XML 16 R8.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v2.4.0.6

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2011
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies [Abstract] |
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies |
2. | Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Use of Estimates The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions affecting the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Our most significant estimates and critical accounting policies involve recognizing revenue, evaluating goodwill for impairment, valuing our put option arrangement with Olympus Corporation, valuing warrants, determining the assumptions used in measuring share-based compensation expense, valuing our deferred tax assets, assessing how to report our investment in Olympus-Cytori, Inc., and valuing allowances for doubtful accounts and inventories. Actual results could differ from these estimates. Current economic conditions, including illiquid credit markets and volatile equity markets, contribute to the inherent uncertainty of such estimates. Management's estimates and assumptions are reviewed regularly, and the effects of revisions are reflected in the consolidated financial statements in the periods they are determined to be necessary. Cash and Cash Equivalents We consider all highly liquid investments with maturities of three months or less at the time of purchase to be cash equivalents. Investments with original maturities of three months or less that were included with and classified as cash and cash equivalents totaled $30,646,000 and $39,807,000 as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. We maintain our cash at insured financial institutions. The combined account balances at each institution periodically exceed FDIC insurance coverage, and as a result, there is a concentration of credit risk related to amounts in excess of FDIC limits. Short-term Investments We invest excess cash in money market funds, highly liquid debt instruments of financial institutions and corporations with strong credit ratings, and in United States government obligations. We have established guidelines relative to diversification and maturities to maintain safety and liquidity. These guidelines are periodically reviewed and modified to take advantage of trends in yields and interest rates. After considering current market conditions, and in order to minimize our risk, management has elected to invest all excess funds in money market funds and other highly liquid investments that are appropriately classified as cash equivalents as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010. Restricted Cash and Cash Equivalents Restricted cash consists of cash and cash equivalents held in a letter of credit account pursuant to a lease agreement entered into on April 2, 2010 (amended November 4, 2011) for leasing of property at 3020 and 3030 Callan Road, San Diego, California. The lease agreement required us to execute a letter of credit for $350,000 naming the landlord as a beneficiary. The letter of credit was issued in July 2010 and required us to maintain $350,000 as restricted cash for the duration of the lease, which expires October 31, 2017, provided that the amount of the letter of credit can be reduced to $262,500 in July 2013, and to $175,000 in July of 2014. Accounts Receivable Accounts receivable are recorded at the invoiced amount and do not bear interest. Amounts collected on accounts receivable are included in net cash provided by operating activities in the consolidated statements of cash flows. The Company maintains an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses inherent in its accounts receivable portfolio. In establishing the required allowance, management considers historical losses adjusted to take into account current market conditions and our customers' financial condition, the amount of receivables in dispute, and the current receivables aging and current payment patterns. Account balances are charged off against the allowance after all means of collection have been exhausted and the potential for recovery is considered remote. Inventories Inventories include the cost of material, labor, and overhead, and are stated at the lower of cost, determined on the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method, or market. We periodically evaluate our on-hand stock and make appropriate provisions for any stock deemed excess or obsolete. Manufacturing costs resulting from lower than “normal” production levels are expensed as incurred. Property and Equipment Property and equipment are stated at cost, net of accumulated depreciation. Depreciation expense, which includes the amortization of capitalized leasehold improvements, is provided for on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets, or the life of the lease, whichever is shorter, and range from three to five years. When assets are sold or otherwise disposed of, the cost and related accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and the resulting gain or loss is included in operations. Maintenance and repairs are charged to operations as incurred. Impairment We assess certain of our long-lived assets, such as property and equipment and intangible assets other than goodwill, for potential impairment when there is a change in circumstances that indicates carrying values of assets may not be recoverable. Such long-lived assets are deemed to be impaired when the undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by the asset (or asset group) are less than the asset's carrying amount. Any required impairment loss would be measured as the amount by which the asset's carrying value exceeds its fair value, and would be recorded as a reduction in the carrying value of the related asset and a charge to operating expense. We recognized no impairment losses during any of the periods presented in these financial statements. Goodwill and Intangibles Goodwill is not amortized but instead is tested annually for impairment at the reporting unit level, or more frequently when events or changes in circumstances indicate that fair value of the reporting unit has been reduced to less than its carrying value. We perform our impairment test annually during the fourth quarter. In September 2011, the FASB issued revised guidance to simplify how entities test goodwill for impairment. Under the revised guidance, entities have the option to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test described in Accounting Standards Codification Topic 350. If, after assessing qualitative factors, an entity determines it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test