-time employees generally. The aggregate compensation to our executive officers and directors include payments from Nanox Gibraltar, including through Six-Eye Interactive Ltd. (“Six-Eye”). See “—Equity Incentive Plan” for a discussion of our 2019 Equity Incentive Plan and grants to our executive officers and directors.

During 2020, certain of our executive officers received bonuses in the following gross amounts: $700,000 to Mr. Poliakine in recognition of his efforts in connection with our initial public offering and certain private placement investments; $100,000 to Mr. Maayan in recognition of his efforts in connection with our initial public offering; $40,911 to Mr. Yron in connection with his hiring as our Chief Business Officer; $139,000 to Mr. Shank in recognition of his efforts in connection with our initial public offering and his contribution to our business; and $34,232 to Ms. Kaphan in recognition of her efforts in connection with our initial public offering. The gross amounts were paid, less applicable taxes and social security payments and withholdings to the extent applicable.

Companies incorporated under the laws of the State of Israel, whose shares are publicly traded, including companies with shares listed on the Nasdaq, are considered public companies under the Companies Law and are required to comply with various corporate governance requirements relating to such matters as the composition and responsibilities of the audit committee and the compensation committee, and a requirement to have an internal auditor. This is the case even if our ordinary shares are not listed on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange, which our ordinary shares are not expected to be. These requirements are in addition to the corporate governance requirements imposed by Nasdaq rules and other applicable provisions of U.S. securities laws to which we are subject (as a foreign private issuer) and the listing of our ordinary shares on the Nasdaq.

We are a “foreign private issuer” under the U.S. securities laws and the Nasdaq corporate governance rules. As a foreign private issuer, we are exempt from the rules under the Exchange Act related to the furnishing and content of proxy statements, and our officers, directors and principal shareholders are exempt from the reporting and short-swing profit recovery provisions contained in Section 16 of the Exchange Act. Also, we are not required to comply with Regulation FD, which restricts the selective disclosure of material information. However, we file with the SEC, within 120 days after the end of each fiscal year, or such applicable time as required by the SEC, an annual report on Form 20-F containing financial statements audited by an independent