Now we know

Now we know why Nanox issued that misleading press release on January 11. 

We also know why Nanox management held a hastily-arranged virtual briefing for its Korean audience on January 14, where the same old lies were repeated, but nothing of substance was announced.  Amir Ben-Shalom, Ph.D., described as the former(?) Chief Science Officer of Nanox, and whose name pops up in all the scams concocted by the former CEO Poliakine, reportedly opined:

it will not be long before FDA approval.

Here is why:

In a pre-market 6-K submission filed yesterday, Nanox revealed that its June 510k submission to the FDA was withdrawn on January 12.  With the withdrawal, Nanox effectively admits that the complaint in the class-action lawsuit had merit, that is, Nanox failed to disclose in June that

(i) Nano-X's 510(k) application for the Nanox.ARC was deficient;  (ii) accordingly, it was unlikely that the FDA would approve the 510(k) application for the Nanox.ARC in its current form;  (iii) as a result, Nano-X had overstated the Nanox.ARC's regulatory and commercial prospects

As a result, the stock hit a new all-time low of $10.70 yesterday.

On a side note, as an example of the nonsense that went on at the Korean briefing, let's take a look at two images:

Nanox still insists its Nanox.SOURCE chip is a FED:

But the 20-F filed by Nanox clearly states that the FED is a type of a failed display, not a chip or a cathode (page 59):

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.

Since when is Nanox in the display business?

Here is another interesting image, supposedly comparing a phantom chest image generated by "existing x-ray" (top) with that by Nanox.ARC (bottom).  It exposes Nanox as a fraud.

How so?  First, if the bottom image is not from an "existing x-ray," then it follows Nanox.ARC does not exist.  Second, it shows that Nanox didn't even bother to license the cheap DICOM software used to show the images, and is instead using a "fully functional trial version."  Third, the timestamp of the "existing x-ray" chest image, "10/10/2021 17:31:15," exactly matches the timestamp of the supposed tomosynthesis image of a pelvis phantom generated by Nanox.ARC shown in a video from the RSNA 2021 deck, indicating that Nanox is using tampered DICOM files.

Update:  Dr. Ben-Shalom disappeared from Nanox "leadership" roster by mid August 2021.

Update:  In November 2019, Poliakine told a consultant that the "FDA approval" was expected in early 2020.  Oh, and 

Aiming to have 15,000 systems deployed globally by 2022.