is unnecessary. If deemed necessary, a two-step test is used to identify the potential impairment and to measure the amount of goodwill impairment, if any. The first step is to compare the fair value of the reporting unit with its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the fair value of the reporting unit exceeds its carrying amount, goodwill is considered not impaired; otherwise, there is an indication that goodwill may be impaired and the amount of the loss, if any, is measured by performing step two. Under step two, the impairment loss, if any, is measured by comparing the implied fair value of the reporting unit goodwill with the carrying amount of goodwill. We completed this assessment as of November 30, 2011, and concluded that no impairment existed. Separable intangible assets that have finite useful lives will continue to be amortized over their respective useful lives. Intangibles, consisting of patents and core technology purchased in the acquisition of StemSource, Inc. in 2002, are being amortized on a straight-line basis over their expected lives of ten years. The changes in the carrying amounts of other indefinite and finite-life intangible assets and goodwill for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 are as follows:
|  | December 31, 2011 |
Other intangibles, net: |  |  |
Beginning balance |  | $ | 413,000 |
Amortization |  |  | (221,000 | )
Ending balance |  |  | 192,000 |
Goodwill, net: |  |  |  |
Beginning balance |  |  | 3,922,000 |
Increase (decrease) |  |  | - |
Ending balance |  |  | 3,922,000 |
Total goodwill and other intangibles, net |  | $ | 4,114,000 |
Cumulative amortization of other intangible assets |  | $ | 2,024,000 |
|  | December 31, 2010 |
Other intangibles, net: |  |  |
Beginning balance |  | $ | 635,000 |
Amortization |  |  | (222,000 | )
Ending balance |  |  | 413,000 |
Goodwill, net: |  |  |  |
Beginning balance |  |  | 3,922,000 |
Increase (decrease) |  |  | - |
Ending balance |  |  | 3,922,000 |
Total goodwill and other intangibles, net |  | $ | 4,335,000 |
Cumulative amortization of other intangible assets |  | $ | 1,803,000 |
As of December 31, 2011, future estimated amortization expense for these other intangible assets is expected to be as follows:
2012 |  | $ | 192,000 |
|  | $ | 192,000 |
Warrant Liability Effective January 1, 2009, we changed our method of accounting for certain common stock purchase warrants with exercise price reset features due to the adoption of a new accounting standard. These warrants were issued in connection with our August 2008 private placement of 2,825,517 unregistered shares of common stock and 1,412,758 common stock warrants. The warrants had an original exercise price of $8.50 and expire in August 2013. Under the new standard, these warrants previously recognized in stockholders' equity (deficit) are now accounted for as fair value liabilities, with changes in fair value included in net earnings (loss). The cumulative effect of the adoption is to present these warrants as liabilities on the date of the adoption as if they had been accounted for as liabilities since the warrants were issued. As a result on January 1, 2009, we recognized a $1.7 million long-term warrant liability, a $2.9 million decrease in accumulated deficit and a corresponding decrease in additional paid-in capital of $4.6 million. The fair value of these warrants increased to $6.3 million as of December 31, 2009, as a result of a $4.6 million loss from the change in fair value of warrants for the year ended December 31, 2009. The fair value of these warrants decreased to $5.0 million as of December 31, 2010, as a result of a $1.3 million gain from the change in fair value of warrants for the year then ended. The fair value of these warrants decreased to $0.6 million as of December 31, 2011, as a result of a $4.4 million gain from the change in fair value of warrants for the year then ended. Since these warrants do not qualify for hedge accounting, all future changes in the fair value of the warrants will be recognized currently in earnings until such time as the warrants are exercised or expire. These warrants are not traded in an active securities market, and as such, we estimated the fair value of these warrants using an option pricing model using the following assumptions:
|  | As of December 31, 2011 |  |  | As of December 31, 2010 |
Expected term |  | 1.61 years |  |  | 2.61 years |
Common stock market price |  | $ | 2.20 |  |  | $ | 5.19 |
Risk-free interest rate |  |  | 0.19 | % |  |  | 0.82 | %
Expected volatility |  |  | 69.98 | % |  |  | 86.03 | %
Resulting fair value (per warrant) |  | $ | 0.32 |  |  | $ | 2.50 |
Expected volatility is based primarily on historical volatility. Historical volatility was computed using daily pricing observations for recent periods that correspond to the expected term of the warrants. We believe this method produces an estimate that is representative of our expectations of future volatility over the expected term of these warrants. We currently have no reason to believe future volatility over the expected remaining life of these warrants is likely to differ materially from historical volatility. The expected life is based on the remaining term of the warrants. The risk-free interest rate is the interest rate for treasury constant maturity instruments published by the Federal Reserve Board that is closest to the expected term of the warrants. The fair value of these warrants also incorporates our assumptions about future equity issuances and their impact to the down-round protection feature. Revenue Recognition Product Sales We recognize revenue from product sales when the following fundamental criteria are met: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, (ii) delivery has occurred, (iii) the price to the customer is fixed or determinable and (iv) collection of the resulting accounts receivable is reasonably assured. For all sales, we use a binding purchase order or a signed agreement as evidence of an arrangement. Revenue for these product sales is recognized upon delivery to the customer, as all risks and rewards of ownership have been substantively transferred to the customer at that point. For sales to customers who arrange for and manage the shipping process, we recognize revenue upon shipment from our facilities. Shipping and handling costs that are billed to our customers are classified as revenue. The customer's obligation to pay and the payment terms are set at the time of delivery and are not dependent on the subsequent use or resale of our products. For sales prior to January 1, 2011 that included multiple deliverables, we allocated revenue based on the relative fair values of the individual components. When more than one element such as product maintenance or technical support services were included in an arrangement, we allocated revenue between the elements based on each element's relative fair value, provided that each element met the criteria for treatment as a separate unit of accounting (an item is considered a separate unit of accounting if it has value to the customer on a standalone basis and there is objective and reliable evidence of the fair value of the undelivered items). Fair value is generally determined based upon the price charged when the element is sold separately. In the absence of fair value for a delivered element, we allocated revenue first to the fair value of the undelivered elements and allocated the residual revenue to the delivered elements. Fair values for undelivered elements were determined based on vendor-specific objective evidence as well as market participant quotes for similar services. In the absence of fair value for an undelivered element, the arrangement was accounted for as a single unit of accounting, resulting in a deferral of revenue recognition for delivered elements until all undelivered elements have been fulfilled. Deferred service revenue is recognized ratably over the period the services are provided. Beginning in 2011, for sales that include multiple deliverables, such as sales of our StemSource® Cell Bank (cell bank), we account for products or services (deliverables) separately rather than as a combined unit. Stem cell banks typically consist of a complex array of equipment and proprietary knowledge, and services, including one or more StemSource® devices, a cryogenic freezer, measuring and monitoring equipment, and a database patient tracking system. In addition, we typically provide consulting services, installation and training services concurrent with the installation of the cell bank. Web hosting and technical and maintenance services are generally provided for a period of up to one year subsequent to the date of sale. The FASB guidance of the Codification establishes a selling price hierarchy for determining the selling price of a deliverable, which is based on: (a) vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”); (b) third-party evidence (“TPE”); or (c) management estimates. This guidance also eliminates the residual method of allocation and requires that arrangement consideration be allocated at the inception of the arrangement to all deliverables using the relative selling price method. For our cell bank sales, we establish relative selling prices for all deliverables based on vendor-specific quotes for comparable services when available. In the absence of VSOE, we use competitors' products or services considered largely interchangeable with our own or management best estimate. A substantial amount of consulting services are provided to customers before the equipment installation and training has been completed, and therefore we treat this as a separate unit of accounting. The equipment with installation and initial training activities are treated as separate units of accounting. Also of standalone value to customers is the transfer of the proprietary knowledge, most notably in the form of standard operating procedures, and any license or exclusivity rights associated with the agreements. Revenue for the various deliverables is calculated and recognized based on the relative selling prices of each deliverable. Future services such as web hosting and ongoing maintenance are deferred and recognized into income during the year following the installation. There would have been no material impact to our financial statements in 2010 had we applied this guidance retrospectively. Concentration of Significant Customers For the year ended December 31, 2011, our sales were concentrated with respect to one direct customer, which comprised 14% of our product revenue recognized for the year ended December 31, 2011. Our Asia-Pacific and North America region sales accounted for 67% of our product revenue recognized for the year ended December 31, 2011. Additionally, two direct customers accounted for 27% of total outstanding accounts receivable as of December 31, 2011. Our Asia-Pacific and North America region sales accounted for 79% of our product revenue recognized for the year ended December 31, 2010. Additionally, two customers accounted for 26% of total outstanding accounts receivable as of December 31, 2010. Research and Development We earn revenue for performing tasks under research and development agreements with both commercial enterprises, such as Olympus and Senko, and governmental agencies like the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”). Revenue earned under development agreements is classified as either research grant or development revenues depending on the nature of the arrangement. Revenues derived from reimbursement of direct out-of-pocket expenses for research costs associated with grants are recorded as research grant and other within development revenues. Research grant revenue is recorded at the gross amount of the reimbursement. The costs associated with these reimbursements are reflected as a component of research and development expense in our statements of operations. Additionally, research and development arrangements we have with commercial enterprises such as Olympus and Senko are considered a key component of our central and ongoing operations. Accordingly, when recognized, the inflows from such arrangements are presented as revenues in our statements of operations. We received funds from Olympus and Olympus-Cytori, Inc. during 2005 and 2006. We recorded upfront fees totaling $28,311,000 as deferred revenues, related party. In exchange for these proceeds, we agreed to (a) provide Olympus-Cytori, Inc. an exclusive and perpetual license to our Celution® System device technology and certain related intellectual property, and (b) provide future development contributions related to commercializing the Celution® System platform. The license and development services are not separable and as a result the recognition of this deferred amount requires achievement of service related milestones, under a proportional performance methodology. If and as such revenues are recognized, deferred revenue will be decreased. Proportional performance methodology was elected due to the nature of our development obligations and efforts in support of the Joint Venture (“JV”), including product development activities and regulatory efforts to support the commercialization of the JV products. The application of this methodology uses the achievement of R&D milestones as outputs of value to the JV. We received up-front, non-refundable payments in connection with these development obligations, which we have broken down into specific R&D milestones that are definable and substantive in nature, and which will result in value to the JV when achieved. As our research and development efforts progress, we periodically evaluate, and modify if necessary, the milestone points in our proportional performance model to ensure that revenue recognition accurately reflects our best estimate of substantive value deliverable to the JV. Revenue will be recognized as the above mentioned R&D milestones are completed. Of the amounts received and deferred, we recognized development revenues of $1,992,000, $2,122,000, and $8,840,000 for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. All related development costs are expensed as incurred and are included in research and development expense on our statements of operations. To date under the contract, of the $28,311,000 originally deferred, we have recognized a total of $24,791,000 through December 31, 2011. Under a Distribution Agreement with Senko, we granted to Senko an exclusive license to sell and distribute certain Thin Film products in Japan. We have also earned or will be entitled to earn additional payments under the Distribution Agreement based on achieving certain defined and substantive research and development milestones. There was no development revenue recognized related to this agreement during the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 or 2009, respectively. Warranty Beginning in March 2008, we began sales and shipments of our Celution® 800/CRS System to the European and Asia-Pacific reconstructive surgery market. In September 2008, we completed installation of our first StemSource® Cell Bank. We are selling medical device equipment for use with humans, which is subjected to exhaustive and highly controlled specification compliance and fitness testing and validation procedures before it can be approved for sale to help ensure that the products will be free of defects. We believe that the rigorous nature of the testing and compliance efforts serves to minimize the likelihood of defects in material or workmanship such that recognition of a warranty obligation is not justified at this time. Accordingly, we have not recorded a warranty reserve for our Celution® 800/CRS System and StemSource® Cell Bank product line during the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009. Research and Development Research and development expenditures, which are charged to operations in the period incurred, include costs associated with the design, development, testing and enhancement of our products, regulatory fees, the purchase of laboratory supplies, and pre-clinical and clinical studies as well as salaries and benefits for our research and development employees. Also included in research and development expenditures are costs incurred to support research grant reimbursement and costs incurred in connection with our development arrangements with Olympus and Senko. Expenditures related to the Joint Venture with Olympus include costs that are necessary to support the commercialization of future generation devices based on our Celution® System platform. These development activities, which began in November 2005, include performing pre-clinical and clinical trials, seeking regulatory approval, and performing product development related to therapeutic applications for adipose stem and regenerative cells for multiple large markets. For the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, costs associated with the development of the device were $396,000, $2,221,000 and $2,713,000. Our agreement with the NIH entitled us to qualifying expenditures of up to $250,000 related to research on Adipose Tissue-Derived Cells for Vascular Cell Therapy, which expired in August 2009. We incurred $49,000 of direct expenses for the year ended December 31, 2009. There were no comparable expenditures in 2011 and 2010. Deferred Financing Costs and Other Debt-Related Costs Deferred financing costs are capitalized and amortized to interest expense over the term of the associated debt instrument. We evaluate the terms of the debt instruments to determine if any embedded or freestanding derivatives or conversion features exist. We allocate the aggregate proceeds of the debt between the warrants and the debt based on their relative fair values. The fair value of the warrant issued to the Lenders was calculated utilizing the Black-Scholes option pricing model. We are accreting the resultant discount over the term of the debt through maturity date using the effective interest method. If the maturity of the debt is accelerated because of default or early debt repayment, then the amortization or accretion would be accelerated. Income Taxes Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit carry forwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income (loss) in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. Due to our history of loss, a full valuation allowance was recognized against our deferred tax assets. Stock Based Compensation We recognize the fair value method of all share-based payment awards granted after January 1, 2006, in our statements of operations over the requisite vesting period of each award. We estimate the fair value of these options using the Black-Scholes option pricing model using assumptions for expected volatility, expected term, and risk-free interest rate. Expected volatility is based primarily on historical volatility and is computed using daily pricing observations for recent periods that correspond to the expected term of the options. The expected life is based on the expected term of the options. The risk-free interest rate is the interest rate for treasury instruments with maturities that approximate the expected term. Segment Information For the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, all of our financial results relate to regenerative cell technology, therefore we report our results as a single segment. Loss Per Share Basic per share data is computed by dividing net income or loss applicable to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted per share data is computed by dividing net income or loss applicable to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period increased to include, if dilutive, the number of additional common shares that would have been outstanding as calculated using the treasury stock method. Potential common shares were related entirely to outstanding but unexercised options and warrants for all periods presented. We have excluded all potentially dilutive securities, including unvested performance-based restricted stock, from the calculation of diluted loss per share attributable to common stockholders for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009, as their inclusion would be antidilutive. Potentially dilutive common shares excluded from the calculations of diluted loss per share were 19,476,425, 18,926,093 and 20,123,889 for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements In October 2009, the FASB issued an update to the revenue recognition topic of the Codification. The update addresses the accounting for multiple-deliverable arrangements to enable vendors to account for products or services (deliverables) separately rather than as a combined unit. This guidance establishes a selling price hierarchy for determining the selling price of a deliverable, which is based on: (a) vendor-specific objective evidence; (b) third-party evidence; or (c) estimates. This guidance also eliminates the residual method of allocation and requires that arrangement consideration be allocated at the inception of the arrangement to all deliverables using the relative selling price method. In addition, this guidance significantly expands required disclosures related to a vendor's multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements. The update 2009-13 is effective prospectively for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010 and early adoption is permitted. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. In April 2010, the FASB issued additional guidance for revenue recognition to provide criteria that should be met for determining whether the milestone method of revenue recognition is appropriate. A vendor can recognize as revenue, in its entirety, consideration that is contingent upon achievement of a milestone in the period in which the milestone is achieved only if the milestone meets all criteria to be considered substantive. The guidance for the milestone method of revenue recognition is effective on a prospective basis for milestones achieved in fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning on or after June 15, 2010. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. In January 2010, the FASB issued an update which provides guidance to improve disclosures about fair value measurements. This guidance amends previous guidance on fair value measurements to add new requirements for disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2 and separate disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements relating to Level 3 measurement on a gross basis rather than on a net basis as previously required. This update also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. This guidance is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activities of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will be effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2010. Early application is permitted and, in the period of initial adoption, entities are not required to provide the amended disclosures for any previous periods presented for comparative purposes. This update did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. In March 2010, the FASB issued an update to clarify that an employee share-based payment award with an exercise price denominated in the currency of a market in which a substantial portion of the equity securities trades should not be considered to contain a condition that is not a market, performance, or service condition. Therefore, an entity would not classify an award with such a feature as a liability if it otherwise qualifies as equity. Affected entities are required to record a cumulative catch-up adjustment for all awards outstanding as of the beginning of the annual period in which the guidance is adopted. This update did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. In September 2011, the FASB issued an update that allows companies to assess qualitative factors to determine whether they need to perform the two-step quantitative goodwill impairment test. Under the option, an entity no longer would be required to calculate the fair value of a reporting unit unless it determines, based on that qualitative assessment, that it is more likely than not that its fair value is less than its carrying amount. The guidance is effective for interim and annual goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011 although early adoption is permitted. As of December 31, 2011, we elected for early adoption and this update did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. Recent Accounting Pronouncements In May 2011, the FASB revised the fair value measurement and disclosure requirements to align the requirements under GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). The guidance clarifies the FASB's intent about the application of existing fair value measurements and requires enhanced disclosures, most significantly related to unobservable inputs used in a fair value measurement that is categorized within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. The guidance is effective prospectively during interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. We do not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

X
- Details
Name: | us-gaap_AccountingPoliciesAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for all significant accounting policies of the reporting entity. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 235 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 2 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6367646&loc=d3e18743-107790 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 235 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 5 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6367646&loc=d3e18854-107790 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher AICPA -Name Accounting Principles Board Opinion (APB) -Number 22 -Paragraph 8 -LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy. Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 235 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 6 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6367646&loc=d3e18861-107790 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 235 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 3 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6367646&loc=d3e18780-107790 Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 235 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6367646&loc=d3e18726-107790 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_SignificantAccountingPoliciesTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration