As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 24, 2005
                                                  Commission File No. 333-103061
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                         POST-EFFECTIVE AMENDMENT NO. 3
                                       to
                                    FORM SB-2
                             REGISTRATION STATEMENT
                                      UNDER
                           THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

                        PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                 (Name of small business issuer in its charter)

         Delaware                   3841                        87-0459536
 (State or jurisdiction    (Primary Standard Industrial      (I.R.S. Employer
of incorporation or        Classification Code Number)    Identification Number)
    organization)
                              2355 South 1070 West
                           Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
                                 (801) 977-8970
             (Address and telephone number of registrant's principal
               executive offices and principal place of business)

              John Y. Yoon, President and Chief Executive Officer,
                              2355 South 1070 West
                           Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
                                 (801) 977-8970
            (Name, address and telephone number of agent for service)
                             ----------------------

                                   Copies to:

                             Randall A. Mackey, Esq.
                         Mackey Price Thompson & Ostler
                              350 American Plaza II
                                57 West 200 South
                         Salt Lake City, Utah 84101-3663
                            Telephone: (801) 575-5000

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


         If any of the  securities  being  registered  on this  Form  are  being
offered  on a  delayed  or  continuous  basis  pursuant  to Rule 415  under  the
Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act"), check the following box. |X|

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

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

      If delivery of the prospectus is expected to be made pursuant to Rule 434,
please check the following box. [ ]

                           ---------------------------






                         CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE





                         Title of each                                            Proposed         Proposed
                           class of                                 Amount         maximum          maximum        Amount of
                       securities to be                             to be      offering price      aggregate     registration
                          registered                              registered      per Share     offering price        fee
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                        
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Class A Warrants   1,000,000      $   7.50       $7,500,000          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Kenneth Jerome
      Warrants.................................................       100,000         8.125          812,500          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Kenneth Jerome
      Warrants.................................................       100,000          7.50          750,000          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Cyndel Warrants      225,000          4.00          900,000          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Cyndel Warrants      250,000          3.00          750,000          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Limberg Warrants     200,000          4.00          800,000          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Limberg Warrants      50,000          4.75          237,500          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Limberg Warrants      50,000          6.75          337,500          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Kohn and
       Sucoff Warrants.........................................       100,000          4.00          400,000          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of  Series E
        Preferred Warrants.....................................       241,095          4.00          964,380          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of  Series F
        Preferred Warrants.....................................       230,589          4.00          922,356          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Options.......       600,000          4.00        2,400,000          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Options.......        73,103          5.00          365,515          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Options.......       150,000          6.00          900,000          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Options.......       786,000          2.75        2,161,500          (1)
Resale of Common Stock by certain holders of Common Stock......       425,000          4.00        1,700,000          (1)
Resale of Common Stock by certain holders of Common Stock......     1,307,484         2.125        2,778,404          (1)
Resale of Common Stock by certain holders of Common Stock......       425,580          2.14          910,741          (1)
Resale of Common Stock by certain holders of Common Stock......     1,968,509          1.16        2,283,470          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Rodman &
       Renshaw Warrants........................................        35,000          2.00           70,000          (1)
Resale of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of Warrants......       788,750           .25          197,188          (1)
Resale of Common Stock by certain holders of common stock......       365,327           .25           91,332          (1)
                                                                     --------                                  ----------
      Total....................................................     9,471,437                                  $        0
                                                                                                               ==========
===============================================================  ============  ============  =============== ===============


(1)      No   registration   fee  is  required  as  securities  were  previously
         registered  by  Form  SB-2  Registration  Statement,   No.  333-  2496,
         effective as of July 10, 1996;  Form SB-2  Registration  Statement  No.
         333-57711,  effective as of September 14, 1998; Form SB-2  Registration
         Statement  No.  333-68471,  effective as of January 4, 1999;  Form SB-2
         Registration Statement No. 333-77267, effective as of May 7, 1999; Form
         S-3 Registration  Statement No.  333-93725,  effective as of January 6,
         2000; Form S-3 Registration  Statement No.  333-44154,  effective as of
         September  1, 2000;  Form S-3  Registration  Statement  No.  333-50846,
         effective as of December 8, 2000; Form S-3  Registration  Statement No.
         333- 66742,  effective  as of August 22,  2001;  Form S-3  Registration
         Statement  No.  333-75912,  effective  as of June  21,  2002;  Form S-3
         Registration  Statement  No.  333-97837,  effective as of September 26,
         2002; and From S-3 Registration  Statement No. 33-103061,  effective as
         of  February  14,  2003.  Pursuant  to Rule  429,  this  is a  combined
         registration  statement  which  relates  to the  securities  previously
         registered by the earlier  registration  statements  and the securities
         being  registered  by  this  registration  statement.   The  number  of
         securities being carried forward,  which were previously  registered by
         the earlier  registration  statements,  is 14,479,693  shares of common
         stock,  and the total amount of the previously paid  registration  fees
         associated  with such  securities  that were  previously  registered is
         $22,703.74.  The number of shares being registered by this registration
         statement is 9,471,437 shares.

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


                                                          



PROSPECTUS
----------




                        9,471,437 Shares of Common Stock




                        PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.


         Paradigm Medical Industries,  Inc. is registering for resale a total of
9,471,437  shares of common  stock.  Our Common  Stock and Class A warrants  are
quoted on the  Over-the-Counter  Bulletin  Board under the  symbols  PMED.OB and
PMEDW.OB. On June 22, 2005 the last reported sale price for our common stock was
$.07 per share and the last  reported  sale price for our Class A  warrants  was
$.003 per warrant.

         We are registering the resale of common stock for certain  shareholders
and will only  receive  proceeds  to the extent  that  outstanding  warrants  or
options are exercised.  The exercise price for all of the  outstanding  warrants
and options  exceeds the current  trading  price for our common  stock and, as a
result,  the  outstanding  warrants  and options are not likely to be  exercised
unless the trading price increases substantially. All other shares of our common
stock being registered are either  outstanding or will be issued upon conversion
of  outstanding  preferred  stock,  and we will  derive  no  proceeds  from  the
conversions or subsequent resales of such shares.

         Investing  in the  common  stock  involves  substantial  risks that are
described in the "Risk Factors" section beginning on page 6 of this prospectus.

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


                  The date of this prospectus is June 24, 2005.

                                        1



                               PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

         This summary  highlights some information from this prospectus.  It may
not contain all of the information  that is important to you. To understand this
offering fully, you should read the entire prospectus  carefully,  including the
risk factors and the financial statements.

The Company

         We develop,  manufacture,  source,  market and sell ophthalmic surgical
and diagnostic  instrumentation and related  accessories,  including  disposable
products.  Our surgical  equipment is designed for minimally  invasive  cataract
treatment.  A  cataract  is a  condition,  which  largely  affects  the  elderly
population,  in which the natural  lens of the eye  hardens and becomes  cloudy,
thereby reducing visual acuity. Treatment consists of removal of the cloudy lens
and  replacement  with a synthetic lens implant,  which restores  visual acuity.
Cataract surgery is the single largest volume and revenue  producing  outpatient
surgical  procedure  for  ophthalmologists  worldwide.  The Health Care  Finance
Administration  reports  that in the United  States  approximately  two  million
cataract  removal  procedures  are performed  annually,  making this the largest
outpatient  procedure  reimbursed  by Medicare.  Most  cataract  procedures  are
performed using a method called  phacoemulsification or "phaco", which employs a
high frequency (40 kHz to 60 kHz) ultrasonic probe needle device to fragment the
cataract  while  still in the eye and remove it in pieces by  suction  through a
small incision.

         We sell our  equipment  and related  products in all  countries  of the
world in which we are permitted to do so. The nature of the regulatory  approval
processes in those  countries vary by country but, in general terms,  follow the
approach of the regulatory approval processes of the United States Food and Drug
Administration,  or FDA,  and the  approval  processes  of the  countries in the
European Union. The status of specific approvals is detailed in the table in the
Business section of this prospectus.

         We market two cataract  surgery  systems with related  accessories  and
disposable  products.  Our cataract removal system, the Photon(TM) laser system,
is a laser cataract  surgery system  marketed as the next generation of cataract
removal.  The  Photon(TM)  product  has yet to be  approved by the Food and Drug
Administration.  Except for the Photon(TM) laser system,  which can only be sold
in  countries  outside of the United  States,  our  products  can be sold in the
United States and in foreign  countries  including but not limited to Argentina,
Australia,  Bangladesh,  Borneo, Brazil, Canada, China,  Czechoslovakia,  Egypt,
France, Germany,  Greece, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Korea,
Malaysia,  Mexico, New Zealand,  Pakistan,  Peru,  Poland,  Puerto Rico, Russia,
Saudi Arabia,  Spain, Sri Lanka, Taiwan,  Thailand,  Turkey, United Kingdom, and
United Arab Emirates . Both the Photon(TM) and the  Precisionist  ThirtyThousand
(TM) are manufactured as an Ocular Surgery Workstation(TM).  At present, because
the  Photon(TM) has not received FDA approval,  it does not provide  significant
revenue to us. We are in the process of completing the clinical  trials in order
to file  for FDA  approval.  However,  due to the  uncertainty  surrounding  the
timetable for obtaining  FDA approval and the lack of  significant  revenue from
other  surgical  products,  we have  recorded an inventory  reserve  against the
majority of inventory  associated  with the Photon(TM) and  Precisionist  Thirty
Thousand(TM).

         Our  diagnostic  products  include  a P55  pachmetric  analyzer,  a P37
Ultrasonic A/B Scan, a P40 UBM Ultrasound Biomicroscope,  a perimeter, a corneal
topographer  and  the  Blood  flow  Analyzer  (TM).  The  diagnostic  ultrasonic
products,  including the P55 pachymetric  analyzer,  the P37 Ultrasonic A/B Scan
and the P40 UBM Ultrasound  Biomicroscope were acquired from Humphrey Systems, a
division of Carl Zeiss,  Inc. in 1998.  We developed and offered for sale in the
fall of 2000 the P45,  which  combines the A/B scope and the P40 UBM  Ultrasound
Biomicroscope  in one machine.  The perimeter and the corneal  topographer  were
added when we  acquired  the  outstanding  shares of the stock of  Vismed,  Inc.
d/b/a/  Dicon(TM) in June 2000. We acquired  Ocular Blood Flow,  Ltd. in June of
2000, whose principal  product is the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM).  This product is
designed for the measurement of intraocular  pressure and pulsatile ocular blood
flow volume for detection and treatment of glaucoma. In March 2005, we developed
and offered for sale the P60 UBM Ultrasound Biomicroscope, the fourth generation
of UBM  devices,  which has better  visual  clarity and image  flexibility  than
earlier versions. We are currently attempting to develop additional applications
for all of our diagnostic products.

         We rely upon several products for revenues.  For the three months ended
March 31, 2005,  35% of our revenues were derived from the Dicon(TM)  diagnostic
products  sales (the  perimeter  and corneal  topographer),  6% of revenues from
Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM)  sales,  44% of  revenues  from  P40,  P45 and P60 UBM
Ultrasound  Biomicroscope sales, 5% of revenues from Humphrey Systems diagnostic
product sales (the P55  pachymetric  analyzer and the P37  Ultrasonic A/B Scan),
and 10% of revenues from services, disposables and other sales.

         For the fiscal year ended  December 31, 2004,  33% of our revenues were
derived from the  Dicon(TM)  diagnostic  products  sales (the  perimeter and the
corneal topographer), 19% of revenues from Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) sales, 28% of
revenues  from  the  P40  and P45 UBM  Ultrasound  Biomicroscope  sales,  11% of
revenues from Humphrey  systems  diagnostic  products sales (the P55 pachymetric
analyzer,  the  P20  A-Scan  and  the P37 A/B  Scan),  and 9% of  revenues  from
services, disposables and other sales.



                                       2


         For the fiscal year ended  December 31, 2003,  36% of our revenues were
derived from the Dicon (TM) diagnostic products sales (the perimeter and corneal
topographer),  16% of  revenues  from  Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM)  sales,  20% of
revenues from P40 and P45 UBM  Ultrasound  Biomicroscope  sales,  9% of revenues
from Humphrey Systems  diagnostic  product sales (the P55 pachymetric  analyzer,
the P20 A-Scan and the P37 A/B Scan),  11% of  revenues  from  cataract  removal
surgery  sales,  including the sale of our SIStem(TM)  and  Odyssey(TM)  product
lines,  and 8% of revenues  from  services,  disposables  and other  sales.  Our
principal executive offices are located at 2355 South 1070 West, Salt Lake City,
Utah 84119 and our telephone number is (801) 977-8970.

         Audited  revenues  for the fiscal  year ended  December  31,  2004 were
$3,062,000 as compared to $3,059,000 for the comparable  period for fiscal 2003.
Unaudited  revenues for the three  months ended March 31, 2005 were  $528,000 as
compared to $583,000 for the comparable period of 2004.

         On March 18,  2004,  our Board of Directors  appointed  John Y. Yoon as
President  and Chief  Executive  Officer of the  company,  replacing  Jeffrey F.
Poore,  who served in those positions from March 19, 2003 to March 18, 2004. Our
Board of Directors terminated Mr. Poore's employment for cause as defined in the
employment  agreement.  On March 22, 2004, our Board of Directors appointed Aziz
A. Mohabbat as Vice President of Operations and Chief  Operating  Officer of the
company,  replacing David I. Cullumber who resigned as Chief  Operating  Officer
and  Chief  Technical  Officer  on  March  22,  2004 to  pursue  other  business
opportunities.  Mr. Mohabbat had previously served as Chief Operating Officer of
the Company from August 2002 to March 2003,  and as Vice President of Operations
from 2001 to March  2003.  On May 23,  2005,  our Board of  Directors  appointed
Frederick D. Geiger as Vice President of Engineering.

         On June 23, 2003, our Board of Directors appointed Gregory Hill as Vice
President  of Finance,  Treasurer  and Chief  Financial  Officer of the Company,
replacing Heber C. Maughan, who resigned as Vice President of Finance, Treasurer
and  Chief  Financial   Officer  on  May  31,  2003  to  pursue  other  business
opportunities.  Mr.  Hill  resigned  from his  positions  on December 5, 2003 to
pursue other business opportunities.

         The Board of  Directors  has not yet  appointed  a new Chief  Financial
Officer  since  Gregory  Hill  resigned in an effort to conserve  our  financial
resources.  Moreover, since Mr. Hill's resignation, we have endeavored to reduce
our operating  expenditures,  which has resulted in a reduction in the number of
our employees.  Luis A.  Mostacero,  our Controller,  is currently  handling the
responsibilities  previously  assumed  by Mr.  Hill  when he served as our Chief
Financial Officer.  It is our intention to appoint a new Chief Financial Officer
in the future when we have adequate funds to do so.

         On January 14, 2005, we issued  2,000,000  restricted  shares of common
stock to Dr. Endre Bodnar, an accredited investor, through a private offering at
a price of $.075 per share.  We  received a total of  $150,000  in cash from the
private  offering  and, as a  commission,  issued  warrants to purchase  200,000
shares of our common stock at an exercise  price of $.15 per share,  exercisable
through January 14, 2008.

Terms of Callable Secured Convertible Notes and Warrants

         To  obtain  funding  for our  ongoing  operations,  we  entered  into a
securities  purchase agreement with four accredited  investors on April 27, 2005
for the sale of (i) $2,500,000 in callable  secured  convertible  notes and (ii)
warrants  to purchase  16,534,392  shares of our common  stock.  The sale of the
callable secured  convertible  notes and warrants is to occur in three traunches
and the investors are obligated to provide us with an aggregate of $2,500,000 as
follows:

         o    $850,000 was disbursed on April 27, 2005;

         o    $800,000   was   disbursed   on  June  23,  2005  after  filing  a
              registration  statement on June 22, 2005,  which covered shares of
              common stock underlying the callable secured convertible notes and
              the warrants; and

         o    $850,000 will be disbursed  within five days of the  effectiveness
              of the registration statement.

         Each closing under the securities  purchase agreement is subject to the
following conditions:

         o    We must have  delivered to the investors  duly  executed  callable
              secured convertible notes and warrants;

         o    No  litigation,  statute,  regulation  or order  shall  have  been
              commenced,  enacted or  entered  by or in any court,  governmental
              authority  or  any  self-regulatory  organization  that  prohibits
              consummation  of the  transactions  contemplated by the securities
              purchase agreement; and

         o    No event shall have occurred that could  reasonably be expected to
              have a material adverse effect on our business.

         We  also  agreed  not,   without  the  prior   written   consent  of  a
majority-in-interest  of the investors,  to negotiate or contract with any party
to obtain additional  equity financing  (including debt financing with an equity
component)  that  involves (i) the issuance of common stock at a discount to the
market  price of the common  stock on the date of issuance  (taking into account
the value of any  warrants  or  options to acquire  common  stock in  connection
therewith),  (ii) the issuance of convertible  securities  that are  convertible
into an indeterminate number of shares of common stock, or (iii) the issuance of
warrants  during the lock-up period  beginning  April 27, 2005 and ending on the
later of (A) 270 days from  April 27,  2005,  and (B) 180 days from the date the
registration statement is declared effective.

                                       3


         In addition,  we agreed not to conduct any equity financing  (including
debt financing with an equity  component)  during the period beginning April 27,
2005 and ending two years after the end of the above  lock-up  period  unless we
have first  provided  each  investor an option to purchase  its  pro-rata  share
(based on the ratio of each  investor's  purchase under the securities  purchase
agreement) of the  securities  being offered in any proposed  equity  financing.
Each investor must be provided  written notice  describing  any proposed  equity
financing at least 20 business days prior to the closing of such proposed equity
financing  and the option must be extended  to each  investor  during the 15-day
period following delivery of such notice.

         The callable  secured  convertible  notes bear interest at 8% per annum
from the date of  issuance.  Interest is computed on the basis of a 365-day year
and is payable  quarterly in cash, with six months of interest payable up front.
The interest  rate resets to zero percent for any month in which the stock price
is greater than 125% of the initial  market price,  or $.0945,  for each trading
day during  that month.  Any amount of  principal  or  interest on the  callable
secured  convertible  notes that is not paid when due will bear  interest at the
rate of 15% per annum from the date due thereof  until such amount is paid.  The
callable  secured  convertible  notes  mature  in three  years  from the date of
issuance, and are convertible into our common stock at the selling stockholders'
option,  at the lower of (i) $.09 or (ii) 60% of the average of the three lowest
intraday  trading  prices for the common stock on the OTC Bulletin Board for the
20 trading days before but not including the conversion date. Accordingly, there
is no limit on the number of shares into which the notes may be converted.

         As of June 23, 2005, the average of the three lowest  intraday  trading
prices of our common stock  during the  preceding 20 trading days as reported on
the OTC Bulletin Board was $.05 and,  therefore,  the  conversion  price for the
callable secured convertible notes was $.03. Based on this conversion price, the
$2,500,000  callable  secured  convertible  notes,   excluding  interest,   were
convertible  into  83,333,333  shares of our common stock.  As of June 23, 2005,
none of the callable secured convertible notes have been converted.

         The  callable  secured  convertible  notes are  secured by our  assets,
including  our  inventory,   accounts  receivable  and  intellectual   property.
Moreover,  we have a call option  under the terms of the notes.  The call option
provides  us with the right to prepay all of the  outstanding  callable  secured
convertible  notes at any time,  provided there is no event of default by us and
our stock is trading at or below  $.09 per share.  An event of default  includes
the  failure by us to pay the  principal  or interest  on the  callable  secured
convertible  notes  when  due or to  timely  file a  registration  statement  as
required  by us  or  obtain  effectiveness  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission of the  registration  statement.  Prepayment of the callable  secured
convertible  notes  is to be  made in  cash  equal  to  either  (i)  125% of the
outstanding  principal and accrued interest for prepayments  occurring within 30
days  following  the  issue  date of the  notes;  (ii)  130% of the  outstanding
principal and accrued interest for prepayments  occurring between 31 and 60 days
following  the  issue  date of the  notes;  and  (iii)  145% of the  outstanding
principal  and accrued  interest for  prepayments  occurring  after the 60th day
following the issue date of the notes.

         The warrants are exercisable until five years from the date of issuance
at a purchase  price of $.20 per share.  The investors may exercise the warrants
on a cashless  basis if the shares of common stock  underlying  the warrants are
not then  registered  pursuant to an effective  registration  statement.  In the
event the investors  exercise the warrants on a cashless basis, then we will not
receive any proceeds therefrom.  In addition, the exercise price of the warrants
will be adjusted  in the event we issue  common  stock at a price below  market,
with the  exception of any  securities  issued as of the date of the warrants or
issued in connection with the callable secured convertible notes issued pursuant
to the securities purchase agreement.

         The  selling  stockholders  have agreed to  restrict  their  ability to
convert their callable secured  convertible notes or exercise their warrants and
receive  shares of our  common  stock  such that the  number of shares of common
stock held by them in the aggregate and their  affiliates  after such conversion
or exercise does not exceed 4.99% of the then issued and  outstanding  shares of
common stock.  However,  the selling  stockholders may repeatedly sell shares of
common stock in order to reduce their  ownership  percentage,  and  subsequently
convert additional callable secured convertible notes.

         We are  required to register  the shares of our common  stock  issuable
upon the conversion of the callable secured  convertible  notes and the exercise
of the warrants.  The  registration  statement must be filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  within 60 days of the April 27, 2005 closing date and
the  effectiveness  of the registration is to be within 135 days of such closing
date.  Penalties  of 2% of the  outstanding  principal  balance of the  callable
secured convertible notes plus accrued interest are to be applied for each month
the  registration is not effective  within the required time. The penalty may be
paid in cash or stock at our option.

         See "Risk Factors"  section for a complete  description of the callable
secured convertible notes and warrants.



                                       4


The Offering

Securities Offered ..............     The resale of  9,471,437  shares of common
                                      stock, consisting of the following:

                                          o    The  resale of  1,000,000  shares
                                               issuable upon exercise of Class A
                                               warrants  with an exercise  price
                                               of $7.50 per share.

                                          o    The  resale  of  200,000   shares
                                               issuable    upon    exercise   of
                                               warrants by Kenneth  Jerome & Co.
                                               with exercise prices ranging from
                                               $7.50 to $8.l25 per share.

                                          o    The  resale  of  475,000   shares
                                               issuable    upon    exercise   of
                                               warrants  by  Cyndel & Co.,  Inc.
                                               with exercise prices ranging from
                                               $3.00 to $4.00 per share.

                                          o    The  resale  of  300,000   shares
                                               issuable    upon    exercise   of
                                               warrants   by  Dr.   Michael   B.
                                               Limberg  with   exercise   prices
                                               ranging  from  $4.00 to $6.75 per
                                               share.

                                          o    The   resale  of  50,000   shares
                                               issuable    upon    exercise   of
                                               warrants  by Helen  Cohn  with an
                                               exercise   price  of  $4.00   per
                                               share.

                                          o    The   resale  of  50,000   shares
                                               issuable  upon  the  exercise  of
                                               warrants by Ronit  Sucoff with an
                                               exercise   price  of  $4.00   per
                                               share.

                                          o    The   resale  of  35,000   shares
                                               issuable  upon  the  exercise  of
                                               warrants  by  Rodman  &  Renshaw,
                                               Inc.  with an  exercise  price of
                                               $2.00 per share.  o The resale of
                                               241,095 shares  issuable upon the
                                               exercise  of warrants by Series E
                                               preferred    holders    with   an
                                               exercise   price  of  $4.00   per
                                               share.

                                          o    The  resale  of  230,589   shares
                                               issuable    upon    exercise   of
                                               warrants  by  Series F  preferred
                                               holders with an exercise price of
                                               $4.00 per share.  o The resale of
                                               788,750   shares   issuable  upon
                                               exercise  of  warrants by Paul L.
                                               Archambeau,    M.D.,    John   H.
                                               Banzhaf,    Daniel   S.   Lipson,
                                               Douglas A. MacLeod, M.D., Douglas
                                               A. MacLeod,  M.D.  Profit Sharing
                                               Trust,  St. Mark's Eye Institute,
                                               Milan  Holdings,  Ltd.,  Frank G.
                                               Mauro and  Delbert  D.  Reichardt
                                               with an  exercise  price  of $.25
                                               per share.

                                          o    The  resale  of  150,000   shares
                                               issuable upon exercise of options
                                               by executive officers,  employees
                                               and  directors  with an  exercise
                                               price of $6.00 per share.

                                          o    The   resale  of  73,103   shares
                                               issuable upon exercise of options
                                               by executive officers,  employees
                                               and  directors  with an  exercise
                                               price of $5.00 per share.

                                          o    The  resale  of  600,000   shares
                                               issuable upon exercise of options
                                               by executive officers,  employees
                                               and  directors  with an  exercise
                                               price of $4.00 per share.

                                          o    The  resale  of  786,000   shares
                                               issuable upon exercise of options
                                               by executive officers,  employees
                                               and  directors  with an  exercise
                                               price of $2.75 per share.

                                          o    The  resale of  4,491,900  shares
                                               held by certain stockholders with
                                               registration rights.

Common stock outstanding
prior to the offering(1) ........     28,530,074 shares.

Common stock outstanding
after the offering(1)............     37,236,305 shares.

Use of proceeds..................     All funds received by us upon the exercise
                                      of the  warrants  and options will be used
                                      for general  corporate  purposes.  We will
                                      not   receive   any   proceeds   from  the
                                      conversion  of  the  shares  of  Series  E
                                      preferred  stock  or  Series  F  preferred
                                      stock.  Risk  Factors/Dilution............
                                      The  offering  involves  a high  degree of
                                      risk.

OTC Bulletin Board symbols
     Common stock................     PMED.OB
     Class warrants..............     PMEDW.OB

                                       5


 ---------------------------

(1)      Does not include 6,753 shares of common stock issuable upon  conversion
         of 5,627 shares of Series A preferred  stock,  10,783  shares of common
         stock  issuable  upon  conversion of 8,986 shares of Series B preferred
         stock,  8,750 shares of common stock issuable upon  conversion of 5,000
         shares of  Series D  preferred  stock,  53,333  shares of common  stock
         issuable upon  conversion of 1,000 shares of Series E preferred  stock,
         245,217  shares of common stock  issuable  upon  conversion of 4,598.75
         shares of Series F preferred stock,  1,726,560 shares of stock issuable
         upon  conversion  of  1,726,560  shares  of Series G  preferred  stock,
         options  to  purchase  a total of  4,301,000  shares  of  common  stock
         issuable upon the exercise of stock options at prices ranging from $.10
         to $4.00 per share,  and  warrants  to  purchase  15,371,881  shares of
         common stock  issuable upon the exercise of warrants at prices  ranging
         from $.15 to $8.125 per share.

                          Summary Financial Information




                                                For the year ended          For the three months ended
                                                  December 31,                      March 31,

 Statement of Operations Data:                  2003            2004            2004            2005
 -----------------------------                  ---             ---             ----            ----
                                                                                         
 Net Sales..............................       $3,059,000      $3,062,000    $   583,000      $   528,000
 Net cost of sales.......................       2,086,000       1,217,000        227,000          214,000
 Operating expenses......................       4,113,000       2,237,000        716,000          648,000
 Operating loss..........................      (3,140,000)       (392,000)      (360,000)        (334,000)
 Other income (expense)..................         (21,000)        456,000         (4,000)          11,000
 Net income (loss).......................      (3,161,000)         64,000       (364,000)        (323,000)
 Net income (loss) applicable to common
        shareholders.....................      (3,431,000)         10,000       (364,000)        (323,000)
 Net income (loss) per common share......           $(.14)             --         $(0.01)          $(0.01)
 Shares used in computing net loss per share   24,058,000      25,405,000     22,373,000       27,121,000






                                                                 As of                As of
 Balance Sheet Data:                                        December 31,  2004    March 31, 2005
 ------------------                                        ------------------    --------------
                                                                                     
 Current assets....................................            $1,573,000            $1,393,000
 Current liabilities...............................             1,657,000             1,584,000
 Working capital (deficit).........................               (84,000)             (191,000)
 Total assets......................................             2,361,000             2,158,000
 Accumulated deficit...............................           (56,807,000)          (57,130,000)
 Stockholder's equity .............................               690,000               569,000



                                  RISK FACTORS

         Before you invest in our common stock, you should be aware of the risks
described  below which  constitute  material risks to potential  investors.  You
should  consider  carefully  these risk factors  together  with all of the other
information  included  in this  prospectus  before  you  decide to invest in our
common  stock.  If any of the following  risks  actually  occurs,  our business,
financial  condition and results of operations  could suffer,  in which case the
trading price of our common stock could decline. No investment should be made by
any person who is not in a position to lose the entire amount of his investment.

                Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

         Some of the information in this prospectus may contain  forward-looking
statements.  Such  statements  can be identified  by the use of  forward-looking
terminology  such  as  "may,"  "will,"   "expect,"   "anticipate,"   "estimate,"
"continue" or other similar words. These statements discuss future expectations,
contain  projections of results of operations or of financial condition or state
other  "forward-looking"  information.  When  considering  such  forward-looking
statements,  you  should  keep in mind the risk  factors  and  other  cautionary
statements in this Prospectus.  The risk factors noted in this section and other
factors  noted   throughout  this  prospectus,   including   certain  risks  and
uncertainties,  could cause our actual results to differ  materially  from those
contained in any forward-looking statement.

Our auditors have expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a
going concern.

         Due to our significant  recurring  losses and our inability to generate
sufficient  cash flows from  operations to satisfy our  liabilities  and sustain
operations,  our auditors have expressed  substantial doubt about our ability to
continue as a going  concern.  Although  we have had success in raising  working
capital  from the  sale of our  common  stock in the  past,  the  going  concern
language in our auditors'  report could  negatively  affect our ability to raise
such funds in the future.  Some investors are unwilling to invest with companies
that have going  concern  language  in the  auditors'  report and others  demand

                                       6


substantial  discounts  from  the  market  price.  Unless  we are  able to raise
additional  working capital through the sale of our common stock, we will not be
able to continue the  development of our products nor will we be able to pay our
existing current liabilities,  which could result in protection under bankruptcy
laws.  Under certain  conditions,  including but not limited to having judgments
rendered  against us in a court of law, a group of creditors could force us into
bankruptcy  due to our  inability  to pay the  liabilities  arising  out of such
judgments.  At this time, we are unable to assess the  likelihood  that we would
seek bankruptcy protection in the near future. There can be no assurance that we
will be successful in raising working capital from the sale of our common stock.

We have limited working capital, have accumulated significant losses, and expect
our losses to continue.

         As of December 31, 2004, we had a deficit  working  capital of $84,000.
As of March 31, 2005, our deficit working capital was $191,000.  Our accumulated
deficit was $56,807,000 as of December 31,2004,  and $57,130,000 as of March 31,
2005.  We had a net loss of  $3,161,000  for the fiscal year ended  December 31,
2003, a net income of $64,000 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, and a
net loss of $323,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2005.  Our losses have
resulted  principally  from costs  incurred  in  connection  with  research  and
development,  including clinical trials, of the laser surgery system. We did not
sell medical products until late 1992. Our ability to become profitable  largely
depends on successfully  developing clinical  applications and obtain regulatory
approvals for our laser surgery products, including the Photon(TM) laser system,
and to effectively  market such products.  The problems and expenses  frequently
encountered in developing new products and the competitive  industry in which we
operate  will  impact   whether  we  are   successful.   We  may  never  achieve
profitability.  Furthermore,  we may encounter substantial delays and unexpected
expenses related to research,  development,  production,  marketing,  regulatory
matters or other unforeseen difficulties.

Because  our  securities  trade on the  Over-the-Counter  Bulletin  Board,  your
ability to sell your shares in the secondary market may be limited.

         Since June 26,  2003,  our shares have  traded on the  Over-the-Counter
Bulletin Board. As a result, it may be more difficult for an investor to dispose
of our  securities,  or to obtain  accurate  quotations  on their market  value.
Furthermore,  the prices for our securities may be lower than might otherwise be
obtained.  On October 8,  2002,  we  received  a notice  from  Nasdaq's  Listing
Qualifications  staff that for the previous 30  consecutive  trading  days,  the
price of our common stock closed below the minimum  $1.00 per share  requirement
for  continued  inclusion  on Nasdaq.  The notice  further  provided  that if at
anytime  before April 7, 2003, the bid price of our common stock closed at $1.00
or more for a minimum of 10  consecutive  trading  days, we would be notified by
the staff that we comply with such rule.

         On April 15, 2003, we received  notice of a  determination  by Nasdaq's
Listing Qualifications staff that we failed to comply with the minimum bid price
rules for  continued  listing set forth in  Nasdaq's  rules.  Specifically,  the
notice  stated  that we have not  regained  compliance  with the  minimum  $1.00
closing bid price per share requirement  (noting that pursuant to the October 8,
2002, notice from the Nasdaq Listing  Qualifications staff, we were provided 180
calendar  days,  or  until  April  7,  2003,  to  regain  compliance  with  this
requirement)  and we do not qualify  with the  $5,000,000  shareholders  equity,
$50,000,000  market  value of listed  securities  or  $750,000  net income  from
continuing operations  requirement for an additional 180 calendar day compliance
period to comply with Nasdaq's rules. The April 15, 2003,  notice further stated
that as of December 31, 2002, we reported stockholders' equity of $2,847,000 and
net losses from continuing  operations of approximately  $11,155,000,  and as of
April 14,  2003,  the market  value of our  listed  securities  was  $4,208,108.
Accordingly,  our common stock would be delisted from the Nasdaq SmallCap Market
at the opening of business on April 24,  2003.  Separately,  Nasdaq  informed us
that listing fees of $22,500 and $18,000 under Rule  4310(c)(13) are owed to the
Nasdaq SmallCap Market.

         We  requested an oral hearing  before a Nasdaq  Listing  Qualifications
Panel to review the staff's determination.  The request automatically stayed the
delisting of our common stock. On April 23, 2003, we received formal notice from
Nasdaq that a hearing to consider our appeal  would be held on May 29, 2003.  On
May 29, 2003, Dr.  Jeffrey F. Poore,  our former  President and Chief  Executive
Officer;  Randall A. Mackey, our Chairman of the Board; and Dr. David M. Silver,
a director of the  company,  attended an oral  hearing  before a Nasdaq  Listing
Qualifications  Panel in Washington,  D.C. At the hearing Dr. Poore presented to
the panel a definitive  plan both for regaining  compliance  with the particular
deficiencies  cited in the  April  15,  2003,  letter  from the  Nasdaq  Listing
Qualifications  staff  and  sustaining  long-term  compliance  with  the  Nasdaq
Marketplace Rules,  including all applicable  maintenance  criteria. On June 24,
2003 we received notification from the Nasdaq Listing  Qualifications Panel that
we were to be delisted from the Nasdaq Stock Market effective June 26, 2003. Our
securities trade on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board effective June 26, 2003.
Because our  securities  are delisted  from the Nasdaq  SmallCap  Market and now
trade on the Over-the-Counter  Bulletin Board,  additional sales requirements on
broker-dealers  will  adversely  affect the  ability of  purchasers  to sell our
securities and the trading price of our securities could decline.

         Moreover,  because our securities  currently  trade on the OTC Bulletin
Board, they are subject to the rules  promulgated under the Securities  Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended,  which impose additional sales practice requirements on
broker-  dealers that sell  securities  governed by these rules to persons other
than established customers and "accredited  investors"  (generally,  individuals
with a net worth in excess of $1,000,000 or annual  individual  income exceeding
$200,000 or $300,000  jointly with their spouses).  For such  transactions,  the
broker-dealer must determine whether persons that are not established  customers
or accredited  investors  qualify under the rule for purchasing  such securities
and must receive that person's written consent to the transaction prior to sale.
Consequently, these rules may adversely affect the ability of purchasers to sell
our securities and otherwise affect the trading market in our securities.

                                       7


Because our shares may be deemed "penny stocks," you may have difficulty selling
them in the secondary trading market.

         The Commission has adopted  regulations which generally define a "penny
stock" to be any non-Nasdaq  equity security that has a market price (as therein
defined) less than $5.00 per share or with an exercise  price of less than $5.00
per share, subject to certain exceptions. For any transactions by broker-dealers
involving a penny stock (unless exempt),  rules promulgated under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 require delivery,  prior to a transaction in a penny stock,
of a risk disclosure document relating to the penny stock market.  Disclosure is
also required to be made about  compensation  payable to both the  broker-dealer
and the registered  representative  and current  quotations for the  securities.
Furthermore,  monthly statements are required to be sent disclosing recent price
information for the penny stocks.

If the litigants in the class action lawsuits  succeed on any o their claims and
we are  denied  coverage  for the  lawsuits  under our  Directors  and  Officers
Liability  and  Company  Insurance  Policy,  we  would  be  unable  to pay  such
liability, and we would be forced to seek bankruptcy protection.

         On May 14, 2003, a complaint  was filed in the United  States  District
Court, District of Utah, captioned Richard Meyer,  individually and on behalf of
all others similarly suited v. Paradigm Medical Industries, Inc., Thomas Motter,
Mark  Miehle and John  Hemmer,  Case No.  2:03  CV00448TC.  The  complaint  also
indicated  that it is a  "Class  Action  Complaint  for  Violations  of  Federal
Securities  Law and  Plaintiffs  Demand a Trial by Jury." We have retained legal
counsel to review the  complaint,  which  appears to be focused on alleged false
and  misleading  statements  pertaining  to  the  Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM)  and
concerning a purchase order from Valdespino Associates  Enterprises and Westland
Financial Corporation.

         More specifically,  the complaint alleged that we falsely stated in our
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  filings  and press  releases  that we had
received  authorization to use an insurance  reimbursement CPT code from the CPT
Code Research and Development  Division of the American Medical  Association for
reimbursement to doctors in connection with the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM),  adding
that the CPT code provides for a reimbursement  to doctors of $57.00 per patient
for use of the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM). According to the complaint, the CPT code
was critical.  Without a reimbursement  code,  physicians would not purchase the
Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM)  because  they  could  not  receive  compensation  for
performance  of medical  procedures  using the  medical  device.  The  complaint
further  contends that we never received the CPT code from the American  Medical
Association  at any time.  Nevertheless,  it is  alleged  that we  continued  to
misrepresent  in our SEC filings and press releases that we had received the CPT
code. It is also alleged that we have never made a full,  corrective  disclosure
with respect to this alleged misstatement.

         The  complaint  also alleged  that on July 11, 2002,  we issued a press
release falsely  announcing that we had received  purchase order from Valdespino
Associates  Enterprises and Westland  Financial  Corporation for 200 sets of our
entire portfolio of products, with $70 million in systems to be delivered over a
two-year period, then another $35 million of orders to be completed in the third
year.  The complaint  further  allege that we had never received a true purchase
order  for our  products.  As a  result  of  these  alleged  misstatements,  the
complaint contends that the price of our shares of common stock was artificially
inflated  during the period from April 25, 2001  through May 14,  2003,  and the
persons who purchased or retained our common shares during that period  suffered
substantial  damages.  The complaint requests judgment for unspecified  damages,
together with interest and attorney's fees

         We dispute having issued false and misleading statements concerning the
Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) and a purchase order from Westland Financial Corporation
and  Valdespino  Associates  Enterprises.  On April 25, 2001,  we issued a press
release  that  stated we had  received  authorization  to use  common  procedure
terminology or CPT code number 92120 for our Blood Flow Analyzer(TM). This press
release was based on a letter we received  from the CPT  Editorial  Research and
Development Department of the American Medical Association stating that CPT code
number 92120 was the appropriate common procedure terminology or CPT code number
for doctors to use when reporting  certain  procedures  performed with our Blood
Flow Analyzer(TM).

         Currently,  there is reimbursement by insurance payors to doctors using
the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) in 22 states and partial reimbursement in four other
states. The amount of reimbursement to doctors using the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM)
generally ranges from $56.00 to $76.00 per patient, depending upon the insurance
payor. Insurance payors providing  reimbursement for the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM)
have the  discretion to increase or reduce the amount of  reimbursement.  We are
endeavoring to obtain  reimbursement  by insurance  payors in other states where
there is currently no reimbursement  being made. We believe we have continued to
correctly  represent in our Securities and Exchange  Commission filings that the
CPT  Editorial  Research and  Development  Department  of the  American  Medical
Association  has advised us that CPT code number  92120 is the  appropriate  CPT
code for our Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  for  reimbursement  purposes  for doctors
using the device.

         On July 11, 2002,  we issued a press  release that stated we received a
purchase order from Westland  Financial  Corporation  and Valdespino  Associates
Enterprises for 200 complete sets of our entire product  portfolio of diagnostic
and surgical equipment for Mexican ophthalmic practitioners, to be followed by a
second order of 100 sets of equipment. The press release was based on a purchase
order  dated  July  10,  2002  that we  entered  into  with  Westland  Financial
Corporation  for the sale of 200 complete  sets of our  surgical and  diagnostic
equipment to Mexican  ophthalmic  practitioners.  The press  release also stated
that the initial  order was for $70 million of our equipment to be filled over a
two-year  period  followed by the second order of $35 million in equipment to be
completed in the third year.  The press  release  further  stated that  delivery
would be made in traunches of 25 complete sets of our equipment, beginning in 30
days from the date of the purchase order.

                                       8


         On September  13, 2002,  the board of directors  issued a press release
regarding   the  status  of  our  product   sales  to  the  Mexican   ophthalmic
practitioners.  In that  press  release  the  board  stated  that we had been in
discussions for the prior nine months with Westland Financial Corporation, aimed
at  supplying  our  medical  device  products  to  the  Mexican   market.   Upon
investigation,  the board of directors had  determined  that the purchase  order
referenced  in the July 11, 2002 press release was not of such a nature as to be
enforceable for the purpose of sales or revenue recognition. In addition, we had
not sent any shipment of medical products to Mexican ophthalmic practitioner nor
received payment for those products pursuant to those discussions. The September
13, 2002 press  release  also  stated  that  discussions  were  continuing  with
Westland Financial  Corporation regarding sales and marketing activities for our
medical  device  products in Mexico,  but we could not, at the time,  predict or
provide any assurance that any transactions would result.

         On June 2, 2003, a complaint  was filed in the United  States  District
Court,  captioned Michael Marrone v. Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc., Thomas
Motter,  Mark Miehle and John  Hemmer,  Case No. 2:03  CV00513  PGC. On July 11,
2003, a complaint was filed in the same United States District Court,  captioned
Lidia Milian v. Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc., Thomas Motter,  Mark Miehle
and John Hemmer,  Case No. 2:03  CV00617PGC.  Both  complaints seek class action
status.  These  cases are  substantially  similar  in nature to the Meyer  case,
including  the  contention  that  as a  result  of  allegedly  false  statements
regarding  the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  and the  purchase  order from  Westland
Financial  Corporation and Valdespino Associates  Enterprises,  the price of our
common stock was artificially  inflated and the persons who purchased our common
shares during the class period suffered  substantial damages. In a press release
dated July 11, 2003,  captioned  "Milberg Weiss  announces the filing of a class
action suit against Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc. on behalf of investors,"
the law firm of Milberg  Weiss  Bershad  Hynen & Levach  LLP,  which  represents
purchasers  of our  securities  in the class action suit filed on July 11, 2003,
stated that our alleged  misrepresentations caused the market price of the stock
to be artificially  inflated during the class period. As a result, it is alleged
that  investors  suffered  millions  of  dollars  in  damages  from our  alleged
misstatements.

         The cases  requested  judgment for unspecified  damages,  together with
interest and attorney's  fees. These cases have now been  consolidated  with the
Meyer case into a single action,  captioned In re: Paradigm  Medical  Industries
Securities  Litigation,  Case No.  03-CV-448TC.  The law firm of  Milberg  Weiss
Bershad & Schulman  LLP is  representing  purchasers  of our  securities  in the
consolidated class action. On June 28 2004, a consolidated  amended class action
complaint was filed on behalf of purchasers of our securities.  The consolidated
complaint  is similar to the three class action  complaints  and alleges that we
made  false   representations   regarding  the  CPT  code  for  the  Blood  Flow
Analyzer(TM),  but it includes additional allegations that we failed to disclose
in a timely manner that doctors were being denied  reimbursement  for procedures
performed  with the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM).  The  consolidated  complaint also
alleges that we made false statements regarding the purchase order from Westland
Financial  Corporation  and Valdespino  Associates  Enterprises.  We believe the
consolidated  complaint  is without  merit and intend to  vigorously  defend and
protect our interests in the case.

         We  were  issued  a  Directors  and  Officers   Liability  and  Company
Reimbursement Policy by United States Fire Insurance Company for the period from
July 10, 2002 to July 10, 2003 that  contains a $5,000,000  limit of  liability,
which is excess of a $250,000 retention. The officers and directors named in the
consolidated  cases have  requested  coverage  under the  policy.  U.S.  Fire is
currently  investigating  whether it may have a right to deny  coverage  for the
consolidated  cases based upon policy  terms,  conditions  and  exclusions or to
rescind the policy based upon  misrepresentations  contained in our  application
for insurance.

         We have paid $30,000 to U.S. Fire toward  satisfaction  of the $250,000
retention  that is applicable to the  consolidated  cases.  We have advised U.S.
Fire that we cannot pay the  $250,000  retention  due to our  current  financial
circumstances.  As a  consequence,  on January 8, 2004,  we entered  into a non-
waiver  agreement  with U.S.  Fire in which U.S. Fire agreed to fund and advance
our retention  obligation in consideration for which we have agreed to reimburse
U.S.  Fire the sum of $5,000 a month for a period of six months,  with the first
of such payments due on February 15, 2004. Thereafter,  commencing on August 15,
2004,  we are required to reimburse  U.S Fire the sum of $10,000 per month until
the entire amount of $250,000 has been paid to U.S.  Fire. We have made payments
to U.S.  Fire in the aggregate  amount of $30,000,  of which our last payment of
$10,000 was made on October 11, 2004. These payments were for the $5,000 monthly
payments  due during the six month  period from  February  15, to July 15, 2004,
leaving a remaining retention obligation to U.S. Fire of $220,000.

         In the event U.S. Fire  determines  that we or our former  officers and
directors named in the consolidated cases are not entitled to coverage under the
policy,  or that it is entitled to rescind the policy,  or should we be declared
in default under the non-waiver  agreement,  for not making the monthly payments
in a timely manner that are owed to U.S.  Fire,  then we agree to pay U.S. Fire,
on demand,  the full amount of all costs advanced by U.S. Fire, except for those
amounts  that we may  have  reimbursed  to U.S.  Fire  pursuant  to the  monthly
payments  due under the  non-waiver  agreement.  Moreover,  if U.S.  Fire denies
coverage  for  the  consolidated  cases  under  the  policy,  we  would  owe our
litigation  counsel in the class action  lawsuits for any legal fees not paid by
U.S.  Fire.  However,  U.S.  Fire has  currently  agreed to pay the  legal  fees
relating to the class action lawsuits.

         We will be in default under the non-waiver agreement if we fail to make
any payment due to U.S. Fire  thereunder  when such payment is due, or institute
proceedings to be adjudicated as bankrupt or insolvent.  U.S. Fire's  obligation
to advance  defense costs under the agreement  will  terminate in the event that

                                       9


the  $5,000,000  policy  limit of liability is  exhausted.  If U.S.  Fire denies
coverage for the  consolidated  cases under the policy and we are not successful
in defending and protecting our interests in the cases,  resulting in a judgment
against us for  substantial  damages,  we would be unable to pay such  liability
and, as a result, would be forced to seek bankruptcy protection

         On July 10, 2003, a complaint was filed in the United  States  District
Court,  District of Utah captioned  Innovative Optics,  Inc. and Barton Dietrich
Investments,  L.P. v. Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc.,  Thomas Motter,  Mark
Miehle and John  Hemmer,  Case No. 2:03 CV 00582DB.  The  complaint  claims that
Innovative  and  Barton  entered  into an asset  purchase  agreement  with us on
January 31, 2002, in which we agreed to purchase all the assets of Innovative in
consideration for the issuance of 1,310,000 shares of the Company's common stock
to Innovative.  The complaint  claims we breached the asset purchase  agreement.
The complaint also claims that we allegedly made false and misleading statements
pertaining to the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  and concerning a purchase order from
Valdespino  Associates  Enterprises  and  Westland  Financial  Corporation.  The
purpose  of  these  statements,  according  to  the  complaint,  was  to  induce
Innovative  to sell its assets and  purchase  the shares of our common  stock at
artificially inflate prices while simultaneously deceiving Innovative and Barton
into  believing  that the  Company's  shares were worth more than they  actually
were. The complaint contends that had Innovative and Barton known the truth they
would not have sold Innovative to us, would not have purchased our stock for the
assets of  Innovative,  or would not have  purchased  the stock at the  inflated
prices that they allegedly paid. The complaint further contends that as a result
of the allegedly false  statements,  Innovative and Barton suffered  substantial
damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

         The  complaint  also  claims  that  491,250  of the  shares  issued  to
Innovative in the asset purchase  transaction  were not issued on a timely basis
and we also did not  file a  registration  statement  with  the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission within five months of the closing date of the asset purchase
transaction.  As a result, the complaint alleged that the value of the shares of
our  common  stock  issued  to  Innovative  in  the  transaction  declined,  and
Innovative and Barton suffered  damage in an unspecified  amount to be proven at
trial. We filed an answer to the complaint and also filed counterclaims  against
Innovative  and Barton for breach of  contract.  We  believe  the  complaint  is
without merit and intend to  vigorously  defend and protect our interests in the
action.  If we are not  successful in defending and  protecting our interests in
this action,  and a judgment for substantial  damages is entered against us, and
U.S.  Fire denies  coverage in the  litigation  under the Directors and Officers
Liability  and  Company  Reimbursement  Policy,  we would be  unable to pay such
liability and, as a result, would be forced to seek bankruptcy protection.

         On October 14, 2003, an action was filed in the Third Judicial District
Court,  Salt  Lake  County,  State of Utah,  captioned  Albert  Kinzinger,  Jr.,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated vs. Paradigm Medical
Industries,  Inc.,  Thomas  Motter,  Mark Miehle,  Randall A.  Mackey,  and John
Hemmer,  Case No.  030922608.  The complaint also indicates that it was a "Class
Action Complaint for Violations of Utah Securities Laws and Plaintiffs  Demand a
Trial by Jury." We have retained  legal counsel to review the  complaint,  which
appears to be focused on alleged  false or misleading  statements  pertaining to
the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM).  More  specifically,  the complaint alleged that we
falsely stated in Securities and Exchange  Commission filings and press releases
that we had received  authorization to use an insurance  reimbursement  CPT code
from the CPT Code  Research and  Development  Division of the  American  Medical
Association in connection with the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM),  adding that the CPT
code provides for a reimbursement to doctors of $57.00 per patient for the Blood
Flow Analyzer(TM).

         The purpose of these  statements,  according to the  complaint,  was to
induce investors to purchase shares of our Series E preferred stock in a private
placement  transaction at artificially  inflated prices.  The complaint contends
that as a result of these statements, the investors that purchased shares of our
Series E preferred stock in the private offering suffered substantial damages to
be proven at trial.  The complaint  also alleged that we sold Series E preferred
shares  without  registering  the sale of such shares or  obtaining an exemption
from registration.  The complaint requests rescission,  compensatory damages and
treble damages,  including  interest and attorneys'  fees. We filed an answer to
the  complaint.  We  believe  the  complaint  is  without  merit  and  intend to
vigorously  defend our  interests  in the action.  If we are not  successful  in
defending and  protecting  our interests in the action,  resulting in a judgment
against  us for  substantial  damages,  and U.S.  Fire  denies  coverage  in the
litigation under the Directors and Officers Liability and Company  Reimbursement
Policy,  we would be unable to pay such  liability  and,  as a result,  would be
forced to seek bankruptcy protection.

         On January 26,  2005,  we completed a written  settlement  agreement to
settle the lawsuit that Innovative Optics, Inc. and Barton Dietrich Investments,
L.P.  brought against us and our former executive  officers.  Under the terms of
the  settlement,  U.S.  Fire agreed to pay  Innovative  Optics,  Inc. and Barton
Dietrich  Investments,  L.P. the sum of $367,500 in cash. Payment of this amount
is  contingent,  however,  upon the courts in the federal and state class action
lawsuits granting final approval of the settlements  reached in those respective
actions, and such orders becoming final and not appealable.

         On February 23, 2005,  we executed  written  settlement  agreements  to
settle the federal and state court class action lawsuits that were filed against
us and our  former  executive  officers.  Under the terms of  settlement  of the
federal  court  class  action  lawsuit,  U.S.  Fire  agreed  to pay  the  sum of
$1,507,500 i cash to the class members that purchased our securities  during the
period  between  April  17,  2002 and  November  4,  2002.  Under  the  terms of
settlement of the state court class action lawsuit,  U.S. Fire agreed to pay the
sum of $625,000 in cash to the class members that  purchased  shares of Series E
convertible preferred stock on or about July 11, 2001.

                                       10


         As a condition to the  settlement  agreements to settle the federal and
state court class action lawsuits, the courts in such lawsuits must have entered
orders  granting final approval of the settlements  reached in those  respective
actions, and such orders must have become final and not appealable.  On March 3,
2005,  the federal court entered an order granting  preliminary  approval of the
settlement in the federal court class action lawsuit and providing for notice to
be sent to potential class members. On April 18, 2005, a hearing was held in the
state court and the court entered a minute entry granting  preliminary  approval
of the settlement in the state court class action lawsuit.

         As a further  condition  to the  settlement  agreements  to settle  the
federal  and state court  class  action  lawsuits,  both  settlement  agreements
provided  that U.S.  Fire must not have  exercised  its option to terminate  the
settlement  agreements.  U.S.  Fire has the option to terminate  the  settlement
agreements if the  cumulative  dollar value of the claims held by individuals or
entities that "opt out" of the federal and state class action  lawsuits  exceeds
$250,000. If such "opt outs" exceed $250,000, however, plaintiffs in the federal
and state court class  action  lawsuits  will have five days to cure by reducing
the amount of "opt outs" to less than $250,000.

         If  U.S.  Fire   exercises  its  option  to  terminate  the  settlement
agreements,  then all parties to the settlement  agreements  will be restored to
their  respective  positions  in  the  various  action  as of  the  date  of the
settlement  agreements.  In addition, the terms and provisions of the settlement
agreements will have no further force and effect on the various parties and will
be deemed null and void in their entirety.

         Under the terms of the settlement  agreements regarding the federal and
state court class action lawsuits and the lawsuit that Innovative  Optics,  Inc.
and Barton Dietrich  Investors,  L.P brought against us and our former executive
officers,  U.S.  Fire has  agreed  to pay a total of  $2,500,000  in cash to the
classes in the class action lawsuits and to Innovative  Optics,  Inc. and Barton
Dietrich Investments,  L.P. in settlement of these lawsuits.  Under the terms of
settlement,  we are to pay  U.S.  Fire  the  sum of  $220,000  representing  the
remaining amount owing under the $250,000 retention  obligation in the insurance
policy,  and to  execute a policy  release in favor of U.S.  Fire a to  coverage
under the insurance policy.

If the litigants in other  lawsuits  succeed on any of their  claims,  we may be
unable  to pay  such  liability  and we  would  be  forced  to  seek  bankruptcy
protection.

         We have been  involved  in other  lawsuits  besides  the  class  action
lawsuits.  If the  litigants  in these  other  lawsuits  succeed on any of their
claims,  we may be unable to pay such  liability  and, as a result,  we could be
forced to seek  bankruptcy  protection.  These  other  lawsuits  include (i) the
complaint filed against us on June 20, 2003 by Citicorp  Vendor  Finance,  Inc.,
formerly known as Copelco Capital,  Inc., alleging that $49,626 plus interest is
due for the leasing of two copy machines; (ii) the complaint filed against us on
August 3, 2003, by Corinne Powell, a former employee,  alleging that at the time
we laid her off, she was owed $2,030 for business  expenses,  $11,06 for accrued
vacation days, $12,818 for unpaid  commissions,  the fair market value of 50,000
stock options  exercisable  at $5.00 per share that she claims she was prevented
from  exercising,  plus attorney's fees and a continuing wage penalty under Utah
law (of which on March 29, 2005,  we agreed to a settlement  with Ms.  Powell of
her claims for unpaid  business  expenses,  accrued  vacation  days,  and unpaid
commission  by agreeing to pay her $13,000,  which  payment has been made to Ms.
Powell);  (iii) the  complaint  filed  against us on September 10, 2003 by Larry
Hicks for payments due under a consulting  agreement in the aggregate  amount of
$110,000  minus  whatever  we have paid to him prior to such  termination,  plus
attorney's  fees and a wage penalty  under Utah law;  (iv) the  complaint  filed
against us on  November  7, 2003,  by Todd Smith,  a former  employee,  alleging
unpaid  wages in the amount of the fair  market  value of 16,800  stock  options
exercisable at $5.00 per share that he claims he was prevented from  exercising,
plus  attorney's  fees and a continuing wage penalty under Utah law; and (v) the
complaint  brought  against us on or about May 25,  2004 by  Jeffrey  F.  Poore,
former  President and Chief Executive  Officer of the company,  alleging that we
unlawfully  terminated  his  employment  with us and,  as a result,  he  demands
judgment  against us for  $350,000,  representing  his annual salary for the two
remaining years under the employment agreement,  for money judgment based on the
value  of his  benefits  for  the  two  remaining  years  under  the  employment
agreement,  and for  money  judgment  equal to the  value of the  stock  options
granted to him under the employment agreement.

There are a large number of shares  underlying our callable secured  convertible
notes and warrants that may be available for future sale,  and the sale of these
shares may depress the market price of our common stock.

         As of June 20,  2005,  we had  28,530,074  shares of our  common  stock
issued and outstanding and callable secured  convertible  notes outstanding that
may be converted into an estimated  18,888,889 shares of common stock at current
market  prices,  and  outstanding  warrants to purchase  5,621,694  shares o our
common stock.  Additionally,  we have an  obligation  to sell  callable  secured
convertible  notes that may be converted into an estimated  36,666,667 shares of
common stock at current market prices and issue warrants to purchase  10,912,698
shares of common stock in the near future. In addition,  the number of shares of
common stock  issuable  upon  conversion  of the  outstanding  callable  secured
convertible  notes may increase if the market price of our stock  declines.  All
the shares,  including all of the shares  issuable upon  conversion of the notes
and upon exercise of our warrants, may be sold without restriction.  The sale of
these shares may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

                                       11


The  continuously  adjustable  conversion  price feature of our callable secured
convertible  notes could require us to issue a  substantially  greater number of
shares, which will cause dilution to our existing stockholders.

         Our obligation to issue shares upon conversion of our callable  secured
convertible notes is essentially  limitless.  The following is an example of the
amount of shares of common stock that are issuable upon conversion of $2,500,000
principal  amount of  callable  secured  convertible  notes  (excluding  accrued
interest),  based on market prices 25%, 50%, and 75% below the market price,  as
of June 22, 2005 of $.07.



    % Below    Price Per     With 40%       Number of             % of
     Market      Share       Discount     Shares Issuable     Outstanding*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     25%       $.0525         $.0315         79,365,079         278.2%5,2389
     50%       $.0350         $.0210        119,047,6199        417.3%5,2389
     75%       $.0175         $.0105        238,095,2389        834.5%5,2389
         
*Based on 28,530,074 shares outstanding.

         As  illustrated,  the number of shares of common  stock  issuable  upon
conversion of our callable secured convertible notes will increase if the market
price  of our  stock  declines,  which  will  cause  dilution  to  our  existing
stockholders.

The continuously  adjustable conversion price feature of our secured convertible
notes may  encourage  investors to make short sales in our common  stock,  which
could have a depressive effect on the price of our common stock.

         The callable secured  convertible  notes are convertible into shares of
our common  stock at a 40%  discount  to the trading  price of the common  stock
prior to the conversion.  The significant  downward pressure on the price of the
common stock as the selling  stockholders  convert and sell  material  amounts o
common stock could encourage short sales by investors.  This could place further
downward  pressure on the price of the common  stock.  The selling  stockholders
could sell common  stock into the market in  anticipation  of covering the short
sale by  converting  their  securities,  which could cause the further  downward
pressure on the stock  price.  In addition,  not only the sale of shares  issued
upon  conversion or exercise of notes,  warrants and options,  but also the mere
perception that these sales could occur,  may adversely  affect the market price
of the common stock.

The issuance of shares upon conversion of the callable secured convertible notes
and  exercise  of  outstanding  warrants  may cause  immediate  and  substantial
dissolution to our existing stockholders.

         The issuance of shares upon conversion of callable secured  convertible
notes and  exercise  of warrants  may result i  substantial  dissolution  to the
interests of other  stockholders  since the selling  stockholders may ultimately
convert and sell the full amount  issuable on  conversion.  Although the selling
stockholders  may not convert their callable  secured  convertible  notes and/or
exercise their warrants if such conversion or exercise price would cause them to
own more than 4.99% of our outstanding  common stock,  this restriction does not
prevent the selling stockholders from converting and/or exercising some of their
holdings  and then  converting  the rest of their  holdings.  In this  way,  the
selling  stockholders  could sell more than this limit while never  holding more
than this  limit.  There is no upper  limit on the number of shares  that may be
issued,  which will have the effect of further diluting the proportionate equity
interest and voting power of holders of our common stock

If we are  required  for any reason to repay our  outstanding  callable  secured
convertible  notes,  we would be required to deplete  our  working  capital,  if
available,  or raise additional funds. Our failure to repay the callable secured
convertible  notes, if required,  could result in legal action against us, which
could require us to curtail or cease operations.

         On April 27, 2005, we entered into a securities  purchase agreement for
the sale of an  aggregate of  $2,500,000  principal  amount of callable  secured
convertible  notes. The callable secured  convertible notes are due and payable,
with 8% interest three years from the date of issuance,  unless sooner converted
into shares of our common stock.  Although we currently have $1,650,000 callable
secured  convertible notes outstanding,  the investors are obligated to purchase
additional  callable  secured  convertible  notes  in the  aggregate  amount  of
$850,000.  Any event of default  such as our failure to repay the  principal  or
interest  when due, our failure to issue shares of common stock upon  conversion
by the holder,  our failure to timely file a  registration  statement or to have
such  registration  statement  declared  effective,   breach  of  any  covenant,
representation  or  warranty in the  securities  purchase  agreement  or related
convertible  notes,  the  assignment or  appointment  of a receiver to control a
substantial  part of our property or business,  the filing of a money  judgment,
writ  or  similar  process  against  our  company  in  excess  of  $50,000,  the
commencement  of  a  bankruptcy,   insolvency,   reorganization  or  liquidation
proceeding  against our  company, and the  delisting  of our common  stock could
require the early repayment of the callable secured convertible notes, including
a default interest rate of 15% on the outstanding principal balance of the notes
if the default i not cured within the specified grace period. We anticipate that
the full amount of callable  secured  convertible  notes will be converted  into
shares of our common stock, in accordance with the terms of the callable secured

                                       12


convertible notes. If we are required to repay the callable secured  convertible
notes,  we would  be  required  to use our  limited  working  capital and  raise
additional  funds.  If we were  unable  to repay the notes  when  required,  the
noteholders  could  commence legal action against us and foreclose on all of our
assets to recover the amounts due.  Any such action would  require us to curtail
or cease operations.

Failure to obtain  stockholder  approval  to increase  the number of  authorized
shares to two times the number of shares  issuable  upon full  conversion of the
callable  secured  convertible  notes and  exercise of warrants  could result in
legal  action  against  us,  which  could  require  us to  curtain or cease  our
operations.

         We have scheduled an annual meeting of stockholders on July 29, 2005 to
approve a proposed amendment to the certificate of incorporation to increase the
number  of  authorized   shares  of  common  stock  from  80,000,000  shares  to
250,000,000  shares. The terms of the callable secured convertible notes and the
securities  purchase  agreement that we entered into on April 27, 2005 with four
accredited  investors  requires  us to have  authorized,  and  reserved  for the
purpose of issuance,  two times the number of shares actually issuable upon full
conversion  of the  callable  secured  convertible  notes  and  exercise  of the
warrants based on the conversion price of the notes or the exercise price of the
warrants  in  effect  from  time to  time.  We  have  allocated  and  registered
183,201,059  shares to cover the conversion of the callable secured  convertible
notes and exercise of the warrants.

         In the event we are unable to obtain  stockholder  approval at the July
29, 2005 annual  stockholders  meeting to amend the certificate of incorporation
to increase the number of authorized  shares to 250,000,000  shares, we would be
required to pay to the  noteholders a standard  liquidated  damages of 3% of the
outstanding  amount of the  callable  secured  convertible  notes per month plus
accrued  interest  on the notes,  in cash or shares of our  common  stock at our
option.  If we elect to pay the  noteholders  the  standard  liquidated  damages
amount  in  share  of our  common  stock,  such  shares  will be  issued  at the
conversion  price  at the  time of  payment.  In  addition,  failure  to  obtain
stockholder  approval to increase the number of  authorized  shares to two times
the number of shares  issuable upon full conversion of the notes and exercise of
the warrants would constitute an event of default under the securities  purchase
agreement.  If we were unable to obtain  stockholder  approval  to increase  the
number of authorized shares, as required in the securities  purchase  agreement,
the  noteholders  could commence legal action against us and foreclose on all of
our assets to recover  damages.  Any such action would  require us to curtail or
cease operations.

If we are unable to obtain additional capital, we would be required to eliminate
certain activities that would adversely effect our operations.

         We may  require  substantial  funds  for  various  purposes,  including
continuing research and development,  expanding clinical trials,  completing the
FDA approval  process for our products  (including the Photon(TM) laser system),
and  manufacturing  and  marketing our existing  products.  We will need to seek
additional capital,  possibly through public or private sales of our securities,
in order to fund our activities on a long-term basis.  Adequate funds may not be
available  when  needed or on terms  acceptable  to us.  Insufficient  funds may
require us to delay,  scale back or eliminate certain or all of our research and
development  programs or to license third parties to  commercialize  products or
technologies  that we would  otherwise  seek to  develop  ourselves,  which  may
materially adversely affect our continued operations.

Our research activities may not result in any commercially profitable products.

         The science and technology of medical  products,  including  lasers, is
rapidly evolving.  Our medical systems may require significant further research,
development,  testing and  regulatory  clearances.  They are also subject to the
risks of failure  inherent in the  development  of products  based on innovative
technologies.  These  risks  include  the  possibility  that  any  or all of the
proposed  products  will prove to be  ineffective  or unsafe;  that they fail to
receive  necessary  regulatory  clearances;   that  the  proposed  products  are
uneconomical;  that  others  hold  proprietary  rights  which  preclude  us from
marketing such products; or that others market better products.  Accordingly, we
are unable to predict  whether our  research  and  development  activities  will
result in any commercially  profitable  products.  Further,  due to the extended
testing and  regulatory  review process  required,  we may be unable to sell our
current and proposed  products.  There is also no guarantee that we will be able
to develop and sell a glaucoma surgery system.

We are uncertain of obtaining FDA approval for our  Photon(TM)  laser system and
further  development  of the Photon(TM) is on hold until our financial situation
improves, and we may lose our rights to manufacture or sell the Photon(TM) laser
system if we are unable to agree on the correct  method of  calculating  royalty
payments under a license agreement.

         We  are  subject  to  substantial  regulation  by  the  Food  and  Drug
Administration  or FDA and other  federal  and state  regulatory  agencies.  FDA
regulations  require  us to obtain  either  510(k)  clearance  or  pre-marketing
approval prior to marketing a product in the United States.  We are also subject
to foreign  regulation and must receive  various types of approvals from foreign
government  agencies  prior to  selling  our  products  in some  countries.  The
clearance  and  approval  processes  for  both  the FDA and  foreign  regulatory
authorities  are costly,  time  consuming  and  uncertain.  In addition,  we are
required to obtain FDA approval before  exporting a device that has not received
FDA  marketing  clearance  or  approval.  We may never be able to  obtain  these
required  government  approvals Delays or failure to obtain such approvals would
materially and adversely  effect us, as would changes in existing  requirements.
We have  received  510(k)  clearance  from  the FDA for our  ultrasonic  surgery
systems  allowing  us to sell both  devices in the United  States.  We have also
received 510(k) clearance to market our Blood Flow Analyzer(TM).

                                       13


         In May 1995, we were granted an  investigational  device  exemption for
our Photon(TM)  laser system allowing us to conduct  clinical studies in support
of our application with the FDA to obtain approval to market the system.  During
the clinical  trials,  we discovered  that the  Photon(TM)  laser system may not
effectively remove hard (dense or impacted) cataracts.  In May 1998, we received
FDA clearance to conduct  clinical tests on soft  cataracts.  We believe the FDA
will approve our 510(k)  predicate  device  application for the Photon(TM) laser
system  because in the United States most  cataracts  are removed  before tissue
hardens.   We  received  an  FDA  warning  letter  in  August  2000   concerning
deficiencies   in  the  Phase  I  clinical  trials  and,  after  making  several
submissions  to the FDA,  we  received a letter  from the FDA in  February  2001
stating that the  deficiencies  had been corrected and the clinical trials could
continue.

         We have completed the authorized clinical studies and, in October 2001,
made a supplemental  submission to the FDA regarding the 510(k) application.  We
received a  preliminary  review from the FDA of our  supplemental  submission in
December  2001  and  submitted  additional  clinical  information  to the FDA on
February 6, 2002. On May 7, 2002,  we received a letter from the FDA  requesting
further clinical information.  We have generated additional clinical information
in response to the letter and are  uncertain if we will make a submission to the
FDA with the additional  clinical  information.  Because of the "going  concern"
status of the  company,  management  has focused  efforts on those  products and
activities  that will,  in its  opinion,  achieve  the most  resource  efficient
short-term cash flow to the company.  As reflected in the results for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2003,  diagnostic products are currently our major focus
and the Photon(TM) and other extensive  research and  development  projects have
been put on hold pending future evaluation when our financial position improves.
Our focus is not on any  specific  diagnostic  product or products but rather on
our entire group of diagnostic products.

         We have also  received  FDA  approval  to  manufacture  and  export the
Photon(TM)  laser  system  internationally.  However,  we have not yet  obtained
approval from some foreign  countries to market the laser product where approval
is necessary. We anticipate that many contemplated applications of our currently
existing and planned products will be subject to the lengthy regulatory approval
process, including preclinical studies, clinical trials and extensive regulatory
review.  This  process  could take many years and  require  the  expenditure  of
substantial resources.

         The Photon(TM)  laser system is protected  under a United States patent
issued  to Daniel M.  Eichenbaum,  M.D.  in 1987 and  subsequently  assigned  to
PhotoMed  International,  Inc. and a Japanese  patent issued to us in 1997.  The
United  States  patent  expired in  September  2004.  We secured  the  exclusive
worldwide  rights to this patent from  PhotoMed by means of a license  agreement
dated July 7, 1993. The license  agreement expires when the United States patent
rights  expire in September  2004.  PhotoMed and Dr.  Eichenbaum  brought  legal
action  against us on September 11, 2000  involving an amount of royalties  that
are  allegedly  due and owing to them from the sale of equipment by us under the
license agreement.

         We have paid  $14,736 to bring all royalty  payments up to date through
June 30, 2001. We have been working with  PhotoMed and Dr.  Eichenbaum to insure
that the royalty  calculations  have been correctly made. It is anticipated that
once the parties  agree on the correct  royalty  calculations,  the legal action
will be  dismissed.  However,  if the parties are unable to agree on a method of
calculating royalties,  there is risk that PhotoMed and Dr. Eichenbaum may amend
the complaint to request termination of the license agreement and, if successful
we would lose our rights to manufacture or sell the Photo(TM) laser system.

Purchasers of our common shares will experience dilution if a threatened lawsuit
by Douglas A. MacLeod,  M.D. and related entities  succeeds on its claims and we
are required to issue additional common shares and warrants to them.

         We received demand letters dated July 18, 2003,  September 26, 2003 and
November 10, 2003 from counsel for Douglas A. MacLeod,  M.D., a  shareholder  of
the  company.  In the July 18, 2003  letter,  Dr.  MacLeod  demands  that he and
certain  entities  with which he is involved or controls,  namely the Douglas A.
MacLeod, M.D. Profit Sharing Trust, St. Marks' Eye Institute and Milan Holdings,
Ltd., be issued a total of 2,296,667  shares of our common stock and warrants to
purchase  1,192,500  shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $.25 per
share. Dr. MacLeod claims that these common shares and warrants are owing to him
and the related  entities  under the terms of a mutual release dated January 16,
2003,  which he and the  related  entities  entered  into with us.  Dr.  MacLeod
renewed his  request  for these  additional  common  shares and  warrants in the
September  26, 2003 and  November 10, 2003 demand  letters.  We believe that Dr.
MacLeod's  claims and  assertions  are without merit and that neither he nor the
related  entities are entitled to any  additional  shares of our common stock or
any additional  warrants under the terms of the mutual release.  However, if Dr.
MacLeod succeeds on his claims,  there would be dilution  associated with having
to issue additional common shares and warrants to him and the related entities.

Our products may become obsolete due to rapid technological change.

         Our market is subject to rapid  technological  change.  Development  by
others of new or  improved  products,  processes  or  technologies  may make our
products obsolete or less competitive.  Accordingly,  we must continue investing
in  research  and  development  on our  existing  products  and to  develop  new
products.  Despite  such  investment,  our current or proposed  products  may be
unsuccessful.

                                       14


Our Photon(TM)  laser system could receive  competition from other laser systems
that are well financed with well- recognized trade names.

         Our Photon(TM) laser system will potentially  receive  competition from
other laser systems, such as excimer, holmium (Ho:YAG),  Erbium (Er:YAG), Nd:YLF
(Neodymium:Yttrium-Lithium-Fluoride)   or   lasers   of  other   wave   lengths.
Competition  may also  come  from  other  medical  devices  and  other  surgical
techniques.  Further,  the cataract  surgical  device industry is dominated by a
small number of large  competitors that are well established in the marketplace,
have experienced management,  are well financed and have a well recognized trade
name related to their product lines.  We may be unable to penetrate the existing
market and  acquire a  sufficient  market  share to be  profitable.  Significant
competitive factors that will affect future sales include regulatory  approvals,
performance,   pricing,  timely  product  shipment,  safety,  customer  support,
convenience of use and patient and general market acceptance.

Our new products may incur unexpected  production  problems,  which would impact
our sales and profits.

         New  ventures,  particularly  those  involved  in  a  highly  technical
industry such as the medical industry,  have substantial  inherent risks.  These
risks  are  in  three   general   areas:   technical,   mechanical   and  human.
Notwithstanding any pre- production planning,  new products can incur unexpected
problems in full-scale production, which cannot always be foreseen or accurately
predicted.  Designs can become  unworkable,  for  unpredicted  reasons.  Quality
control and component  sourcing failures can also be expected from time to time.
Any business,  including ours, is substantially  dependent upon the capabilities
and performance of both management, engineering and sales personnel. Mistakes in
judgment or  performance  can be costly and,  in certain  instances,  disabling.
Therefore,  management  skill,  experience,  character  and  reliability  are of
significant importance.

Mistakes may occur in the design and  manufacture  of our products,  which could
prevent or limit the sales of such products.

         The high-technology product line requires us to deal with suppliers and
subcontractors    supplying   highly   specialized   parts,   operating   highly
sophisticated  and narrow  tolerance  equipment and performing  highly technical
calculations.  Components must be custom designed and manufactured, which is not
only  complicated  and  expensive,  but can also  require  a number of months to
accomplish.  Slight  mistakes in either the design or manufacture  can result in
unsatisfactory parts that may not be correctable.  Because our business requires
the talents of various  professions,  mistakes  from very slight  oversights  or
miscommunications  can  occur,  resulting  not only in  costly  delays  and lost
orders,  but  also in  disagreements  regarding  liability  and,  in any  event,
extended delays in production.  Moreover,  we rely on suppliers that are related
to each other for parts and equipment.  When dealing with related  suppliers the
terms on which parts and  equipment  are  purchased  may not be as  favorable as
could be obtained from unrelated third-party suppliers.

We are dependent upon a limited number of key suppliers for components and parts
used in our products and the  interruption in the supply of these components and
parts could impede our ability to deliver our products to market.

         We currently purchase  components and parts used in our products from a
limited number of key suppliers. Although we maintain alternative suppliers, our
reliance on our  principal  suppliers  could  result in delays  associated  with
redesigning  a product  due to an  inability  to obtain  an  adequate  supply of
required  components and parts,  and reduced  control over pricing,  quality and
timely delivery.  The loss of any of these principal  suppliers or the inability
of  a  supplier  to  meet  performance  and  quality  specifications,  requested
quantities  or  delivery  schedules  could cause our  revenues  to  decline.  In
addition,  any  interruption  or  discontinuance  in the supply of components or
parts could have an adverse  effect on our  business,  results of operation  and
financial  condition.  Further,  a  significant  price  increase from any of our
principal  suppliers  could  cause our  profitability  to  decline  if we cannot
increase the prices of our products to our  customers.  Our principal  suppliers
include Capistrano Labs, U.S. Ultrasound and Anello.

No independent marketing studies have been made to confirm the commercial demand
for the Photon(TM) laser system and the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM).

         We  believe  that  there  is  substantial  commercial  demand  for  our
Photon(TM)  laser  system  and our  Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM)  for the eyes at a
profitable  price.  However,  this  belief is solely  based on our  management's
experience and judgment.  At this time, there have been no independent marketing
studies by  independent  professional  marketing  firms to reliably  confirm the
extent of this demand, the price ranges within which it exists and the amount of
promotion necessary to exploit whatever demand does exist.

                                       15


Our Photon(TM)  laser system may not be accepted in the  marketplace  because it
does not remove hard cataracts.

         Our products may not be accepted in the  marketplace.  Such  acceptance
will depend on a number of factors  including  receiving  regulatory  approvals,
demonstrating  the safety,  and advantages of our products over existing systems
and  techniques.  Our Photon(TM)  laser system may never gain market  acceptance
since the system does not effectively remove hard (dense or impacted) cataracts.
Further,  we may be unable to  successfully  market  our  products  even if they
perform    successfully    in   clinical    applications.    Our    Precisionist
ThirtyThousand(TM)  Workstation(TM) may not gain acceptance unless we can reduce
or eliminate  the vacuum surge and develop  additional,  complementary  surgical
devices for installation in that host system.  Vacuum surge is a phenomenon that
occurs when the tip of the  ultrasonic  needle is obstructed  by target  tissue,
allowing  pressure to build up and, if the pressure is not  released,  a rush of
fluid goes from the chamber of the eye into the needle to equalize the pressure.
The result can be  complications  to the eye such as posterior  capsule rupture,
iris capture and chamber collapse.  We believe this phenomenon affects all other
ultrasonic cataract removal systems currently on the market.

Our pending  patents may not be perfected and our present or future  patents may
infringe  upon the  patents of  others,  which  could  restrict  or prevent  the
manufacture and sale of our products.

         We depend on our  ability to  license  and  obtain  patents  and on the
adherence to confidentiality  agreements executed by employees,  consultants and
third-parties  to  maintain  the  proprietary  nature of our  technology  and to
operate without  infringing on the proprietary rights of others. A United States
patent issued in 1987 to Daniel M.  Eichenbaum,  M.D.  protects our laser probe.
These patent rights expired in September 2004. Patents have also been granted to
the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) in the United States and the United Kingdom,  to the
Dicon(TM)  Topographer in the United States,  and to the Dicon(TM)  Perimeter in
the United States,  the United  Kingdom,  Germany and  Switzerland.  The pending
patents may not be perfected.  Also, our present or future products may be found
to infringe upon the patents of others. If our products are found to infringe on
the patents,  or otherwise  impermissibly  utilize the intellectual  property of
others, our development, manufacture and sale of such products could be severely
restricted or prohibited.  We may be required to obtain licenses to utilize such
patents or proprietary rights of others and acceptable terms may be unavailable.
If we do not obtain  such  licenses,  the  development,  manufacture  or sale of
products  requiring such licenses  would be materially  adversely  affected.  In
addition,  we could  incur  substantial  costs in  defending  ourselves  against
challenges  to our patents or  infringement  claims made by third  parties or in
enforcing any patents we may obtain.

Because  patents  only provide  limited  protection,  others  could  produce and
distribute  products  similar to the Photon(TM)  laser system and the Blood Flow
Analyzer(TM).

         We rely on the  protections  for our  products  that we hope to realize
under the United  States and  foreign  patent  laws.  However,  patents  provide
limited  protections.  We  have a  United  States  and  Japanese  patent  on the
hand-held probe design and  applications  for various foreign patents are either
pending or planned, and the patents for the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) for the eyes
are  reported  by Ocular  Blood Flow,  Ltd. to have been  approved in the United
States and the United Kingdom. Similar devices,  however, could be designed that
do not  infringe on our patent  rights,  but that are similar  enough to compete
against our patented products.  Moreover,  it is possible that an unpatented but
prior  existing  device or design may exist that has never been made  public and
therefore is not known to us or the industry in general.  Such a device could be
introduced into the market without infringing on our current patent. If any such
competing  non-infringing  devices  are  produced  and  distributed,  our profit
potential  would  be  seriously  limited,   which  would  seriously  impair  our
viability.

Some of our products may be denied  reimbursement by third-party payors, such as
government programs and private insurance plans.

         We anticipate  that our medical  devices will generally be purchased by
ophthalmologists  and hospitals that will then bill various  third-party payors,
such as government  programs and private  insurance  plans,  for the health care
services provided to their patients.  Government agencies generally reimburse at
a fixed rate based on the procedure performed.  Some of the potential procedures
for which our medical devices may be used, however,  may be denied reimbursement
as elective.  In addition,  third-party  payors may deny  reimbursement  if they
determine  that the use of our  products  was  unnecessary,  inappropriate,  not
cost-effective,  experimental  or used for a  non-approved  indication.  Certain
purchasers of our Blood Flow Analyzer,(TM),  for example, have had difficulty in
obtaining  reimbursement  from  insurance  carriers.  Even  if  we  receive  FDA
clearances  for  our  products,   third-party   payors  may  nevertheless   deny
reimbursement. Furthermore, third-party payors increasingly challenge the prices
charged for medical  products  and  services.  Reimbursement  from third-  party
payors may be unavailable  or if available,  that  reimbursement  may be limited
when compared with reimbursement for competitive procedures,  thereby materially
adversely affecting our ability to profitably sell products.  The market for our
products  could also be adversely  affected by recent federal  legislation  that
reduces  reimbursements  under the capital cost pass-through  system utilized in
connection  with the Medicare  program.  Failure by hospitals and other users of
our  products  to obtain  reimbursement  from  third-party  payors or changes in
government and private  third-party  payors' policies toward  reimbursement  for
procedures employing our products would have a material adverse effect on us.

                                       16


Congress  may  introduce  legislation  that  could  result in price  limits  and
utilization controls on our products.

         Members of Congress have  introduced  legislation  to change aspects of
the delivery and financing of health care services.  Such legislation to control
or reduce public (Medicare and Medicaid) and private spending on health care, to
reform the  methods of payment  for health  care goods and  services by both the
public and private sectors,  and to provide  universal access to health care may
be passed.  We cannot predict what form this  legislation may take or the effect
of such  legislation  on our  business.  It is  possible  that  the  legislation
ultimately enacted by Congress will contain provisions resulting in price limits
and utilization  controls which may reduce the rate of increase in the growth of
the ophthalmic laser market or otherwise  adversely  affect our business.  It is
also  possible  that future  legislation  could result in  modifications  to the
nation's  public and private  health  care  insurance  systems  that will affect
reimbursement  policies in a manner  adverse to us. We also cannot  predict what
other  legislation  relating to our business or the health care  industry may be
enacted,  including legislation relating to third-party  reimbursement,  or what
effect legislation may have on the results of our operations.

Our product  liability  insurance could be inadequate to cover liabilities if we
face significant product liability claims against us.

         The nature of our business  exposes it to risk from  product  liability
claims  and there can be no  assurance  that we can  avoid  significant  product
liability  exposure.  We maintain product liability insurance providing coverage
up to $2,000,000 per claim with an aggregate  policy limit of $2,000,000.  There
is  substantial  doubt that this amount of insurance  would be adequate to cover
liabilities should we face significant  claims. A successful  products liability
claim brought  against us could have a material  adverse effect on our business,
operating results and financial condition.  Further, product liability insurance
is becoming increasingly  expensive,  and there can be no assurance that we will
successfully  maintain adequate product liability insurance at acceptable rates,
or at all. Should we be unable to maintain adequate product liability insurance,
our ability to market our products would be significantly  impaired.  Any losses
that we may suffer from future  liability  claims or a voluntary or  involuntary
recall of our products and the damage that any product  liability  litigation or
voluntary or involuntary  recall may do to the reputation and  marketability  of
our products  would have a material  adverse  effect on our business,  operating
results and financial condition.

Our future products sales in foreign countries could be adversely  affected by a
significant  increase  in value of the U.S.  dollar  against  local  currencies,
economic and political instability,  and changes in the regulatory processes and
other regulations.

         We anticipate  that a significant  portion of our future  product sales
will be in foreign  countries.  Because we quote  prices  for our  products  and
accept payment on sales principally in U.S. dollars, any significant increase in
the value of the U.S. dollar against local currencies may make our products less
competitive  with foreign  products.  The economic and political  instability of
some  foreign  countries  also may affect the  ability of  ophthalmologists  and
others to purchase our  products,  or the ability of potential  customers to pay
for the procedures for which our products are used. In addition,  other specific
risks in doing business in foreign  countries  include changes in the regulatory
processes affecting our products,  in controls governing foreign payments by our
customers, and in regulations, taxes and customs duties or requirements that may
be imposed on the  purchase of our  products.  The foreign  countries  where our
products  are  sold  include  but  are  not  limited  to  Argentina,  Australia,
Bangladesh,  Borneo,  Brazil,  Canada,  China,  Czechoslovakia,  Egypt,  France,
Germany,  Greece,  Hong  Kong,  India,  Israel,  Italy,  Japan,  Jordan,  Korea,
Malaysia,  Mexico, New Zealand,  Pakistan,  Peru,  Poland,  Puerto Rico, Russia,
Saudi Arabia,  Spain, Sri Lanka, Taiwan,  Thailand,  Turkey, United Kingdom, and
United Arab Emirates. Certain of countries may experience political, economic or
social instability, which could adversely affect our sales.

The market price of our securities could fluctuate significantly.

         Our  common  stock and Class A  warrants  were  delisted  on The Nasdaq
SmallCap Market  effective June 26, 2003 and currently trade on the OTC Bulletin
Board. Factors such as announcements by us of the regulatory status of products,
quarterly  variations  in our  financial  results,  the gain or loss of material
contracts, changes in management,  regulatory changes, trends in the industry or
stock market and announcements by competitors,  among other things,  could cause
the market price of such securities to fluctuate significantly.

We may issue  preferred  shares  with  preferences  in an equal or prior rank to
existing preferred shares.

         Our certificate of  incorporation  authorizes the issuance of shares of
"blank check" preferred  stock,  which will have such  designations,  rights and
preferences  as our  board  of  directors  may  determine  from  time  to  time.
Accordingly,  our Board of Directors is empowered,  without stockholder approval
(but  subject  to  applicable  government  regulatory  restrictions),  to  issue
preferred stock with dividend,  liquidation,  conversion, voting or other rights
that could  adversely  affect the voting power or other rights of the holders of
our common stock. Those terms and conditions may include preferences on an equal
or prior rank to existing  preferred  stock.  Those shares may be issued on such
terms and for such  consideration  as the board then deems  reasonable  and such

                                       17


stock  shall  then  rank  equally  in  all  aspects  of  the  series  and on the
preferences and conditions so provided,  regardless of when issued. In the event
of  such  issuance,  the  preferred  stock  could  be  utilized,  under  certain
circumstances,  as a method of discouraging,  delaying or preventing a change in
control of our company.  As of May 31, 2005, the following preferred shares were
issued and  outstanding:  5,627 shares of Series A preferred  stock  convertible
into 6,753 common shares;  8,986 shares of Series B preferred stock  convertible
into 10,783 common shares;  no shares of Series C preferred stock;  5,000 shares
of Series D preferred stock  convertible into 8,750 common shares;  1,000 shares
of Series E preferred  stock  convertible  into 53,333 common  shares;  4,598.75
shares of Series F preferred stock  convertible into 245,267 common shares;  and
1,726,560  shares of Series G preferred stock  convertible into 1,726,560 common
shares.

Our preferred  shares have rights that amount to a preference over the shares of
this offering.

         Our preferred  shares have dividend and liquidation  rights that amount
to preferences over the shares of this offering.  We must pay any cash dividends
to our holders of preferred  shares before paying cash  dividends to the holders
of the shares of this offering.  The dividend rights of our preferred shares are
as follows: for Series A and Series B preferred shares, $.24 per share per annum
payable,  at our option, in cash from surplus  earnings;  for Series C preferred
shares,  12%  noncumulative  preferred shares payable,  at our option, in common
stock or cash from  surplus  earnings;  and for  Series D, E, F and G  preferred
shares, 8% non-cumulative  preferred dividends payable, at our option, in common
stock  or cash  from  surplus  earnings.  Upon  our  liquidation,  we  must  pay
preferential  distributions  to our  preferred  shareholders  before  paying any
distributions to holders of the shares of this offering.  The liquidation rights
of our preferred shares are as follows: for Series A preferred shares, $1.00 per
share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends;  for Series B preferred shares,  $4.00
per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends; for Series C preferred shares, the
stated  value of $100.00 per share,  plus  declared  but unpaid  dividends;  for
Series D preferred  shares,  the stated value of $1.75 per share,  plus declared
but unpaid dividends;  for Series E, F, and G preferred  shares,  the greater of
(i) the amount of distributions  such shares would have received had the holders
converted  such  preferred  shares  into  common  stock   immediately  prior  to
liquidation,  or (ii) the stated value of $100.00 per share,  plus  declared but
unpaid dividends.

Exercise of outstanding  options and warrants will dilute existing  stockholders
and could decrease the market price of our common stock

         As of May 31, 2005, we had issued and outstanding  28,530,074 shares of
our  common  stock,  shares  of  Series  A,  B, D,  E, F and G  preferred  stock
convertible into 3,051,446  shares of common stock, and outstanding  options and
warrants to purchase 19,672,881 additional shares of common stock. The existence
of the outstanding  preferred shares,  options and warrants may adversely affect
the market  price of our common  stock and the terms under which we could obtain
additional  equity  capital.  Included in the  outstanding  options is 1,000,000
options issued to John Y. Yoon, our President and Chief Executive Officer, under
the terms of his employment  agreement with us. These options are exercisable at
$.13 per  share and vest in 36 equal  monthly  installments  of  27,778  shares,
beginning on April 30, 2004 until such shares are fully vested.

We do not expect to pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

         We issued a stock dividend on our Series A preferred stock and Series B
preferred stock on January 8, 1996, to stockholders of record as of December 31,
1994. We have not paid any cash dividends on our common shares and do not expect
to declare or pay any cash or other dividends in the foreseeable  future so that
we may reinvest  earnings,  if any, into the  development  of the business.  The
holders of our Series A  preferred  stock,  Series B preferred  stock,  Series C
preferred stock,  Series D preferred stock,  Series E preferred stock,  Series F
preferred stock and Series G preferred stock are entitled to non-cumulative cash
dividends paid out of surplus earnings.

We may have  continuing  liability  following  our  rescission  offer in 1996 to
Series B preferred shareholders.

         We issued 493,000 shares of Series B preferred  stock in 1994 and 1995.
The Series B shares may not have been sold in compliance with certain aspects of
California  corporate law and federal and state  securities  laws.  Concurrently
with our July 1996 public offering, we provided the Series B shareholders with a
rescission  offer to  repurchase  all Series B  preferred  shares or  rescission
shares  owned by the  Series B  shareholders.  The  Series B  shareholders  were
offered the right to rescind  their  purchases and receive a refund of the price
paid by them of $4.00 per share plus an amount equal to the interest  thereon at
rates ranging from 6% to 12% per annum from the date the rescission  shares were
purchased  to July 25,  1996,  the  date our  public  offering  closed  and each
rescinding  shareholder was paid by us. The original purchasers of approximately
93% of the Series B shares  (460,250  shares)  rejected the rescission  offer by
responding  as  requested  in the  rescission  offer or by  failing  to return a
response  within 30 days of receiving the  rescission  offer.  Two  shareholders
owning a combined  total of 32,750  shares  accepted the  rescission  offer.  We
purchased the 32,750 shares from the two  shareholders  accepting the rescission
offer from the proceeds from our public offering.

         The  rescission  offer was  designed  to reduce any type of  contingent
liability  we may be subject to in  connection  with its  private  placement  of
Series B  preferred  stock.  However,  the  rescission  offer may not have fully
relieved  us from  exposure  to  contingent  liability  under  federal  or state
securities laws. Not every state statutorily  provides for voluntary  rescission

                                       18


offers. In addition,  other states,  although authorizing  rescission offers, do
not completely limit the liability of the offeror.  Thus, we may have continuing
liability in certain  states  following  the  rescission  offer.  Other than the
payments in 1996 to the two shareholders accepting the rescission offer, we have
made no additional  payments  thereunto as no other shareholder has accepted the
rescission  offer.  Moreover,  there  has been no  litigation  by a  shareholder
involving  the private  offering of Series B preferred  stock or the  rescission
offer. As of May 31, 2005, a total of 484,014 shares of Series B preferred stock
have been converted  into 580,817  shares of common stock.  There are a total of
8,986  shares of Series B  preferred  stock  issued and  outstanding,  which are
convertible into 10,783 shares of common stock.

Because  we failed to hold an annual  shareholders  meeting  in fiscal  2003 and
fiscal 2004,  the Delaware  Court of Chancery may order an annual  meeting to be
held upon request by a shareholder.

         We did not hold an annual meeting of the  shareholders  for fiscal 2003
or fiscal 2004 in order to avoid the costs of such a meeting, including the cost
of  preparing  and mailing a proxy  statement  and annual  report to each of our
shareholders.  There  were no  actions  taken  in 2003 or 2004 by the  board  of
directors or our management that required shareholder  approval.  Under Delaware
law, we are required to hold an annual shareholders meeting each year. A failure
to hold an annual shareholders meeting does not affect otherwise valid corporate
acts or  work a  forfeiture  or  dissolution  of the  company.  Moreover,  under
Delaware law, directors continue to serve as directors despite lack of an annual
shareholders  meeting until the next annual shareholders meeting and until their
successors  have been  elected  and  qualified.  However,  if we fail to hold an
annual shareholders meeting for a period of 30 days after the date designated in
our bylaws for the annual  meeting,  the Delaware Court of Chancery may order an
annual meeting to be held upon the application of any of our shareholders. If an
annual  meeting is  ordered to be held by the court,  we would have to incur the
costs of holding the meeting,  including  the cost of preparing  and mailing the
proxy  statement  and annual report to each of our  shareholders.  We anticipate
holding an annual shareholders meeting on July 29, 2005.

We have indemnification  agreements with certain officers and directors that may
require us to indemnify them in a civil or criminal action.

         Our certificate of  incorporation  eliminates in certain  circumstances
the  liability of directors for monetary  damages for breach of their  fiduciary
duty as directors. We have entered into indemnification  agreements with certain
directors and officers.  Each such  indemnification  agreement  provides that we
will indemnify the indemnitee against expenses,  including reasonable attorneys'
fees,  judgments,  penalties,  fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and
reasonably  incurred by him in connection  with any civil or criminal  action or
administrative  proceeding  arising  out of his  performance  of his duties as a
director or officer, other than an action instituted by the director or officer.
The indemnification  agreements will also require that we indemnify the director
or  other  party  thereto  in all  cases  to the  fullest  extent  permitted  by
applicable  law.  Each  indemnification  agreement  will permit the  director or
officer  that is party  thereto to bring suit to seek  recovery  of amounts  due
under the  indemnification  agreement and to recover the expenses of such a suit
if he or she is successful.

Our Board of Directors has the right to issue additional  shares of common stock
and to create a new  series of  preferred  stock that  could  dilute  holders of
common stock.

         Our board of directors has the inherent right under applicable Delaware
law, for whatever value the board deems  adequate,  to issue  additional  common
shares up to the limit of shares authorized by the certificate of incorporation,
and, upon such  issuance,  all holders of shares of common stock,  regardless of
when they are issued,  thereafter  generally rank equally in all aspects of that
class of stock,  regardless of when issued.  Our board of directors likewise has
the inherent  right,  limited only by applicable  Delaware law and provisions of
the Certificate of Incorporation to increase the number of preferred shares in a
series, to create a new series of preferred shares and to establish  preferences
and all other terms and conditions in regard to such  newly-created  series. Any
of those  actions  will dilute the holders of common  shares and also affect the
relative  position  of  the  holders  of  any  series  of  any  class.   Current
stockholders have no rights to prohibit such issuances nor inherent "preemptive"
rights to purchase any such stock when offered.


                                       19


                                 USE OF PROCEEDS

         Holders of our  warrants  are not  obligated  to exercise  any of their
warrants  and holders of our options are not  obligated to exercise any of their
options.  The  closing  bid price of our common  shares on the  Over-the-Counter
Bulletin  Board  was $.07 on June 22,  2005.  The  exercise  price of all of the
outstanding warrants and options exceeds the current trading price of our common
stock and, as a result,  the outstanding  warrants and options are not likely to
be exercised unless the trading price increases substantially. As a consequence,
most of the  outstanding  warrants  and options  are not likely to be  exercised
unless the trading price increases substantially. All other shares of our common
stock being registered are either  outstanding or will be issued upon conversion
of  outstanding  preferred  stock  and we  will  derive  no  proceeds  from  the
conversions or subsequent resales of such shares.

         If there are any net proceeds from this offering, we will use these net
proceeds to fund working capital requirements.  In the event sufficient proceeds
are not  received,  our short term plan is to meet cash needs  through  external
financing  sources such as bank  financing,  a public offering of our securities
and  private  offerings  of debt  and/or  equity.  We expect  the cash flow from
operations to provide additional funds for us as operating revenues increase.

         The cost,  timing and the amount of funds  required for such uses by us
cannot be previously determined at this time and will be based upon, among other
things,   competitive  developments,   the  rate  of  our  progress  in  product
development,  and the  availability  of  alternative  methods of  financing.  In
addition,  our Board of Directors has broad  discretion in  determining  how the
proceeds of this offering will be allocated.

                                 DIVIDEND POLICY

         We have never paid any cash  dividends  on our common  stock and do not
anticipate  paying any cash  dividends  on our common  stock in the  foreseeable
future.  Dividends paid in cash pursuant to outstanding  shares of our Series A,
Series C, Series D,  Series E,  Series F and Series G  preferred  stock are only
payable  from our surplus  earnings and are  non-cumulative  and  therefore,  no
deficiencies  in dividend  payments from one year will be carried forward to the
next.  We  currently  intend  to retain  future  earnings,  if any,  to fund the
development and growth of our proposed  business and operations.  Any payment of
cash  dividends  in the future on the common  stock will be  dependent  upon our
financial  condition,  results  of  operations,  current  and  anticipated  cash
requirements,  plans  for  expansion,  restrictions,  if  any,  under  any  debt
obligations,  as well as  other  factors  that  our  board  of  directors  deems
relevant.



                                       20


                                 CAPITALIZATION

         The following table sets forth our capitalization on an actual basis as
of December 31, 2004 and March 31, 2005.




                                                                           December 31,          March 31,
                                                                                 2004              2005        
                                                                         --------------        -------------
                                                                                                   
 Long-term obligations.................................................    $     14,000         $      5,000

 Stockholders' equity:

     Series A Preferred Stock, $.001 par value per share;
     500,000 shares authorized, 5,627 issued and outstanding...........               -                    -
                                                                                       
     Series B Preferred Stock, $.001 par value per share; 500,000                      
     shares authorized, 8,986 issued and outstanding...................               -                    -
                                                                                       
     Series C Preferred Stock, $.001 par value per share;                              
      30,000 shares authorized, 0 issued and outstanding...............               -                    -
                                                                                       
     Series D Preferred Stock, $.001 par value per share;                              
     1,140,000 shares authorized, 5,000 issued and outstanding.........               -                    -
                                                                                       
     Series E Preferred Stock, $.001 par value per share;                              
     50,000 shares authorized, 1,000 issued and outstanding............               -                    -
                                                                                       
     Series F Preferred Stock, $.001 par value per share; 50,000 shares                
     authorized, 5,623.75 and 4,597 issued and                                         
     outstanding, respectively.........................................               -                    -
                                                                                       
     Series G Preferred Stock, $.001 par value per share;                             
     2,000,000 shares authorized, 1,981,560 issued and outstanding.....           2,000                2,000

     Common Stock, $.001 par value per share; 80,000,000 shares authorized,
     25,627,764 and 28,280,074 issued and outstanding,
     respectively......................................................          25,000               28,000

     Additional paid-in-capital, common stock..........................
                                                                             57,470,000           57,669,000
     Accumulated deficit...............................................
                                                                            (56,807,000)         (57,130,000)
 Total stockholders' equity ...........................................
                                                                                690,000              569,000
 Total capitalization..................................................
                                                                           $    704,000         $    574,000


            MARKET FOR COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

         Our authorized  capital stock  consists of 80,000,000  shares of common
stock, $.001 par value per share, and 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock, $.001
par  value  per  share.  We have  created  seven  classes  of  preferred  stock,
designated  as Series A  preferred  stock,  Series B preferred  stock,  Series C
preferred stock , Series D preferred stock,  Series E preferred stock,  Series F
preferred stock and Series G preferred stock.

         Our  common  stock and Class A warrants  trade on the  Over-the-Counter
Bulletin Board under the respective  symbols of "PMED.OB" and "PMEDW.OB."  Prior
to July 22, 1996, there was no public market for the common stock. From July 22,
1996 to June 25, 2003,  our common stock and Class A warrants were listed on the
Nasdaq  SmallCap  Market.  Since June 25,  2003,  our  common  stock and Class A
warrants  have traded on the  Over-the-Counter  Bulletin  Board.  As of June 22,
2005,  the  closing  sale prices of the common  stock and Class A warrants  were
$0.07 per share and $.003 per warrant,  respectively. The following are the high
and low sale  prices  for the common  stock and Class A  warrants  by quarter as
reported  by  Nasdaq  from  January  1,  2000  to  June  25,  2003  and  by  the
Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board since June 25, 2003.

                                       21





                                                            Common Stock         Class A Warrants
                                                            Price Range             Price Range   
          Period (Calendar Year)                          High        Low        High          Low
                                                          ----        ---        ----          ---
                                                                                   
 2002
    First Quarter..................................       3.31         2.21       .38          .19
    Second Quarter.................................       1.91          .60       .32          .05
    Third Quarter..................................       1.50          .16       .20          .08
    Fourth Quarter.................................        .30          .13       .10          .01
 2003
    First Quarter..................................        .42          .14       .12          .01
    Second Quarter.................................        .74          .14       .44          .01
    Third Quarter..................................        .42          .18       .18          .01
    Fourth Quarter ................................        .24          .15       .10          .02
 2004
    First Quarter .................................        .21          .15       .05          .02
    Second Quarter ................................        .16          .07       .05          .03
    Third Quarter .................................        .12          .09       .03          .02
    Fourth Quarter ................................        .12          .08       .02          .02
 2005
    First Quarter .................................        .10          .08       .02          .02
    Second Quarter (through June 22, 2005).........        .10          .05     .0085         .002


         Our  Series A  preferred  stock,  Series B  preferred  stock,  Series C
preferred stock,  Series D preferred stock,  Series E preferred stock,  Series F
preferred stock and Series G preferred stock are not publicly traded.  As of May
31, 2005,  there were 717 record holders of common stock,  six record holders of
Series A preferred  stock,  four record holders of Series B preferred  stock, no
record  holders  of Series C  preferred  stock,  one  record  holder of Series D
preferred  stock,  14 record  holders  of Series E  preferred  stock,  52 record
holders  of  Series F  preferred  stock,  and two  record  holders  of  Series G
preferred stock.

         We have never paid any cash  dividends on our common stock and does not
anticipate  paying any cash  dividends  on our common  stock in the  foreseeable
future. We must pay cash dividends to holders of our Series A preferred,  Series
B preferred,  Series C preferred,  Series D preferred stock, Series E preferred,
Series F preferred stock and Series G preferred stock before it can pay any cash
dividend  to holders of our common  stock.  Dividends  paid in cash  pursuant to
outstanding  shares of our Series A,  Series B,  Series C,  Series D,  Series E,
Series  F and  Series  G  preferred  stock  are only  payable  from our  surplus
earnings,  and are  noncumulative  and therefore,  no  deficiencies  in dividend
payments from one year will be carried forward to the next.

         We  currently  intend to retain  future  earnings,  if any, to fund the
development and growth of our proposed  business and operations.  Any payment of
cash  dividends  in the future on the common  stock will be  dependent  upon our
financial  condition,  results  of  operations,  current  and  anticipated  cash
requirements,  plans  for  expansion,  restrictions,  if  any,  under  any  debt
obligations,  as well as  other  factors  that  our  board  of  directors  deems
relevant.  We issued 6,764 shares of our Series A preferred  and 6,017 shares of
our Series B  preferred  on January 8, 1996 as a stock  dividend to Series A and
Series B preferred shareholders of record as of December 31, 1994.


                                       22


                             SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

         The  following  table sets forth our  selected  financial  data for the
years ended  December  31, 2003 and 2004,  and the three  months ended March 31,
2004  and  2005.  The  selected  financial  data as of and for the  years  ended
December 31, 2002 and 2003 are derived from our financial statements, which have
been audited by Tanner & Co. The selected financial data as of and for the three
months  ended March 31, 2004 and 2005 are derived from our  unaudited  quarterly
financial statements, which have been reviewed by Chrisholm,  Bierwolf & Nilson.
The  following  financial  information  should be read in  conjunction  with the
Financial Statements, and related notes thereto.




                                                For the year ended          For the three months ended
                                                  December 31,                      March 31,

 Statement of Operations Data:                  2003            2004            2004            2005
 -----------------------------                  ---             ---             ----            ----
                                                                                          
 Net Sales..............................       $3,059,000      $3,062,000    $   583,000      $   528,000
 Net cost of sales.......................       2,086,000       1,217,000        227,000          214,000
 Operating expenses......................       4,113,000       2,237,000        716,000          648,000
 Operating loss..........................      (3,140,000)       (392,000)      (360,000)        (334,000)
 Other income (expense)..................         (21,000)        456,000         (4,000)          11,000
 Net income (loss).......................      (3,161,000)         64,000       (364,000)        (323,000)
 Net income (loss) applicable to common
         shareholders....................      (3,431,000)         10,000       (364,000)        (323,000)
 Net income (loss) per common share......           $(.14)             --         $(0.01)          $(0.01)
 Shares used in computing net loss per share   24,058,000      25,405,000     22,373,000       27,121,000






                                                              As of                 As of
 Balance Sheet Data:                                  December 31,  2004    March 31, 2005
 ------------------                                   ------------------    --------------
                                                                              
 Current assets....................................        $1,573,000          $1,393,000
 Current liabilities...............................         1,657,000           1,584,000
 Working capital (deficit).........................          (84,000)           (191,000)
 Total assets......................................         2,361,000           2,158,000
 Accumulated deficit...............................      (56,807,000)        (57,130,000)
 Stockholder's equity .............................           690,000             569,000



                           MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND
                          ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION

         This  report  contains   forward-looking   statements  and  information
relating  to us that is based on beliefs of  management  as well as  assumptions
made by, and information  currently  available to management.  These  statements
reflect  its current  view  respecting  future  events and are subject to risks,
uncertainties  and  assumptions,  including  the risks and  uncertainties  noted
throughout  the  document.  Although we have  attempted  to  identify  important
factors that could cause the actual results to differ  materially,  there may be
other  factors  that cause the  forward-looking  statements  not to come true as
anticipated,  believed,  projected,  expected or intended. Should one or more of
these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove
incorrect,  actual results may differ  materially from those described herein as
anticipated, believed, projected, estimated, expected or intended.

Critical Accounting Policies

         Revenue  Recognition.  We recognize  revenue in  compliance  with Staff
Accounting Bulletin 101, Revenue Recognition in Financial  Statements (SAB 101),
as revised by Staff Accounting  Bulletin No. 104, Revenue Recognition (SAB 104).
SAB 101 and SAB 104  detail  four  criteria  that must exist  before  revenue is
recognized:

         1. Persuasive evidence of an arrangement  exists.  Prior to shipment of
product, we require a signed purchase order and, depending upon the customer,  a
down  payment  toward the final  invoiced  price or full payment in advance with
certain international product distributors.

         2. Delivery and  performance  have occurred.  Unless the purchase order
requires specific installation or customer acceptance, we recognize revenue when
the product  ships.  If the purchase  order requires  specific  installation  or
customer  acceptance,  we recognize revenue when such installation or acceptance
has occurred.  Title to the product passes to the customer upon  shipment.  This
revenue  recognition  policy does not differ among the various different product
lines. We guarantee the  functionality  of its product.  If our product does not
function as marketed when received by the customer, we either make the necessary
repairs on site or have the product  shipped to us for the repair work. Once the

                                       23


product has been  repaired and retested for  functionality,  it is re-shipped to
the customer.  We provide warranties that generally extend for one year from the
date of sale. Such warranties  cover the necessary parts and labor to repair the
product  as well as any  shipping  costs  that may be  required.  We  maintain a
reserve for estimated  warranty  costs based on its  historical  experience  and
management's current expectations.

         3.  The  sales  price  is fixed or  determinable.  The  purchase  order
received  from the  customer  includes  the agreed upon sales  price.  We do not
accept customer orders, and therefore do not recognize revenue,  until the sales
price is fixed.

         4.  Collectibility is reasonably assured.  With limited exceptions,  we
require down  payments on product prior to shipment.  In some cases,  we require
payment  in full  prior  to  shipment.  We also  perform  credit  checks  on new
customers  and  ongoing  credit  checks on  existing  customers.  We maintain an
allowance for doubtful  accounts  receivable based on historical  experience and
management's current expectations.

         Recoverability  of Inventory.  Since our  inception,  we have purchased
several complete lines of inventory.  In some circumstances we have been able to
utilize certain items acquired and others remain unused.  On a quarterly  basis,
we attempt to identify inventory items that have shown relatively no movement or
very slow  movement.  Generally,  if an item has shown little or no movement for
over a year, it is determined not to be recoverable and a reserve is established
for that item. In addition,  if we identify  products that have become  obsolete
due to product  upgrades  or  enhancements,  a reserve is  established  for such
products.  We  intend  to make  efforts  to sell  these  items at  significantly
discounted  prices.  If items are sold,  the cash received  would be recorded as
revenue,  but there  would be no cost of sales on such items due to the  reserve
that has been recorded.  At the time of sale, the inventory would be reduced for
the item sold and the corresponding inventory reserve would also be reduced.

         Recoverability of Goodwill and Other Intangible  Assets. Our intangible
assets  consist of goodwill,  product and  technology  rights,  engineering  and
design costs, and patent costs. Intangibles with a determined life are amortized
on a  straight-line  basis  over  their  determined  useful  life  and are  also
evaluated for potential impairment if events or circumstances  indicate that the
carrying amount may not be  recoverable.  Intangibles  with an indefinite  life,
such as goodwill,  are not amortized but are tested for  impairment on an annual
basis or when events and circumstances  indicate that the asset may be impaired.
Impairment  tests include  comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its
carrying net book value,  including goodwill.  To date, our determination of the
fair value of the  reporting  unit has been based on the  estimated  future cash
flows of that reporting unit.

         Allowance  for Doubtful  Accounts.  We record an allowance for doubtful
accounts to offset estimated uncollectible accounts receivable. Bad debt expense
associated with the increases in the allowance for doubtful accounts is recorded
as part of general and administrative  expense.  Our accounting policy generally
is to record an allowance for receivables  over 90 days past due unless there is
significant evidence to support that the receivable is collectible.

General

         The  following  Management's   Discussion  and  Analysis  of  Financial
Condition and Results of Operations,  contains forward-looking statements, which
involve risks and uncertainty.  Our actual results could differ  materially from
those  anticipated  in these  forward-looking  statements as a result of certain
factors  discussed  in this  section.  Our fiscal year is from January 1 through
December 31.

         We are engaged in the design, development, manufacture and sale of high
technology diagnostic and surgical eye care products.  Given the "going concern"
status of Paradigm Medical, management has focused efforts on those products and
activities  that will,  in its  opinion,  achieve  the most  resource  efficient
short-term  cash  flow.  As seen in the  results  for the  twelve  months  ended
December  31,  2004,  diagnostic  products  have  been the  major  focus and the
Photon(TM) and other extensive  research and development  projects have been put
on hold pending future evaluation when our financial  position  improves.  We do
not focus on a specific  diagnostic  product or products but,  instead,  on this
entire diagnostic product group.

         During the year ended December 31, 2004, we recorded a reduction in the
warranty  accrual of  approximately  $308,000.  This reduction was a result of a
comprehensive  analysis  by  management  regarding  historical  warranty  costs.
Historically,  we have recorded a monthly  warranty expense and related increase
to the warranty  accrual.  However,  in recent periods the usage of the warranty
accrual has continued to decline.  After reviewing the recent  historical  data,
management   determined   that  the  warranty   accrual  should  be  reduced  by
approximately $308,000. Management will continue to closely monitor the warranty
accrual usage to ensure that the proper amount has been accrued.

         During the twelve  months  ended  December 31,  2003,  management  made
certain  adjustments  to the financial  statements,  including a decrease in the
reserve  for  obsolete  or  estimated  non-recoverable  inventory  of  $484,000,
consisting  of an increase in the reserve of  $403,000,  offset by a decrease of
$887,000 due to the sale of the  SIStem(TM) and the  Odyssey(TM)  product lines,
which were fully reserved.  We also recorded a net increase in the allowance for
doubtful accounts receivable of $123,000, impairment of intangibles of $150,000,
and  increases  in  accruals  to settle  outstanding  disputes  in the amount of
$443,000.

                                       24


         Our ultrasound  diagnostic products include a P55 pachymetric analyzer,
a P37 Ultrasound A/B Scan, a P40, a P45 and a P60 Ultrasound Biomicroscope,  the
technology  for which was acquired from Humphrey  Systems in 1998. We introduced
the P45  biomicroscope  in the fall of 2000, which combines the A/B Scan and the
biomicroscope  into  one  instrument.  In  March  2005,  we  introduced  the P60
biomicroscope,  a fourth  generation  of UBM  devices,  which has better  visual
clarity and image flexibility than earlier versions.  In addition, we market our
Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  acquired in the  purchase of Ocular Blood Flow Ltd. in
June 2000. Other diagnostic  products are the Dicon(TM) LD400 Auto Perimeter and
the  Dicon  (TM)  CT200e  Corneal  Topographer,   which  were  acquired  in  the
acquisition  of Vismed  d/b/a Dicon in June 2000.  We purchased  the  inventory,
design and  production  rights of the SIStem(TM) , the Odyssey and the Surgetrol
from Mentor Corporation in October 1999, which was designed to perform minimally
invasive  cataract  surgery.  In November 1999, we entered into a Mutual Release
and   Settlement   Agreement   with  the   manufacturer   of  the   Precisionist
ThirtyThousand(TM),  in which we purchased the raw materials and finished  goods
inventory to bring the manufacturing of this product in-house. During the fourth
quarter of 2003, we sold all inventory and rights associated with the SIStem(TM)
and Odyssey(TM)  for $125,000.  This  transaction  resulted in sales of $125,000
with no cost of sales because a reserve for obsolete inventory had been recorded
on all SIStem(TM) and Odyssey(TM) inventory.

         Because of the "going  concern"  status of the company,  management has
focused  efforts on those  products and  activities  that will,  in its opinion,
achieve the most  resource  efficient  short-term  cash flow to the company.  As
reflected in the results for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, diagnostic
products are currently our major focus and the  Photon(TM)  and other  extensive
research  and  development  projects  have  been  put  on  hold  pending  future
evaluation when the financial position of the company improves.  Due to the lack
of current  evidence to support  recoverability,  we have  recorded an inventory
reserve  to  offset  the  inventory  associated  with  the  Precisionist  Thirty
Thousand(TM)  and the Photon(TM) as well as certain other  inventory  items that
are estimated to be non-recoverable  due to the lack of significant  turnover of
such items in recent periods.

         We have shown improvement in our manufacturing efficiencies, as well as
the timeliness and the quality of our services to our customers.  For example, a
great deal of the improvement is  attributable  to reforms in operations,  which
enabled dramatically  improved availability of product and decreased lead times.
Additional  reorganization of services enabled  substantially reduced wait times
and reserve requirements.  Specifically,  during 2004, we were able to record an
increase  in income of  approximately  $300,000  from a  reduction  in  warranty
reserves.  This reduction was a result of a comprehensive analysis by management
regarding  historical warranty costs.  Historically,  we have recorded a monthly
warranty  expense and related  increase to the  warranty  accrual;  however,  in
recent periods the usage of the warranty accrual has continued to decline. After
reviewing the recent  historical  data, we determined that the warranty  accrual
should be reduced by approximately $300,000. We will continue to closely monitor
the warranty accrual usage to ensure that the proper amount has been accrued.

         Activities  for the twelve  months  ended  December  31,  2004 and 2003
included sales of our products and related accessories and disposable  products.
On March  18,  2004,  we  named  John Y.  Yoon as the new  President  and  Chief
Executive  Officer.  Mr. Yoon replaced  Jeffrey F. Poore who served as President
and Chief  Executive  Officer from March 19, 2003 to March 18, 2004.  We named a
new Vice  President  of Sales and  Marketing,  Ray  Cannefax,  during  the first
quarter  of 2003,  and a new Vice  President  of  Finance  and  Chief  Financial
Officer,  Gregory C. Hill,  during the second quarter of 2003. Mr. Hill resigned
as Vice  President of Finance and Chief  Financial  Officer on December 5, 2003.
Mr.  Cannifax  resigned as Vice  President  of Sales and  Marketing on April 19,
2005.

         On  March  18,  2004,  we named a new  President  and  Chief  Executive
Officer,  John Y. Yoon.  On March 23,  2004,  we named as new Vice  President of
Operations and Chief Operating  Officer,  Aziz A. Mohabbat.  On May 23, 2005, we
named as new Vice President of Engineering, Frederick D. Geiger.

         On May 7, 2002,  we received a letter from the FDA  requesting  further
clinical  information  regarding  the  Photon(TM).  We  are in  the  process  of
generating the  additional  clinical  information in response to the letter.  We
cannot market or sell the  Photon(TM) in the United States until FDA approval is
granted. On November 4, 2002, we received FDA approval for expanded  indications
of use of the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM) for pulsatile  ocular blood flow,  volume
and  pulsatility  equivalence  index.  Also,  we are  continuing  our efforts to
educate the payors of Medicare  claims  throughout  the country  about the Blood
Flow  Analyzer(TM),  its purposes and the  significance  of its  performance  in
patient care in order to achieve reimbursements to the providers.  These efforts
should lead to a more positive effect on sales.

                                       25


         In April 2001, we received written authorization from the CPT Editorial
Research and Development Department of the American Medical Association to use a
common  procedure  terminology  or CPT code  number  92120  for its  Blood  Flow
Analyzer(TM),  for reimbursement purposes for doctors using the device. However,
certain  insurance payors have elected not to reimburse  doctors using the Blood
Flow Analyzer(TM). We believe the reasons why insurance payors initially elected
not to reimburse  doctors using the CPT code were the relatively  high volume of
claims that began to be submitted  under CPT code number  92120  compared to the
limited  volume of claims  previously  submitted  under this code,  and the time
consumed  by the Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM)  test,  which  some  payors  may have
believed was less than what is allowed under CPT code number  92120.  This trend
began shortly after insurance payors were presented with reimbursement  requests
under this code,  and we believe these reasons were the basis for the initiation
of nonpayment.

         The  impact  of  this  nonpayment  by  certain  payors  on  our  future
operations  is a lower  volume  of sales,  particularly  in those  states  where
reimbursement  is  not  yet  approved  or  is  delayed.   Currently,   there  is
reimbursement by insurance payors in 22 states and partial reimbursement in four
other  states.  As  insurance  payors  have the  prerogative  whether to provide
reimbursement to doctors using the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM), we are continuing to
work with insurance  payors in states where there is no reimbursement to doctors
using the CPT code to demonstrate  the value of the  instrument.  However,  some
insurance  payors are currently not providing  reimbursement  to doctors where a
regional or state  administrator of Medicare has elected not to provide Medicare
coverage for the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM).  We are  continuing  to work with the
regional and state  administrators of Medicare who have denied Medicare coverage
for the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) to demonstrate the value of the instrument.

         There were a number of factors  that  contributed  to the  decrease  in
sales of the Blood Flow  Analyzer (TM) and other  products.  September 11, 2001,
the ensuing Afghanistan  conflict,  and the Iraq war had a significant impact on
our international sales. The U.S.  recessionary  economic trend has impacted its
domestic sales.  Additionally,  we restructured our sales organization and sales
channels by decreasing  our direct sales force who are full-time  employees from
10 direct sales  employees on January 1, 2003, to five direct sales employees on
December 31, 2004. The dependent  sales force was reduced because we do not have
sufficient  revenues  to  justify  the larger  direct  sales  force.  One of the
challenges  for fiscal 2005 will be the  judicious  reconstruction  of the sales
force in anticipation of increased sales.

         We intend to  increase  our  efforts  to sell our  diagnostic  products
through independent sales representatives and ophthalmic equipment distributors,
which are paid commissions only for their sales. As of December 31, 2004, we had
two independent sales representatives and two ophthalmic equipment  distributors
in the United States and 26 ophthalmic and medical product  distributors outside
the  United  States.  We  hope  to  benefit  from  these  recently  hired  sales
representatives  and distributors in the United States as they gain familiarity,
through training,  of our diagnostic  products.  Due to concerns over the budget
and the  effectiveness  of trade  shows,  we  exhibited  at only two trade shows
during 2004. We monitor  trade show  attendance to determine the extent to which
we will exhibit at future trade shows.

         On September 19, 2002, we completed a  transaction  with  International
Bio-Immune  Systems,   Inc.,  a  privately  held  biotechnology   based,  cancer
diagnostic  and  immunotherapy  company,  in which we acquired  2,663,254 of our
shares, or 19.9% of our outstanding  shares,  and warrants to purchase 1,200,000
shares of common stock of  International  Bio-Immune  Systems at $2.50 per share
for a period of two years,  through the exchange and issuance of 736,945  shares
of our common  stock,  the lending of 300,000  shares of our common stock to the
company,  and the payment of certain of its expenses  through the issuance of an
aggregate of 94,000 shares of common stock to International  Bio-Immune  Systems
and its counsel.  On August 3, 2004,  we sold our  investment  in  International
Bio-Immune Systems for net proceeds of $505,000 pursuant to a stock purchase and
sale  agreement  with  William  Ungar,  a current  director and  shareholder  of
International  Bio-Immune Systems. The securities sold to Mr. Ungar consisted of
2,663,254  common shares of  International  Bio- Immune  Systems and warrants to
purchase  1,200,000 common shares of International  Bio-Immune  Systems at $2.50
per  share.  Because,  for  book  purposes,   our  investment  in  International
Bio-Immune  Systems  had been  reduced  to $0, the full  amount of the  $505,000
received from the sale of the International Bio-Immune Systems common shares and
warrants was reported as a gain in 2004.

                                       26


Results of Operations

Three Months Ended March 31, 2005, Compared to Three Months Ended March 31, 2004

         Net sales for the three  months  ended  March  31,  2005  decreased  by
$55,000, or 9%, to $528,000 as compared to $583,000 for the same period of 2004.
This  decrease  was  primarily  due  to  decreased   sales  of  the  Blood  Flow
Analyzer(TM)  and a softening of sales of the Dicon(TM)  perimeters  and corneal
topographers.

         For the three months ended March 31,  2005,  sales from our  diagnostic
products totaled $384,000,  or 73% of total revenues,  compared to $553,000,  or
95% of total  revenues for the same period of 2004.  The remaining 27% of sales,
or  $146,000,  during the three  months  ended  March 31,  2005 was from  parts,
disposables, and service revenue.

         Sales of the P40 and P45 UBM Ultrasound  Biomicroscopes  were stable at
$142,000  during the first  quarter 2005,  or 27% of total  quarterly  revenues,
compared to $142,000,  or 21% of total revenues,  for the same period last year.
Sales of the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM)  decreased by $89,000 to $34,000,  or 6% of
total revenues, for the three months ended March 31, 2005, compared to net sales
of $123,000, or 21% of total revenues during the same period in 2004. Sales from
the P37 A/B Scan Ocular  Ultrasound  Diagnostic  decreased to $11,000,  or 4% of
total revenues,  for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, down slightly compared to
$36,000, or 6% of total revenues,  for the same period last year. Combined sales
of the LD 400 and TKS 5000  Autoperimeters and the 200 Corneal  Topographer were
$186,000,  or 35% of the total  revenues,  for the three  months ended March 31,
2005,  compared to $252,000,  or 43% of total revenues,  for the same quarter of
2004.

         Our sales have been lower due to an industry  slow down.  Additionally,
sales  of  the  Blood  Flow   Analyzer(TM)   decreased  due  in  part  from  the
reorganization of our sales force. We anticipate reversing the downward trend in
sales through  additional  efforts by us to gain more widespread support for the
Blood Flow Analyzer(TM).

         For the three months ended March 31,  2005,  gross profit  decreased by
2%, to 59% of total  revenues,  compared  to the 61% of total  revenues  for the
comparable period of 2004.

         Marketing and selling expenses  decreased by approximately  $5,000,  or
3%, to $180,000,  for the three months ended March 31, 2005,  from  $185,000 for
the  comparable  period in 2004.  The  reduction  was due primarily to a reduced
number of sales  representatives  and lower travel related and associated  sales
expenses.

         General and administrative  expenses  decreased by $46,000,  or 17%, to
$258,000  for the three  months  ended March 31,  2005,  from  $304,000  for the
comparable  period in 2004.  The  general  and  administrative  expense  savings
reflected  the  on-  going  results  of our  cost  reduction  program  and  more
aggressive  budget  management  procedures  implemented  in the first quarter of
2005.

         In addition, during the first quarter of 2005, we issued 515,206 shares
of common stock to two  shareholders  that had purchased  shares of our Series G
convertible  preferred  stock in a  private  offering.  Under  the  terms of the
private  offering,  we were required to file a  registration  statement with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission  for the purpose of  registering  the common
shares issuable to the Series G preferred  stockholders upon conversion of their
Series G preferred shares and exercise of their warrants. The shares were issued
as a penalty  for our not having a  registration  statement  declared  effective
within 120 days of the initial closing of the private offering.

         Research,  development and service expenses decreased  $17,000,  or 8%,
for the three  months  ended  March 31, 2005 to  $210,000,  compared to $227,000
recorded  in the same  period  of  2004.  Much of the  improvement  was from the
continued benefit of the reorganization of the service  department  initiated in
the second  quarter of 2004,  which is yielding  not only cost  improvement  but
dramatically  lower  response  times and enabled  clean up of the  service  unit
backlogs.

Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2004  Compared to  Fiscal Year Ended December 31,
2003

         Net sales  increased by $3,000,  or 0.1%, to $3,062,000  for the twelve
months ended December 31, 2004,  from  $3,059,000  for the comparable  period in
2003.  Sales of our  diagnostic  products and related  accessories  increased by
$296,000,  or 19%, to $2,780,000,  or 91% of revenues,  during the twelve months
ended December 31, 2004 compared with $2,484,000,  or 81% of total revenues, for
the comparable period of 2003.

                                       27


         In 2004,  sales of our P40 and P45 UBM  Ultrasound  Biomicroscopes  and
related  accessories  were  $855,000,  or 28% of  total  revenues,  compared  to
$615,000,  or 20% of total revenues,  in the same period of 2003. Sales from the
Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  and  related  accessories  increased  by  $175,000  to
$674,000,  or 22% of total  revenues,  during the year ended  December  31, 2004
compared with $499,000, or 13% of total revenues, in the same period of 2003.

         During 2004, sales from the P37 A/B Scan Ocular  Ultrasound  Diagnostic
increased to $257,000,  or 8% of total revenues,  slightly up from the $133,000,
or 4% of total revenues,  in the same period last year.  Sales of the LD 400 and
TKS  5000  Autoperimeters  and  the  CT  200  Corneal  Topographer  and  related
accessories  were slightly  lower,  with total revenue of $1,022,000,  or 33% of
total  revenues,  in 2004 compared with  $1,100,000,  or 36% of total  revenues,
during the same period of 2003.

         Sales of surgical products are at a standstill  pending FDA approval of
the Photon(TM) laser system.  In the twelve month period ended December 31 2004,
we  realized  a  loss  of  $3,000  in  the  surgical  line   consisting  of  the
Precissionist  Thirty  Thousand  (TM)  and the  Photon(TM)  laser  system.  This
compared to $94,000 in sales for the comparable period of 2003, which was mainly
from the sale of the SIStem(TM) and Odyssey(TM) product lines.

         There were a number of material  reasons that contributed to flat sales
during the twelve  months ended  December  31,  2004,  compared to the period of
2003.  Along with  generally weak economic  conditions in the United States,  we
initiated  aggressive cost cutting efforts and were able to successfully  reduce
operating  expenses.  One of the negative  consequences  of such aggressive cost
cutting  was a slow down in the upgrade  programs  for our  product  lines.  Our
objective  is to focus  its  sales  efforts  on the  products  with the  highest
potential for sales and strong margins.

         During  2004,  we hired three sales  representatives  and  replaced one
bringing the total to four domestic and one international  sales  representative
and  one  independent  representative.  International  sales  were  impacted  by
weakness in the economies of the large industrial  countries and by the residual
impact of the situation in the Middle East, which had a negative impact on sales
to the Middle East, Pakistan, India and other countries in that region.

         Gross profit for the twelve months ended December 31, 2004 increased to
60% of total revenues,  compared to 32% of total revenues for the same period in
2003.  The  increase was mainly due to an increase in the  inventory  reserve of
$403,000 in the twelve months ending December 31, 2003. The $403,000 increase in
inventory reserve in 2003 resulted in an increase to cost of sales. There was no
increase or decrease to cost of sales as a result of a change to the reserve for
obsolete inventory in 2004. The other major contributing  factor to the improved
margins was greater operational efficiencies and more timely production planning
and scheduling.

         On a quarterly basis, we attempt to identify  inventory items that have
shown  relatively no movement or very slow movement.  Generally,  if an item has
shown  little  or no  movement  for  over a  year,  it is  determined  not to be
recoverable  and a reserve is  established  for that item.  In  addition,  if we
identify  products  that  have  become  obsolete  due  to  product  upgrades  or
enhancements, a reserve is established for such products. Such analysis resulted
in a material increase in the reserve for obsolete or estimated  non-recoverable
inventory in 2003.  There can be no assurance that we will not identify  further
obsolete  inventory due to significant  declines in sales of certain products or
technological  advances of products in the future.  We intend to make efforts to
sell many of these items at significantly  discounted prices. If items are sold,
the cash  received  would be recorded as revenue,  but there would be no cost of
sales on such items due to the reserve  that has been  recorded.  At the time of
sale,  the  inventory  would be reduced for the item sold and the  corresponding
inventory  reserve  would also be  reduced.  We do not expect the sales of these
items to be significant in the future.

         During 2003,  we Company sold all  inventory,  rights,  and  technology
related to the SIStem(TM) and Odyssey(TM) product lines for $125,000. All of the
inventory  sold  in  this   transaction  had  previously  been  fully  reserved.
Therefore, upon the sale, we reduced inventory by $887,000 for the original book
value of the inventory,  reduced the reserve of $887,000,  and recorded  revenue
for the cash received of $125,000.

         Marketing  and  selling  expenses  decreased  by  $119,000,  or 13%, to
$801,000 for the twelve  months ended  December 31, 2004,  from $920,000 for the
comparable  period in 2003.  This  reduction was due primarily to more effective
use of  marketing  programs.  During  this  period  three  additional  full-time
salespersons were added, a print advertising campaign initiated,  and plans were
made to support a major  trade show in the fourth  quarter of 2004.  At the same
time, the use of consultant services declined  considerably  enabling an overall
savings.


                                       28


         General and administrative expenses decreased by $1,572,000, or 64%, to
$874,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2004,  from $2,446,000 for the
same period in 2003.  The  favorable  reduction  in general  and  administrative
expense in 2004 also reflected the ongoing results of our new budget  management
and cost reduction programs.  In addition,  during the period ended December 31,
2004, we recorded a reduction in the warranty accrual of approximately $308,000.
This reduction was a result of a comprehensive  analysis by management regarding
historical  warranty costs.  Historically,  we have recorded a monthly  warranty
expense and related increase to the warranty accrual. However, in recent periods
the usage of the warranty accrual has continued to decline.  After reviewing the
recent historical data,  management  determined that the warranty accrual should
be  reduced by  approximately  $308,000.  Management  will  continue  to closely
monitor the  warranty  accrual  usage to ensure that the proper  amount has been
accrued. The general and administrative  expenses during the twelve months ended
December  30, 2003 also  included  $443,000  in  accruals to settle  outstanding
disputes.

         In  addition,  during  2004,  we  collected  approximately  $87,000  in
receivables that were previously allowed in the allowance for doubtful accounts.
During  2003,  we increased  the  allowance  for doubtful  accounts by $123,000.
General and administrative expense for the twelve months ended December 31, 2003
also  included  $259,000 for  1,562,000  shares of common stock issued to settle
potential litigation.  We issued 1,262,000 common shares to six investors due to
a dispute  arising  from a private  offering  that was  completed on January 22,
2003. We agreed to issue the shares to the investors in the offering at $.25 per
share rather than $.50 per share, the original  offering price (or an additional
1,262,000  shares) to resolve a dispute with the  investors  concerning  certain
statements  made by a former officer in connection with the sale of said shares.
The additional 300,000 shares were issued to settle an outstanding  dispute with
a consultant regarding services performed by such consultant.

         Research and  development  expenses  decreased by $265,000,  or 26%, to
$768,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2004,  from $1,033,000 for the
same period in 2003.  Expenses  associated  with the development of new products
during 2004  decreased  compared  to 2003,  as a result of our efforts to reduce
costs and focus on products that are fully developed with the highest  potential
for sales and high margins.

         There was no impairment of assets for the twelve months ended  December
31, 2004,  compared to $150,000 in 2003. The impairment expense for 2003 was due
to a reduction  in the value of certain  intangible  assets  based on their then
current estimated fair value.

         Due to our  ongoing  cash flow  difficulties,  most of our  vendors and
suppliers were contacted during 2003 and 2004 with attempts to negotiate reduced
payments and  settlement of  outstanding  accounts  payable.  While some vendors
refused to negotiate and demanded  payment in full, some vendors were willing to
settle for a reduced  amount.  The  accounts  payable  forgiven  by vendors  and
suppliers  resulted in a gain of $206,000  and  $436,000  during the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

         Other income  mainly  consisted of a gain recorded from the sale of our
investment in International  Bio-Immune Systems,  Inc. In July 2004, we sold our
investment  in  International  Bio-Immune  Systems,  Inc.  for net  proceeds  of
$505,000  cash.  Because,  for book purposes,  our  investment in  International
Bio-Immune  Systems  had  previously  been  reduced  to $0,  the full  amount of
$505,000 was recorded as a gain in 2004.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

         We used  $197,000  cash in  operating  activities  for the three months
ended March 31,  2005,  compared to $19,000 for the three months ended March 31,
2004.  The increase in cash used for operating  activities  for the three months
ended March 31, 2005 was  primarily  attributable  to net loss and  decreases in
accounts  payable  and  accrued  liabilities.  Net cash  provided  in  financing
activities  was $136,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2005,  versus cash
used of $13,000 in the same period in 2004.  We had working  capital  deficit of
$191,000 as of March 31, 2005.  In January  2005,  we sold  2,000,000  shares of
common stock to an accredited  investor for $150,000  cash. In the past, we have
relied heavily upon sales of our common and preferred stock to fund  operations.
There can be no  assurance  that such equity  funding will be available on terms
acceptable to us in the future.

         We used  $477,000  cash in operating  activities  for the twelve months
ended  December  31,  2004,  compared to $707,000  for the twelve  months  ended
December 31, 2003.  The reduction in cash used by operating  activities  for the
twelve  months  ended  December  31,  2004  was  primarily   attributable  to  a
significant  reduction  in net loss and  decreases  in accounts  receivable  and
inventory, partially offset by a decrease in accrued liabilities. Our efforts to
substantially  reduce costs and manage  current  assets and current  liabilities
continued  to  minimize  cash used for  operating  activities.  Net cash used in

                                       29


financing  activities was $56,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2004,
versus cash  provided of $647,000 in the same period in 2003.  During the twelve
months  ended  December  31,  2004,  we did not sell any  shares  of  common  or
preferred stock. In the past, we have relied heavily upon sales of the Company's
common and preferred  stock to fund  operations.  There can be no assurance that
such equity funding will be available on terms acceptable to us in the future.

         We  will  continue  to  seek  funding  to  meet  our  working   capital
requirements  through   collaborative   arrangements  and  strategic  alliances,
additional public offerings and private  placements of our securities;  and bank
borrowings.  In July 2004, we sold our  investment in  International  Bio-Immune
Systems,  Inc. for net proceeds of $505,000 in cash. We are uncertain whether or
not the  combination  of the  cash  received  from  the  sale  of  International
Bio-Immune Systems,  Inc. stock and the benefits from sales of our products will
be  sufficient  to assure our  operations  through  December 31,  2005.  We will
continue to seek funding through the sale of common and preferred stock.

         As of December 31, 2004, we had net operating loss carryforwards (NOLs)
of approximately $48 million.  These loss  carryforwards are available to offset
future taxable  income,  if any, and have begun to expire in 2001 and extend for
twenty years.  Our ability to use net  operating  loss  carryforwards  (NOLs) to
offset future income is dependant  upon certain  limitations  as a result of the
pooling  transaction  with  Vismed and the tax laws in effect at the time of the
NOLs can be utilized. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 significantly limits the annual
amount that can be utilized  for certain of these  carryforwards  as a result of
change of ownership.

         As  of  March  31,  2005,  we  had  accounts  payable  of  $745,000,  a
significant  portion of which was over 90 days past due. We have  contacted many
of the vendors or companies that have  significant  amounts of payables past due
in an effort to delay  payment,  renegotiate a reduced  settlement  payment,  or
establish a longer term payment plan.  While some companies have been willing to
renegotiate the outstanding amounts, others have demanded payment in full. Under
certain  conditions,  including but not limited to judgments rendered against us
in a court of law, a group of creditors  could force us into  bankruptcy  due to
our inability to pay the liabilities arising out of such judgments at that time.
In addition to the accounts  payable  noted above,  we also have  non-cancelable
capital lease  obligations  and  operating  lease  obligations  that require the
payment of approximately $140,000 in 2005, and $14,000 in 2006.

         We have taken  numerous  steps to reduce costs and  increase  operating
efficiencies. These steps consist of the following:

         1.  We  closed  our  San  Diego   facility.   In  so  doing,   numerous
manufacturing,  accounting and management responsibilities were consolidated. In
addition,  such closure resulted in significant  headcount reductions as well as
savings in rent and other overhead costs.

         2. We have  significantly  reduced  the use of  consultants,  which has
resulted in a large decrease to these expenses.

         3. We have  reduced  our direct  sales  force to five  representatives,
which has resulted in less payroll, travel and other selling expenses.

         Because we have significantly fewer sales representatives,  our ability
to generate sales has been reduced.

         We have taken measures to reduce the amount of  uncollectible  accounts
receivable  such  as more  thorough  and  stringent  credit  approval,  improved
training and instruction by sales personnel,  and frequent direct  communication
with the  customer  subsequent  to  delivery of the system.  The  allowance  for
doubtful  accounts was 14% of total  outstanding  receivables as of December 31,
2004 and 40% as of December 31, 2003.  The allowance  for doubtful  accounts has
decreased  from  $470,000 at December 31, 2003 to $101,000 at December 31, 2004.
The  decrease  in the  allowance  for  doubtful  accounts  was the result of the
collection of approximately  $87,000 of receivables that was previously  allowed
as part of the allowance for doubtful  accounts and the write off of $282,000 of
receivables  against the  allowance.  The downturn in the economy  worldwide has
resulted  in  increased  difficulty  in  collecting  certain  accounts.  Certain
international  dealers  have  some  aged  unpaid  invoices  that  have  not been
resolved.  We have addressed its credit  procedures  and collection  efforts and
have  instituted  changes that require more payments at the time of sale through
letters of credit and not on a credit term basis.

         We intend to continue our efforts to reduce the  allowance for doubtful
accounts as a percentage  of accounts  receivable.  We have  ongoing  efforts to
collect a significant  portion of the sales price in advance of the sale or in a
timely manner after delivery.  During the twelve months ended December 31, 2004,
we had a net  recovery of  receivables  previously  allowed for of $87,000,  and

                                       30


during the twelve months ended  December 31, 2003, we added a net of $123,000 to
the  allowance  for  doubtful  accounts.  We believe  that by  requiring a large
portion of payment prior to shipment, it has greatly improved the collectibility
of our receivables.

         We carried an  allowance  for  obsolete  or  estimated  non-recoverable
inventory  of  $1,418,000  at December 31, 2004 and  $1,642,000  at December 31,
2003,  or  approximately  66% and 62% of  total  inventory,  respectively.  This
inventory  reserve was  decreased  by $224,000  during the twelve  months  ended
December  31, 2004 due to direct  write-off  of  inventory  against the reserve.
Therefore, this decrease in the reserve did not impact costs of sales. Our means
of expansion and  development  of product has been largely from  acquisition  of
businesses,  product  lines,  existing  inventory,  and the  rights to  specific
products.  Through such acquisitions,  we have acquired  substantial  inventory,
some of which the eventual use and recoverability was uncertain. In addition, we
have a significant  amount of inventory relating to the Photon(TM) laser system,
which does not yet have FDA approval in order to sell the product  domestically.
Therefore,  the allowance for  inventory  was  established  to reserve for these
potential eventualities.

         On a quarterly basis, we attempt to identify  inventory items that have
shown  relatively no movement or very slow movement.  Generally,  if an item has
shown  little  or no  movement  for  over a  year,  it is  determined  not to be
recoverable  and a reserve is  established  for that item.  In  addition,  if we
identify  products  that  have  become  obsolete  due  to  product  upgrades  or
enhancements,  a reserve is  established  for such  products.  We intend to make
efforts to sell these items at  significantly  discounted  prices.  If items are
sold, the cash received would be recorded as revenue, but there would be no cost
of sales on such items due to the reserve that has been recorded. At the time of
sale,  the  inventory  would be reduced for the item sold and the  corresponding
inventory  reserve would also be reduced.  During the fourth quarter of 2003, we
sold  all  inventory  and  rights  associated  with  the  Phaco  SIStem(TM)  and
Odyssey(TM)  for $125,000.  Because the full amount of inventory  related to the
SIStem(TM)  and  Odyssey(TM)  had been  fully  reserved,  no cost of sales  were
recorded in connection  with this sale,  thus resulting in gross profit equal to
the sales price of $125,000.  We do not expect the sales of these items, if any,
to be significant in the future.

         At this time, our Photon(TM) Laser Ocular Surgery Workstation  requires
regulatory FDA approval in order to be sold in the United  States.  Any possible
future  efforts to complete the clinical  trials on the  Photon(TM)  in order to
file for FDA  approval  would  depend  on our  obtaining  adequate  funding.  We
estimate  that the funds  needed to  complete  the  clinical  trials in order to
obtain the necessary  regulatory  approval on the Photon(TM) to be approximately
$225,000.

Effect of Inflation and Foreign Currency Exchange

         We have not realized a reduction  in the selling  price of our products
as a result of domestic  inflation.  Nor have we experienced  unfavorable profit
reductions due to currency  exchange  fluctuations or inflation with our foreign
customers. All sales transactions to date have been denominated in U.S. Dollars.

Impact of New Accounting Pronouncements

         In December  2003,  the FASB issued  Interpretation  No. 46 ("FIN 46R")
(revised  December  2003),  Consolidation  of  Variable  Interest  Entities,  an
Interpretation  of  Accounting  Research  Bulletin  No.  51  ("ARB  51"),  which
addresses how a business enterprise should evaluate whether it has a controlling
interest in an entity  through means other than voting rights and,  accordingly,
should consolidate the entity. FIN 46R replaces FASB  Interpretation No. 46 (FIN
46), which was issued in January 2003.  Before concluding that it is appropriate
to apply ARB 51 voting interest  consolidation model to an entity, an enterprise
must first determine that the entity is not a variable interest entity (VIE). As
of the effective  date of FIN 46R, an enterprise  must evaluate its  involvement
with all  entities or legal  structures  created  before  February  1, 2003,  to
determine whether consolidation requirements of FIN 46R apply to those entities.
There is no  grandfathering  of existing  entities.  Public companies must apply
either FIN 46 or FIN 46R immediately to entities  created after January 31, 2003
and no later than the end of the first reporting period that ends after December
15,  2004.  The adoption of FIN 46 had no effect on our  consolidated  financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.


                                       31


         In  November  2004,  the  FASB  issued  SFAS 151  "Inventory  Costs--an
amendment  of ARB No.  43." This  statement  amends the  guidance in ARB No. 43,
Chapter 4, "Inventory  Pricing," to clarify the accounting for abnormal  amounts
of  idle  facility  expense,   freight,  handling  costs,  and  wasted  material
(spoilage).  Paragraph 5 of ARB 43, Chapter 4,  previously  stated that "[u]nder
some  circumstances,  items such as idle facility expense,  excessive  spoilage,
double freight,  and rehandling costs may be so abnormal as to require treatment
as current period  charges.  . . ." This statement  requires that those items be
recognized  as  current  period  charges  regardless  of  whether  they meet the
criterion of "so abnormal." In addition, this statement requires that allocation
of fixed production  overheads to the costs of conversion be based on the normal
capacity of the production facilities. The provisions of this statement shall be
effective for inventory  costs incurred during fiscal years beginning after June
15,  2005.  We do not  believe  adoption of SFAS 151 will have any impact on our
consolidated financial statements.

         In  December  2004,  FASB  issued SFAS 153  "Exchanges  of  Nonmonetary
Assets--an amendment of APB Opinion No. 29." The guidance in APB Opinion No. 29,
Accounting  for  Nonmonetary  Transactions,  is  based  on  the  principle  that
exchanges of  nonmonetary  assets should be measured  based on the fair value of
the assets exchanged.  The guidance in that opinion,  however,  included certain
exceptions to that principle.  This statement amends Opinion 29 to eliminate the
exception for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive assets and replaces it
with a general  exception for exchanges of  nonmonetary  assets that do not have
commercial  substance.  A nonmonetary  exchange has commercial  substance if the
future cash flows of the entity are expected to change significantly as a result
of the exchange.  We do not believe adoption of SFAS 153 will have any impact on
our consolidated financial statements.

         In  December  2004,  the FASB issued FASB  Statement  No. 123  (revised
2004),  "Share Based  Payment."  Statement  123(R)  addresses the accounting for
share  based  payment  transactions  in which an  enterprise  receives  employee
services  in  exchange  for (a)  equity  instruments  of the  enterprise  or (b)
liabilities  that  are  based  on the  fair  value  of the  enterprise's  equity
instruments  or that may be settled by the issuance of such equity  instruments.
Statement  123(R)  requires an entity to recognize  the grant date fair value of
stock  options and other  equity based  compensation  issued to employees in the
income  statement.  The  revised  statement  generally  requires  that an entity
account for those transactions using the fair value based method, and eliminates
the intrinsic value method of accounting in APB Opinion No. 25,  "Accounting for
Stock  Issued to  Employees",  which  was  permitted  under  Statement  123,  as
originally   issued.   The  revised  statement  requires  entities  to  disclose
information  about the nature of the share based  payment  transactions  and the
effects of those transactions on the financial statements.

         Statement  123(R) is effective for public companies that do not file as
small  business  issuers  as of the  beginning  of the first  interim  or annual
reporting period that begins after June 15, 2005. For public companies that file
as small business issuers,  Statement 123(R) is effective as of the beginning of
the first interim or annual reporting period that begins after December 15, 2005
(i.e., first quarter 2006 for the Company). All public companies must use either
the modified prospective or the modified retrospective  transition method. Early
adoption of this  statement  for interim or annual  periods for which  financial
statements  or interim  reports have not been issued is  encouraged.  We believe
that the  adoption  of this  pronouncement  may have a  material  impact  on our
financial statements.

                                    BUSINESS

General

         We develop,  manufacture,  source,  market and sell ophthalmic surgical
and diagnostic  instrumentation and related  accessories,  including  disposable
products.  Our surgical  equipment is designed for minimally  invasive  cataract
treatment.  We market two cataract surgery systems with related  accessories and
disposable  products.  Our cataract removal system, the Photon(TM) laser system,
is a laser cataract  surgery system  marketed as the next generation of cataract
removal.  Because of the "going concern"  status of the company,  management has
focused  efforts on those  products and  activities  that will,  in its opinion,
achieve the most  resource  efficient  short-term  cash flow to the company.  As
reflected in the results for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, diagnostic
products are currently our major focus and the  Photon(TM)  and other  extensive
research  and  development  projects  have  been  put  on  hold  pending  future
evaluation when the financial position of the company improves.  Due to the lack
of FDA approval and the lack of current evidence to support  recoverability,  we
have  recorded an  inventory  reserve to offset the  majority  of the  inventory
associated with the Photon(TM).  In addition, most inventory associated with the
Precisionist Thirty Thousand(TM) has been reserved for due to the estimated lack
of  recoverability.  Our  focus is not on any  specific  diagnostic  product  or
products,  but rather on our entire group of diagnostic products. The Photon(TM)
can be sold in markets outside of the United States. Both the Photon(TM) and the
Precisionist   ThirtyThousand(TM)   are   manufactured   as  an  Ocular  Surgery
Workstation(TM).  We are  considering  marketing the Photon(TM) and other lasers
for use in eye care.

                                       32


         Our  diagnostic  products  include a  pachymeter,  the P55  Pachymetric
Analyzer, the P37 A/B Scan Ocular Ultrasound Diagnostic,  the P40 UBM Ultrasound
Biomicroscope,   the  P45  Plus  UBM  Biomicroscope,   the  P60  UBM  Ultrasound
Biomicroscope,  the  Dicon(TM)  LD 400  Autoperimeter,  the  Dicon(TM)  TKS  500
Autoperimeter,  the  Dicon(TM)  CT 200  Corneal  Topographer  and the Blood Flow
Analyzer(TM).  The diagnostic  ultrasound products including the P55 pachymeter,
the P37 A/B Scan,  the P40  biomicroscope  and the P45 Plus  biomicroscope  were
acquired from Humphrey  Systems,  a division of Carl Zeiss in 1998. We developed
and offered  for sale in the fall of 2000 the P45,  which  combines  the P37 A/B
Scan and the UBM biomicroscope  into one machine.  The perimeter and the corneal
topographer  were added when we acquired the outstanding  shares of the stock of
Vismed, Inc. d/b/a/ Dicon(TM) in June 2000. We purchased Ocular Blood Flow, Ltd.
in June 2000,  whose  principal  product is the Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM).  This
product is designed for the  measurement of  intraocular  pressure and pulsatile
ocular blood flow volume for detection and treatment of glaucoma. In March 2005,
we developed and offered for sale the P60 Ultrasound  Biomicroscope,  the fourth
generation of UBM devices, which has better visual clarity and image flexibility
than earlier versions. We are currently developing  additional  applications for
all of our diagnostic products.

         A cataract is a condition that largely affects the elderly  population,
in which  the  natural  lens of the eye  hardens  and  becomes  cloudy,  thereby
reducing  visual  acuity.  Treatment  consists of removal of the cloudy lens and
replacement  with a  synthetic  lens  implant,  which  restores  visual  acuity.
Cataract surgery is the single largest volume and revenue  producing  outpatient
surgical  procedure  for  ophthalmologists  worldwide.  The Health Care  Finance
Administration  reports  that in the United  States  approximately  two  million
cataract  removal  procedures  are performed  annually,  making this the largest
outpatient  procedure  reimbursed  by Medicare.  Most  cataract  procedures  are
performed using a method called  phacoemulsification or "phaco", which employs a
high frequency (40 kHz to 60 kHz) ultrasonic probe needle device to fragment the
cataract  while  still in the eye and remove it in pieces by  suction  through a
small incision.
  
         In June  1997,  we  received  FDA  clearance  to market  the Blood Flow
Analyzer(TM) for measurement of intraocular  pressure and pulsatile ocular blood
flow for the  detection of glaucoma and other retina  related  diseases.  Ocular
blood flow is  critical,  the  reduction  of which may cause nerve fiber  bundle
death through oxygen deprivation, thus resulting in visual field loss associated
with glaucoma.  Our Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM) is a portable  automated  in-office
system that presents an affordable  method for ocular blood flow testing for the
ophthalmic and optometric practitioner. In June 2000, we purchased Occular Blood
Flow,  Ltd.,  the  manufacturer  of the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM).  The terms and
conditions of the sale were $100,000 in cash and 100,000 shares of common stock.
In April 2001, we received  authorization to use a common procedure  terminology
or CPT code from the American Medical Association for procedures  performed with
the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) , for  reimbursement  purposes for doctors using the
device. However,  certain payers have elected not to reimburse doctors using the
Blood Flow Analyzer(TM).

         On July 23, 1998, we entered into an agreement for purchase and sale of
assets with the  Humphrey  Systems  Division of Carl Zeiss,  Inc. to acquire the
ownership and  manufacturing  rights to certain assets of Humphrey  Systems that
are   used   in   the    manufacturing    and   marketing   of   an   ultrasonic
microprocessor-based  line of ophthalmic diagnostic  instruments,  including the
Ultrasonic  Biometer  Model 820, the A/B Scan System  Model 837, the  Ultrasound
Pachymeter  Model 855,  and the  Ultrasound  Biomicroscope  Model  840,  and all
accessories, packaging and end-user collateral materials for each of the product
lines for the sum of  $500,000,  payable in the form of 78,947  shares of common
stock which were issued to Humphrey  Systems and 26,316  shares of common  stock
which were issued to business broker Douglas Adams. If the net proceeds received
by Humphrey Systems from the sale of the shares issued pursuant to the Agreement
was less than $375,000,  after payment of commissions,  transfer taxes and other
expenses  relating  to the sale of such  shares,  we would be  required to issue
additional  shares of common stock, or pay additional  funds to Humphrey Systems
as would be necessary  to increase the net proceeds  from the sale of the assets
to $375,000.  Since  Humphrey  Systems  realized  only $162,818 from the sale of
78,947 shares of our common stock, we issued 80,000 additional shares in January
1999 to enable Humphrey Systems to receive its guaranteed  amount. The amount of
$21,431  was paid to us as  excess  proceeds  from  the sale of this  additional
stock.

         The rights to the ophthalmic  diagnostic  instruments,  which have been
purchased from Humphrey Systems, complement both our cataract surgical equipment
and our ocular Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM). The Ultrasonic  Biometer calculates the
prescription for the intraocular  lens to be implanted during cataract  surgery.
The P55 pachymetric  measures corneal thickness for the new refractive  surgical
applications   that  eliminate  the  need  for  eyeglasses  and  for  optometric

                                       33


applications  including  contact  lens  fitting.  The P37  Ultrasonic  A/B  Scan
combines the Ultrasonic  Biometer and ultrasound imaging for advanced diagnostic
testing throughout the eye and is a viable tool for retinal specialists. The P40
UBM Ultrasound  Biomicroscope utilizes microscopic digital ultrasound resolution
for detection of tumors and improved glaucoma management.  We introduced the P45
in the fall of  2000,  which  combines  the P37  Ultrasonic  A/B  Scan,  and the
Ultrasonic Biometer in one machine.

         On October 21,  1999,  we purchased  Mentor's  surgical  product  line,
consisting of the Phaco  SIStem(TM),  the Odyssey(TM)  and the  Surg-E-Trol(TM).
This  acquisition was an attempt to round out our cataract  surgery product line
by  adding  entry-level,   moderately  priced  cataract  surgery  products.  The
transaction was paid for with $1.5 million worth of our common stock. Due to the
lack of sales volume of these products,  they were determined to be obsolete and
a reserve  was  established  to  offset  all  inventory  associated  with  these
products.  During the fourth  quarter of 2003,  we sold all inventory and rights
associated with the SIStem(TM) and Odyssey(TM) for $125,000 in cash.

         On June 5, 2000,  we  purchased  Vismed Inc.  d/b/a  Dicon(TM)  under a
pooling of interest  accounting  treatment.  The purchase included the Dicon(TM)
perimeter  product line  consisting  of the LD 400,  the TKS 5000,  the SST(TM),
FieldLink(TM),  FieldView(TM) and Advanced FieldView and the corneal topographer
product  line,  the CT 200(TM),  the CT 50 and an ongoing  service and  software
business.  Perimeters  are used to  determine  retinal  sensitivity  testing the
visual  pathway.  Corneal  topographers  are used to  determine  the  shape  and
integrity of the cornea,  the anterior surface of the eye. Corneal  topographers
are used for the refractive  surgical  applications  that eliminate the need for
eyeglasses and for optometric applications including contact lens fitting.

         In January  2002,  we purchased  the  Innovatome(TM)  microkeratome  of
Innovative  Optics,  Inc. by issuing an  aggregate  of  1,272,825  shares of its
common stock,  warrants to purchase  250,000 shares of our common stock at $5.00
per share,  exercisable  over a period of three years from the closing date, and
$100,000 in cash. The  transaction was accounted for as a purchase in accordance
with  Statement  of Financial  Accounting  Standards  No. 141. We acquired  from
Innovative Optics raw materials, work in process and finished goods inventories.
Additionally,  we acquired the furniture and equipment used in the manufacturing
process of the  microkeratome  console and the  inspection  and packaging of the
disposable blades.

         We  were   unsuccessful   in  supplying  the  disposable   blades.   We
discontinued  the marketing  and sales efforts of this product  during the third
quarter of 2002. On April 1, 2002, we entered into a consulting  agreement  with
John Charles Casebeer,  M.D. to develop and promote the  microkeratome.  For Dr.
Casebeer's  services during the period from April 1, 2002 to September 30, 2002,
we issued him a total of 43,684 shares of our common stock, representing payment
of $100,000 in stock for his services. On October 9, 2003, an additional 300,000
shares of our common stock was issued to Dr. Casebeer in settlement of a lawsuit
he brought  against us for  additional  consideration  due under the  consulting
agreement.  All assets  acquired from  Innovative  Optics,  including  remaining
inventory with a book value of $160,000 and equipment and intangible assets with
a book value of $2,082,000, were written off during 2002.

         On September 19, 2002, we completed a  transaction  with  International
Bio-Immune  Systems,  Inc.,  a  Delaware  corporation  , in  which  we  acquired
2,663,254  shares,  or 19.9% of the outstanding  shares of its common stock, and
warrants to purchase  1,200,000 shares of its common stock of at $2.50 per share
for a period of two years,  through the exchange and issuance of 736,945  shares
of our common  stock,  the lending of 300,000  shares of our common stock to the
company and the payment of certain of its  expenses  through the  issuance of an
aggregate of 94,000 shares of our common stock to the company and its counsel.

         International  Bio-Immune Systems,  Inc. may sell the 300,000 shares of
our common stock loaned by us and the proceeds  therefrom shall be deemed a loan
from us payable on the  earlier of  September  19,  2002,  or the closing of any
private  placement  or  public  offering  of  the  securities  of  International
Bio-Immune Systems, any merger involving more than 50% of the outstanding shares
of International  Bio-Immune Systems,  or any sale,  dissolution,  transfer,  or
assignment  of corporate  assets other than in the ordinary  course of business.
Interest shall accrue on the unpaid principal of the loan at the rate of 10% per
annum. If International  Bio-Immune Systems did not sell the shares by September
19, 2004, it was required to return the shares, or any amount which has not been
sold, to us.  International  Bio-Immune  Systems  currently  controls the voting
decisions  regarding these shares.  The President and Chief Executive Officer of
International  Bio- Immune Systems is Leslie F. Stern, who exercises sole voting
and investment powers regarding the shares.

         On August 3, 2004, we sold our investment in  International  Bio-Immune
Systems,  Inc. for $533,000 pursuant to a stock purchase and sale agreement with
William Ungar, a current  director and shareholder of  International  Bio-Immune

                                       34


Systems.  The securities sold to Mr. Ungar consisted of 2,663,254  common shares
of International  Bio-Immune  Systems and warrants to purchase  1,200,000 common
shares of International Bio-Immune Systems at $2.50 per share.

         On December 3, 2003,  we executed a purchase  agreement  with  American
Optisurgical, Inc. for the sale of the Mentor surgical products line, consisting
of the Phaco SlStem(TM) and the Odyssey(TM).  The assets sold in the transaction
included patents,  trademarks,  software codes and programs,  supplies,  work in
process,  finished goods, and molds related to the equipment. The purchase price
paid to us by American  Optisurgical  for the assets was $125,000.  The purchase
agreement also contained a noncompete  provision in which we agreed for a period
of three years from the closing date not to own, manage,  operate or control any
business that competes with cataract removal equipment substantially the same as
the proprietary technology of the Phaco SlStem(TM) and the Odyssey(TM).

         On September 28, 2004, we entered into an Investment  Banking Agreement
with Alpha  Advisory  Services,  Inc.  Under the terms of the  agreement,  Alpha
Advisory  Services is to use its best efforts to provide the following  services
to us: (i) review of and make  recommendations  regarding  our business plan and
promotional  materials;  (ii)  identify and contact  potential  investors in the
United  States and Europe for  potential  investment  in our  securities;  (iii)
organize meetings with potential investors and participate in such meetings; and
(iv)  assist  us in  future  financings,  mergers,  acquisitions  and  potential
buyouts.

         The term of the agreement  was for a period of three months,  which was
to be automatically renewed for successive one-year terms. Following the initial
three month  period,  either  party may  terminate  the  agreement  upon 15 days
written  notice to the other  party.  In  consideration  for the  services to be
performed  under the agreement,  Alpha Advisory  Services is to receive a fee of
$3,000 per month,  plus reasonable  travel and other  expenses,  and warrants to
purchase  25,000 shares of our common stock at $.15 per share.  The warrants are
exerciseable,  on a  cashless  basis,  over a two year  period  from the date of
issuance.  On May 20, 2005, we provided notice to Alpha Advisory Services of our
intention to terminate the agreement, effective as of June 4, 2005.

Background

         Corporate History: Our business originated with Paradigm Medical, Inc.,
a  California  corporation  formed  in  October  1989.  Paradigm  Medical,  Inc.
developed  our present  ophthalmic  business  and was  operated by our  founders
Thomas F.  Motter and Robert W.  Millar.  In May 1993,  Paradigm  Medical,  Inc.
merged with Paradigm Medical Industries, Inc. At the time of the merger, we were
a dormant  public  shell  existing  under the name French Bar  Industries,  Inc.
French Bar had operated a mining and tourist  business in Montana.  Prior to its
merger  with  Paradigm  Medical,  Inc. in 1993,  French Bar had  disposed of its
mineral and mining assets in a settlement of  outstanding  debt and had returned
to the  status  of a  dormant  entity.  Pursuant  to the  merger,  we  caused  a
1-for-7.96  reverse stock split of our shares of common stock.  We then acquired
all of the issued and  outstanding  shares of common stock of Paradigm  Medical,
Inc.  using  shares of our own  common  stock as  consideration.  As part of the
merger, we changed our name from French Bar Industries, Inc. to Paradigm Medical
Industries, Inc. and the management of Paradigm Medical, Inc. assumed control of
the  company.  In April  1994,  we caused a 1-for-5  reverse  stock split of our
shares of common  stock.  In  February  1996,  we  re-domesticated  to  Delaware
pursuant to a reorganization.

Overview

         Disorders of the Eye: The human eye is a complex organ which  functions
much  like a  camera,  with a lens in front and a  light-sensitive  screen,  the
retina,  in the rear. The  intervening  space contains a transparent  jelly-like
substance,  the vitreous,  which  together with the outer layer,  the sclera and
cornea,  helps the  eyeball to  maintain  its shape.  Light  enters  through the
cornea,  a  transparent  domed  window at the front of the eye.  The size of the
pupil, an aperture in the center of the iris,  controls the amount of light that
is then focused by the lens onto the retina as an upside-down image. The lens is
the internal  optical  component  of the eye and is  responsible  for  adjusting
focus. The lens is enclosed in a capsule. The retina is believed to contain more
than 130 million  light-receptor  cells.  These cells  convert  light into nerve
impulses  that are  transmitted  right-side  up by the optic nerve to the brain,
where they are interpreted. Muscles attached to the eye control its movements.

         Birth  defects,   trauma  from  accidents,   disease  and  age  related
deterioration  of  the  components  of  the  eye  could  all  contribute  to eye
disorders.  The most common eye disorders are either pathological or refractive.
Many  pathological  disorders  of the eye can be  corrected  by  surgery.  These
include cataracts  (clouded lenses),  glaucoma  (elevated  pressure in the eye),

                                       35


corneal   disorders   such  as  scars,   defects  and  irregular   surfaces  and
vitro-retinal disorders such as the attachment of membrane growths to the retina
causing blood leakage within the eye. All of these  disorders can impair vision.
Many  refractive  disorders can be corrected  through the use of eyeglasses  and
contact  lenses.  Myopia  (nearsightedness),   hyperopia   (farsightedness)  and
presbyopia  (inability  to  focus)  are  three  of the  most  common  refractive
disorders.

         Ultrasound   Technology:   Ultrasound   devices   have   been  used  in
ophthalmology  since the late 1960's for  diagnostic  and surgical  applications
when  treating  or  correcting  eye  disorders.   In   diagnostics,   ultrasound
instruments are used to measure distances and shapes of various parts of the eye
for  prescription  of eyeglasses and contact lenses and for  calculation of lens
implant  prescriptions for cataract surgery treatment.  These devices emit sound
waves  through a hand held  probe  that is placed  onto or near the eye with the
sound waves  emitted  being  reflected by the targeted  tissue.  The  reflection
"echo" is computed into a distance value that is presented as a visual image, or
cross  section of the eye, with precise  measurements  displayed and printed for
diagnostic use by the surgeon.

         Surgical use of ultrasonics in ophthalmology is limited to treatment of
cataract  lenses in the eye through a procedure  called  phacoemulsification  or
"phaco."  A primary  objective  of  cataract  surgeries  is the  removal  of the
opacified (cataract) lens through an incision that is as small as possible.  The
opacified  lens is then replaced by a new synthetic  lens  intraocular  implant.
Phaco  technology  involves a process by which a cataract  is broken  into small
pieces using ultrasonic shock waves delivered through a hollow, open-ended metal
needle attached to a hand held probe. The fragments of cataracts tissue are then
removed through aspiration. Phaco systems were first designed in the late 1960's
after various  attempts by surgeons to use other  techniques to remove opacified
lenses, including crushing,  cutting, freezing,  drilling and applying chemicals
to the  cataract.  By the  mid-1970's,  ultrasound  had  proven  to be the  most
effective   technology  to  fragment  cataracts.   Market  Scope's  (Manchester,
Missouri),  "The 2001 Report on the  Worldwide  Cataract  Market",  January 2001
indicates that phaco cataract  treatment was the technology for cataract removal
used in over 80% of surgeries  in the United  States and over 20% of all foreign
surgeries.

         Laser   Technology:   The  term   "laser"  is  an  acronym   for  Light
Amplification  by Stimulated  Emission of  Radiation.  Lasers have been commonly
used for a variety of medical and ophthalmic procedures since the 1960's. Lasers
emit photons into a highly intense beam of energy that  typically  radiates at a
single wavelength or color. Laser energy is generated and intensified in a laser
tube or solid-state  cavity by charging and exciting photons of energy contained
within  material  called the lazing  medium.  This stored  light  energy is then
delivered to targeted tissue through focusing lenses by means of optical mirrors
or fiber optics.  Most laser systems use solid-state  crystals or gases as their
lazing  medium.  Differing  wavelengths  of  laser  light  are  produced  by the
selection  of the  lazing  medium.  The  medium  selected  determines  the laser
wavelength  emitted,  which in turn is  absorbed by the  targeted  tissue in the
body.  Different tissues absorb different  wavelengths or colors of laser light.
The degree of absorption by the tissue also varies with the choice of wavelength
and is an important  variable in treating various tissues.  In a surgical laser,
light is emitted in either a continuous  stream or in a series of short duration
"pulses",  thus  interacting  with the  tissue  through  heat and  shock  waves,
respectively.  Several  factors,  including the  wavelength of the laser and the
frequency and duration of the pulse or exposure,  determine the amount of energy
that interacts with the targeted  tissue and thus, the amount of surgical effect
on the tissue.

         Lasers are widely accepted in the ophthalmic community for treatment of
certain eye disorders and are popular for surgical applications because of their
relatively  noninvasive  nature. In general,  ophthalmic lasers,  such as argon,
Nd:YAG  and  excimer  (argon-fluoride)  are  used to  coagulate,  cut or  ablate
targeted  tissue.  The argon laser is used to treat leaking blood vessels on the
retina  (retinopathy)  and  retinal  detachment.  The  excimer  laser is used in
corneal refractive surgery. The Nd:YAG pulsed laser is used to perforate clouded
posterior  capsules  (posterior  capsulotomy)  and to  relieve  glaucoma-induced
elevated   pressure  in  the  eye   (iridotomy,   trabeulorplasty,   transcleral
cyclophotocoagulation).  Argon, Nd:YAG and excimer lasers are primarily used for
one or two clinical  applications  each. In contrast to these conventional laser
systems,  our  Photon(TM)  laser  cataract  system  is  designed  to be used for
multiple ophthalmic applications, including certain new applications that may be
made possible with our proprietary technology.  Such new applications,  however,
must be tested in clinical trials and be approved by the FDA.

Products

         Our  principal  proprietary  surgical  products  are systems for use by
ophthalmologists  to perform surgical treatment  procedures to remove cataracts.
We have  complete  ownership  of each product  with no  technological  licensing
limitations.

         Precisionist ThirtyThousand(TM): The Precisionist ThirtyThousand(TM) is
our core  phaco  surgical  technology.  The  Precisionist(TM)  was  placed  into
production and offered for sale in 1997. As a phaco cataract surgery system,  we
believe the Precisionist(TM) with its new fluidics panel is equal or superior to

                                       36


the present competitive systems in the United States.  However,  due to the lack
of recent sales, the majority of our inventory  associated with the Precisionist
Thirty  Thousand(TM)  has been  estimated to be obsolete and therefore a reserve
for such  inventory  has been  recorded.  The system  features  a graphic  color
display and unique  proprietary  on board  computer and graphic  user  interface
linked to a soft key membrane  panel for flexible  programmable  operation.  The
system provides real-time "on-the-fly" adjustment capabilities for each surgical
parameter  during  the  surgical  procedure  for high  volume  applications.  In
addition,  the  Precisionist(TM)  provides  one hundred  preprogrammable surgery
setups,  with a second  level of  subprogrammed  custom  modes within each major
surgical screen (i.e., ultrasound phaco and irrigation/aspiration modes).

         The  Precisionist(TM)  also  features our newly  developed  proprietary
fluidics  panel which is completely  noninvasive  for improved  sterility and to
provide a surgical  environment  in the eye that  virtually  eliminates  fluidic
surge and solves chamber  maintenance  problems  normally  associated with phaco
cataract  surgery.  This new fluidics  system  provides  greater control for the
surgeon and allows the safe operation at much higher vacuum settings by sampling
changes in  aspiration  100 times per second.  Greater  vacuum in phaco  surgery
means less use of  ultrasound  or laser energy to fragment the cataract and less
chance for  surrounding  tissue  damage.  In addition to the full  complement of
surgical  modalities  (e.g.,  irrigation,  aspiration,  bipolar  coagulation and
anterior vitrectomy), system automation includes "dimensional" audio feedback of
vacuum levels and voice  confirmation for major system  functions,  providing an
intuitive environment in which the advanced phaco surgeon can concentrate on the
surgical technique rather than the equipment.  Sales of the Precisionist(TM) and
related  accessories were 0% of the total revenues in both 2004 and 2003, and 0%
of the total revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2005.

         Ocular  Surgery  Workstation(TM):  The Ocular  Surgery  Workstation(TM)
comprises  the base  system of the  Precisionist  ThirtyThousand(TM)  and is the
first system to our knowledge,  which uses the expansive capabilities of today's
advanced computer  technology to offer seamless open architecture  expandability
of the system hardware and software  modules.  The  Workstation(TM)  utilizes an
embedded  open  architecture  computer  developed  for  us and  controlled  by a
proprietary  software system developed by us that interfaces with all components
of  the  system.  Ultrasound,   fluidics  (irrigation),   aspiration,   venting,
coagulation  and anterior  vitrectomy  (pneumatic)  are all included in the base
model.  Each  component is controlled  as a peripheral  module within this fully
integrated system. This approach allows for seamless expansion and refinement of
the  Workstation(TM)  with  the  ability  to add  other  hardware  and  software
features.  Expansion  such as our  Photon(TM)  laser  system  and  hardware  for
additional   surgical   applications  are  easily  implemented  by  means  of  a
preexisting  expansion rack,  which resides in the base of the  Workstation(TM).
These expanded  capabilities  could  include,  but would not be limited to laser
systems,  video  surgical  fiber  optic  imaging,   cutting  and  electrosurgery
equipment.  However,  there is no  guarantee  that the  Workstation(TM)  will be
accepted in the marketplace.  If the FDA approves the Photon(TM),  we will refer
to the  Workstation(TM)  as the Photon(TM)  Ocular Surgery  Workstation(TM).  To
date,  we have not  commercially  developed  or offered for sale any other added
hardware or software features to its Workstation(TM).

         Photon(TM) Laser System: The Photon(TM) laser cataract system, which is
still subject to FDA approval, is designed to be installed as a seamless plug-in
upgrade or add-on to our Precisionist(TM)  Ocular Surgery  Workstation(TM).  The
plug-in platform concept is unique in the ophthalmic surgical market for systems
of this  magnitude  and presents a unique  market  opportunity  for us. The main
elements  of the laser  system are the Nd:YAG  laser  module,  Photon(TM)  laser
software  package  and  interchangeable  disposable  hand held fiber optic laser
cataract  probe.  The  Photon(TM)  laser  utilizes  the on board  microprocessor
computer of the  Workstation(TM)  to generate short pulse laser energy developed
through the patented  LCP(TM) to targeted  cataract tissue inside the eye, while
simultaneously  irrigating the eye and aspirating the diseased  cataract  tissue
from the eye.  The probe is smaller in  diameter  than  conventional  ultrasound
phaco  needles and  presents no damaging  vibration or heat build up in the eye.
Our Phase I clinical trials demonstrated that this probe could easily reduce the
size of the  cataract  incision  from 3.0 mm to under  2.0 mm  thereby  reducing
surgical  trauma  and  complementing   current  foldable   intraocular   implant
technology.

         The laser probe may also eliminate any possibility for burns around the
incision  or at the  cornea  and may  therefore  be used with  cataract  surgery
techniques  that  utilize  a more  delicate  clear  cornea  incision  which  can
eliminate sutures and be conducted with topical anesthesia. However, this system
may not effectively remove harder grade cataracts. Harder grade cataracts can be
removed   using   the   already   existing   ultrasound    capability   of   the
Precisionist(TM).  Because  of  the  "going  concern"  status  of  the  company,
management has focused  efforts on those  products and activities  that will, in
its opinion,  achieve the most resource  efficient  short-term  cash flow to the
company. As reflected in the results for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004
and the three months ended March 31, 2005, diagnostic products are currently our


                                       37


major focus and the  Photon(TM)  and other  extensive  research and  development
projects  have been put on hold pending  future  evaluation  when our  financial
position  improves.  Due  to  the  uncertainty  surrounding  the  timetable  for
obtaining  FDA  approval  and the lack of  significant  revenue  from the  other
surgical products, we have recorded an inventory reserve against the majority of
the  inventory  associated  with  the  Photon(TM)  and the  Precisionist  Thirty
Thousand(TM).  Our focus is not on any specific  diagnostic product or products,
but rather on our entire group of diagnostic products.

         At some  point  in the  future,  we may  intend,  subject  to  economic
feasibility and the availability of adequate funds, to refine the laser delivery
system and laser cataract  surgical  technique  used on soft  cataracts  through
expanded   research  and  clinical  studies.   Subject  to  the   aforementioned
constraints,  we intend to refine the  fluidics  management  system by improving
chamber  maintenance  during  surgical  procedures and to develop  techniques to
optimize time and improve  invasive  techniques  through  expanded  research and
clinical  studies.  As far as we  can  determine,  no  integrated  single  laser
photofragmenting  probe is  presently  available  on the market  that uses laser
energy directly,  contained in an enclosed probe, to denature cataract tissue at
a precise location inside the eye while simultaneously irrigating and aspirating
the site.

         Our laser  system is based upon the concept  that pulsed  laser  energy
produced  with  the  microprocessor  controlled  Nd:YAG  laser  system  provides
ophthalmic  surgeons  with a more  precise  and less  traumatic  alternative  in
cataract surgery.  Although conventional ultrasonic surgical systems have proven
effective  and  reliable  in  clinical  use for many  years,  their  use of high
frequency  shock waves and  vibration  to  fragment  the  cataract  can make the
procedure  difficult and can present risk of complication  both during and after
surgery. In contrast,  our laser system, which utilizes short centralized energy
bursts,  should  permit  the  delivery  of the laser  beam  with less  trauma to
adjacent tissue.  Therefore,  unlike  ultrasonic  systems,  whose vibrations and
shock waves affect (and can damage)  non-cataracts  tissues  within the eye, our
Photon(TM)  laser cataract system should only affect tissues with which it comes
into direct contact.

         In  October  of 2000,  we  received  FDA  approval  for the  Photon(TM)
Workstation(TM)  to be used with a 532mm  green  laser  which is  effective  for
medical  procedures other than cataract  removal,  such as  photocoagulation  of
retinal and venous anomalies within or outside the eye, pigmented lesions around
the orbital socket, posterior or anterior procedures associated with glaucoma or
diabetes  and  general   photocoagulation  for  various   dermatological  venous
anomalies including  telangiectasia  (surface veins), or commonly referred to as
"spider veins".  The goal is to be able to integrate  multiple laser wavelengths
into  one  system  or  workstation   that  can  be  used  for  multiple  medical
specialties.  This approval  represents  only one of the potential  applications
that could represent substantial growth opportunities including additional sales
of equipment, instruments, accessories and disposables.

         The Photon(TM) Ocular Surgery Workstation(TM) has not been commercially
developed  with any other  added  hardware  or  software  features.  There is no
guarantee  that the  ophthalmic  surgery  market  will  accept the laser in this
capacity or that the FDA will grant approval.  Regulatory approval would require
completion of pending  Photon(TM)  clinical trials and  resubmission of a 510(k)
predicate  device  application to the FDA. Because of the "going concern" status
of the company,  management has focused efforts on those products and activities
that will, in its opinion,  achieve the most resource efficient  short-term cash
flow to the  company.  As  reflected  in the  results  for the fiscal year ended
December  31,  2003,  diagnostic  products  consisting  mainly  of the  P40  UBM
Ultrasound Biomicroscope,  perimeter, CT 50 Corneal Topographer,  and Blood Flow
Analyzer(TM)  are  currently  our  major  focus  and the  Photon(TM)  and  other
extensive research and development projects have been put on hold pending future
evaluation when the financial position of the company improves. Our focus is not
on any specific  diagnostic product or products,  buy rather on the entire group
of diagnostic products.

         The SIStem(TM) and the Odyssey(TM):  The SIStem(TM) and the Odyssey(TM)
have been our entry-level  phacoemulsification  systems.  The SIStem(TM) and the
Odyssey(TM) were designed to be a full featured, cost-effective,  reliable phaco
machines;  however,  due to the  lack  of  sales  in  2002,  the  products  were
determined to be obsolete. Sales of the SIStem(TM),  the Odyssey(TM) and related
accessories represented approximately 4% and 0% of the total revenues for fiscal
years 2004 and 2003,  respectively,  and 0% of the total  revenues for the three
months ended March 31, 2005.  On December 3, 2003,  we completed the sale of the
SIStem(TM) and the Odyssey(TM),  including patents,  trademarks,  software codes
and programs,  supplies, work in process,  finished goods and molds, to American
Optisurgical, Inc.

         Surgical  Instruments  and  Disposables:  In addition  to the  cataract
surgery  equipment,  our  surgical  systems  utilize or will  utilize  accessory
instruments and disposables,  some of which are proprietary to us. These include
replacement ultrasound tips, sleeves, tubing sets and fluidics packs, instrument
drapes and laser cataract probes. We intend to expand its disposable accessories
as it further  penetrates the cataract  surgery market and expands the treatment
applications for its Workstation(TM).  These products contributed  approximately
0% of the total  revenues for both 2004 and 2003,  and 0% of the total  revenues
for the three months ended March 31, 2005.

                                       38


         Diagnostic  Eye Care  Products:  Glaucoma is a second  leading cause of
adult  blindness in the world.  Glaucoma is described as a partial or total loss
of visual field  resulting from certain  progressive  disease or degeneration of
the  retina,  macula or nerve  fiber  bundle.  The cause  and  mechanism  of the
glaucoma pathology is not completely understood. Present detection methods focus
on the  measurement  of  intraocular  pressure  in the  eye,  visual  field  and
observation  of the optic nerve head to determine  the  possibility  of pressure
being exerted upon the retina, and optic nerve fiber bundle,  which can diminish
visual field.  Recently,  retinal blood  circulation has been indicated as a key
component in the presence of glaucoma.  Some  companies  produce  color  Doppler
equipment in the $80,000 price range  intended to provide  measurement of ocular
blood flow activity in order to diagnose and treat glaucoma at an earlier stage.

         Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM):  In June 1997,  we received FDA  clearance to
market the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) for early detection and treatment  management
of glaucoma  and other retina  related  diseases.  The device  measures not only
intraocular  pressure but also  pulsatile  ocular blood flow,  the  reduction of
which may cause  nerve  fiber  bundle  death  through  oxygen  deprivation  thus
resulting  in visual  field  loss  associated  with  glaucoma.  Our  Blood  Flow
Analyzer(TM)  is  a  portable  automated  in  office  system  that  presents  an
affordable  method  for  ocular  blood  flow  testing  for  the  ophthalmic  and
optometric  practitioner.  This was our first  diagnostic  eye care device.  The
device is a portable  desktop  system that utilizes a  proprietary  and patented
pneumatic Air Membrane Applanation Probe(TM) or AMAP(TM),  which can be attached
to any model of  standard  examination  slit lamp,  which is then  placed on the
cornea of the patient's eye to measure the intraocular  pressure within the eye.
The device is unique in that it reads a series of  intraocular  pressure  pulses
over a short period of time  (approximately five to ten seconds) and generates a
waveform profile, which can be correlated to blood flow volume within the eye. A
proprietary  software  algorithm  developed by David M. Silver,  Ph.D., at Johns
Hopkins  University,  calculates  the blood flow volume.  The device  presents a
numerical  intraocular  pressure  reading  and blood flow  analysis  rating in a
concise printout, which is affixed to the patient history file. In addition, the
data generated by the device can be downloaded to a personal computer system for
advanced database development and management.

         We market the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM) as a stand-alone  model packaged
with a custom built  computer  system.  The Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  utilizes a
single  use  disposable  cover for the Air  Membrane  Applanation  Probe(TM),  a
corneal probe which is shipped in sterile packages. The probe tip cover provides
accurate readings and acts as a prophylactic barrier for the patient. The device
has been  issued a patent in the  European  Economic  Community  and the  United
States  and has a patent  pending  in Japan.  The FDA  cleared  the  Blood  Flow
Analyzer(TM)  for marketing in June 1997 and we commenced  selling the system in
September 1997. In addition to the Humphrey  products,  this diagnostic  product
allowed us to expand its market to approximately 35,000 optometry  practitioners
in the  United  States  in  addition  to  the  approximately  18,000  ophthalmic
practitioners  who currently  perform eye surgeries and are  candidates  for our
surgical systems.

         In April 2001, we received written authorization from the CPT Editorial
Research and Development  Department of the American Medical  Association to use
common  procedure  terminology  or CPT code  number  92120  for our  Blood  Flow
Analyzer(TM),  for reimbursement purposes for doctors using the device. However,
certain  payers  have  elected  not to  reimburse  doctors  using the Blood Flow
Analyzer(TM).  We are continuing  our aggressive  campaign to educate the payers
about the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM),  its  purposes and the  significance  of its
performance in patient care in order to achieve  reimbursements  to the doctors.
Currently, there is reimbursement by insurance payors to doctors using the Blood
Flow  Analyzer(TM) in 22 states and partial  reimbursement in four other states.
The  amount of  reimbursement  to  doctors  using the  Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM)
generally ranges from $56.00 to $76.00 per patient, depending upon the insurance
payor. Insurance payors providing  reimbursement for the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM)
have the  discretion to increase or reduce the amount of  reimbursement.  We are
endeavoring to obtain  reimbursement  by insurance  payors in other states where
there is currently no reimbursement being made.

         The manufacturing  activities for the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) have been
moved to the Salt  Lake City  facility  from the  outsourced  plant  located  in
England. On October 21, 2002, we received FDA approval on our 510(k) application
for  additional  indications  of  use  for  the  Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM).  The
additional  indications include pulsatile ocular blood flow and pulsatile ocular
blood volume. These are diagnostic  measurements that assess the hemodynamic and
vascular  health of the eye. Also, we are continuing our aggressive  campaign to
educate the insurance payers about the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM), its purposes and
the  significance  of its  performance  in  patient  care in  order  to  achieve
reimbursements  to the doctors using our Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM).  Sales of the
Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) and related accessories  accounted for approximately 19%
and 16% of total revenues for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively,  and 6% of total  revenues  for the three  months  ended March 31,
2005.

                                       39


         Dicon(TM)  Perimeters:  Dicon(TM) perimeters consist of the LD 400, the
TKS 5000,  the SST(TM),  FieldLink(TM),  FieldView(TM)  and Advanced  FieldView.
Perimeters are used to determine retinal sensitivity testing the visual pathway.
Perimeters  have become a standard of care in the  detection  and  monitoring of
glaucoma  worldwide.   Perimetry  is  reimbursable   worldwide.   The  Dicon(TM)
perimeters  feature  patented  kinetic  fixation and voice  synthesis  now in 27
different languages. Software programs are sold to assist in the analysis of the
test  results.  Sales  of  the  perimeters  and  related  accessories  generated
approximately  27% of the total  revenues for both 2004 and 2003,  respectively,
and 27% of the total revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2005.

         The LD 400FT, or Fast Threshold Autoperimeter,  is the successor to the
LD 400. The device is an  autoperimeter  used to measure  patient visual fields.
The LD 400FT is  identical in hardware to the LD 400 but it uses new software to
enable  a  fast  threshold   test.  This  test  reduces  the  time  required  by
ophthalmologists  and optometrists  conducting  autoperimetry tests by more than
40% by running an abbreviated  test at light levels  determined to be sufficient
to be seen in  normal  patients.  The  procedure  currently  takes  more than 15
minutes.  The fast  threshold  test by the LD 400FT is similar to tests by other
devices  on the  market.  Healthy  patients  will pass the test.  Patients  with
reduced  visual  fields  will be  flagged  by the test  enabling  the  device to
automatically  run a more  comprehensive  examination to determine the extent of
the visual  field loss.  All existing LD 400s can be upgraded to support the new
fast threshold test through the purchase of a software package.

         Dicon(TM) Corneal Topographers:  Dicon(TM) corneal topographers include
the CT 200(TM) and the CT 50.  Corneal  topographers  are used to determine  the
shape and  integrity of the cornea,  the anterior  surface of the eye.  Clinical
applications for corneal topographers include refractive surgery that eliminates
the need for  eyeglasses  and  optometric  applications  including  contact lens
fitting. Revenues from the topographer and related accessories were 6% and 9% of
the total revenues for 2004 and 2003, respectively, and 3% of the total revenues
for the three  months  ended  March 31,  2005.  An  enhanced  version  of the CT
200(TM), the CT 2000(TM) was introduced during the first quarter of 2004. We are
completing  the  development of upgrades to the CT 200(TM) and the CT 50 Corneal
Topographer,  which will be  operating  upon  completion  of the  upgrades  with
Windows XP software rather than the former Windows 95 operating systems.  We are
also  revising our upgrade to offer the CT 200(TM)  with  Windows 2000  software
rather than the Windows XP software that we announced in August 2003.

         P55  Pachymetric  Analyzer:  The  ultrasonic  pachymeter  is  used  for
measurement  of corneal  thickness.  The Model P55 is  positioned  as a standard
office pachymeter.  This device is targeted to the refractive surgery market and
contributed  approximately  3% of the total revenues for both 2004 and 2003, and
1% of the total revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2005.

         P20 A-Scan Biometric Ultrasound  Analyzer:  The A-Scan has been removed
from our line of diagnostic  products.  The A-Scan is a  prerequisite  procedure
reimbursed  by Medicare and is performed  before every  cataract  surgery.  Over
5,000 A-Scan systems have been installed in the worldwide market, representing a
substantial  market  opportunity  for software  upgrades  and extended  warranty
contract sales.  A-Scan sales were approximately 0% and 2% of the total revenues
for both 2004 and 2003, respectively, and 0% of the total revenues for the three
months ended March 31, 2005.

         P37 A/B  Scan  Ocular  Ultrasound  Diagnostic:  The A/B Scan is used by
retinal  subspecialists  to identify foreign bodies in the posterior  chamber of
the eye and to evaluate the structural  integrity of the retina. The A/B Scan is
attractive  to the general  ophthalmic  community at large  because of its lower
price point.  Sales from this product were  approximately 8% and 4% of the total
revenues for 2004 and 2003,  respectively,  and 4% of the total revenues for the
three months ended March 31, 2005.

         P40,  P45 and  P60  UBM  Ultrasound  Biomicroscopes:  Humphrey  Systems
developed the P40 UBM Ultrasound  Biomicroscope in conjunction with the New York
Eye and Ear  Infirmary  in  Manhattan  and the  University  of Toronto.  The P40
biomicroscope  and its intellectual  property were included in the purchase from
Humphrey  Systems and gives us the  proprietary  rights to this device.  The P40
biomicroscope  creates a high  resolution  computer image of the unseen parts of
the eye that is a "map" for the glaucoma  surgeon.  The P40  biomicroscope is an
"enabling technology" for the ophthalmologist, one that we have repositioned for
broader market sales  penetration.  Formerly sold only to glaucoma  subspecialty
practitioners,  we reintroduced the P40  biomicroscope at a price point targeted
for  the  average  practitioners  seeking  to add  glaucoma  filtering  surgical
procedures and income to their cataract surgical practice.

         The P40 biomicroscope  related surgical filtering  procedures are fully
reimbursable  by Medicare  and  insurance  providers.  This  untapped new market
positions us with our proprietary P40  biomicroscope  and to our knowledge,  the

                                       40


only commercially  viable product of this type on the market, as a leader in the
rapidly expanding glaucoma imaging and treatment segment. In the fall of 2000 we
introduced  the  P45  UBM  Ultrasound  Biomicroscope,  which  combines  the  P40
biomicroscope  and  the  P37  A/B  Scan  Ocular  Ultrasound  Diagnostic  in  one
instrument.  We believe that by combining functions,  the P45 biomicroscope will
appeal to a broader market. The P40 biomicroscope and related  accessories sales
were  approximately  12%  and  7% of the  total  revenues  for  2004  and  2003,
respectively,  and 2% of the total revenues for the three months ended March 31,
2005.  The  P45 UBM  Ultrasound  Biomicroscope  and  related  accessories  sales
contributed  approximately  16% and 13% of the total revenues for 2004 and 2003,
respectively, and 25% of the total revenues for the three months ended March 31,
2005.

         On October 25, 2004, we entered into a Manufacturing  and  Distribution
Agreement  with  E-Technologies,  Inc.,  a Iowa based  developer of software and
related technology for technical applications. Under the terms of the agreement,
E-Technologies  granted to us the exclusive right to manufacture,  market,  sell
and distribute an ultrasound biomicroscope.  Upon execution of the agreement, we
paid  $30,000  to  E-Technologies  for  engineering  costs  associated  with the
development of the biomicroscope. Once the bioimicroscope receives FDA approval,
we agree to pay E-Technologies an additional fee of $45,000.

         In March 2005, we introduced the P60 UBM Ultrasound Biomicroscope.  The
P60 biomicroscope represents the fourth generation of UBM devices and has better
visual clarity and image flexibility than earlier versions. On March 1, 2005, we
were awarded the CE Mark for the P60,  which  enables us to market the device in
19 Western  European  countries  and some parts of the  Pacific  Rim. On May 26,
2005, we received FDA 510(k) premarket  approval for the P60, which allows us to
sell the P60 in the United States. The P60 biomicroscope and related accessories
sales were 0% of total  revenues for 2004, and 17% of the total revenues for the
three months ended March 31, 2005.

         In consideration  for the exclusive right to manufacture and distribute
the biomicroscope, we agree to pay E- Technologies the sum of $5,000 for each of
the  first  25  biomicroscopes  sold  by  us.  Thereafter,  we  agree  to pay E-
Technologies  the sum of $4,000 for each  biomicroscope  sold.  As an additional
condition,  we agree to sell 25 biomicroscopes  during the first 12 months after
the biomicroscope  receives FDA approval.  The agreement is effective for a term
of two years.  After the expiration of the two year period,  the agreement is to
automatically renew for additional one year periods,  unless either party elects
to terminate  the agreement  upon at least 30 days prior  written  notice to the
other party before the end of any term of the agreement.

         In July of 2000, we received ISO 9001 and EN 46001  certification using
TUV Essen as the notified body. Under ISO 9001  certification,  our products are
now CE  marked.  The CE mark  allows us to ship  product  for  revenue  into the
European Community. We successfully retained our certification in 2002.

         Parts and Services:  The parts and services revenue from the repair and
service of equipment sold accounted for  approximately  8% of the total revenues
in both 2003 and 2002,  and 7% of the total  revenues for the three months ended
March 31, 2005.

         Sales of other  products  represented  1% of the total revenues in both
2004 and 2003, and 3% of the total revenues for the three months ended March 31,
2005.

         The following table identifies each product class, status of commercial
development,  the percentage of sales  contributed by that class,  reimbursement
status, and status of applicable United States and foreign regulatory approvals:

                                       41





                                                      Commercial       Reimbursement       %2004       % 2005     Regulatory
      Product (1)             Product Class          Development           Status          Sales      Sales(2)    Approvals

                                                                                                
 P55 Pachymetric         System, Imaging, Pulsed       Complete             Yes              3%          1%      FDA 510(K)
 Analyzer                    Echo Diagnostic                                                                     K844299*
                                                                                                                 ISO 9001: 1994, EN

 P20 A-Scan              System, Imaging, Pulsed     Discontinued           Yes              0%          0%      FDA 510(K)
 Biometric                   Echo Diagnostic                                                                     K844299*
 Ultrasound Analyzer                                                                                             ISO 9001: 1994,
                                                                                                                 EN ISO 9001**

 P37 A/B Scan             Transducer, Ultrasound       Complete             Yes              8%          4%      FDA 510(K)
 Ocular Ultrasound              Diagnostic                                                                       K844299*
 Diagnostic                                                                                                      ISO 9001: 1994,
                                                                                                                 EN ISO 9001**

 P40 UBM                 System, Imaging, Pulsed       Complete             Yes             12%          2%      FDA 510(K)
 Ultrasound                  Echo Ultrasound                                                                     K844299*
 BioMicroscope                  Diagnostic                                                                       ISO 9001: 1994,
                                                                                                                 EN ISO 9001**

 P45 UBM                 System, Imaging, Pulsed       Complete             Yes             16%         25%      FDA 510(K)
 Ultrasound                  Echo Ultrasound                                                                     K844299*
 Biomicroscope,                 Diagnostic                                                                       ISO 9001: 1994,
 Workstation Plus                                                                                                EN ISO 9001**

 P60 UBM                 System, Imaging, Pulsed       Complete             Yes              0%         17%      FDA 510(K)
 Ultrasound                  Echo Ultrasound                                                                     K844299*
 Biomicroscope,                 Diagnostic                                                                       ISO 9001: 1994,
 Workstation Plus                                                                                                EN ISO 9001**

 BFA Ocular Blood           Tonometer, Manual          Complete             Yes****         19%          6%      FDA 510(K)
 Flow Analyzer(TM)                 Diagnostic                                                                    K844299*
 and Disposables                                                                                                 ISO 9001: 1994,
                                                                                                                 EN ISO 9001**

 CT 200 Corneal            Topographer Corneal         Complete             Yes              6%          3%      FDA 510(K)
 Topography System              AC-Powered                                                                       K844299*
                                Diagnostic                                                                       ISO 9001: 1994,
                                                                                                                 EN ISO 9001**

 LD 400                    Perimeter, Automatic        Complete             Yes             24%         27%      FDA 510(K)
 Autoperimetry                  AC-Powered                                                                       K844299*
 System                         Diagnostic                                                                       ISO 9001: 1994,
                                                                                                                 EN ISO 9001**

 TKS 5000                  Perimeter, Automatic        Complete             Yes              3%          5%      FDA 510(K)
 Autoperimetry                 AC-Powered,                                                                       K844299*
 System                         Diagnostic                                                                       ISO 9001: 1994,
                                                                                                                 EN ISO 9001**

 Precisionist Thirty        Phacofragmentation         Complete             Yes              0%          0%      FDA 510(K)
 Thousand(TM), Ocular                                                                                            K844299*
 Surgery Workstation                                                                                             ISO 9001: 1994,
 with Surgical                                                                                                   EN ISO 9001**
 Equipment and
 Disposables

 SIStem(TM) and            Phacofragmentation           Sold                Yes              0%          0%      FDA 510(K)
 Odyssey(TM)(3)                                                                                                  K844299*


 Photon(TM) Laser, Ocular  Phacoemulsification BFA   In-Process (5)         No               0%          0%      IDE G940151
 Surgery Workstation               tips                                                                          ISO 9001: 1994,
 with Surgical                                                                                                   EN ISO 9001
 Equipment and
 Disposables(4)

 Parts and Services          Perimeter, BFA,          Complete             Yes               9%         10%     FDA 510(K) K844299*
                        Tonometer, Topographer,                                                                 ISO 9001: 1994,
                               Ultrasound                                                                       EN ISO 9001**
                         Workstations, Systems,
                                Imaging


                                       42


 --------------------------

(1)      Except for the Photon(TM) Ocular Surgery Workstation, which can only be
         sold in countries outside the United States, these products can be sold
         in the United States and in foreign countries including but not limited
         to Argentina,  Australia,  Bangladesh,  Borneo,  Brazil, Canada, China,
         Czechoslovakia,  Egypt,  France,  Germany,  Greece,  Hong Kong,  India,
         Israel,  Italy, Japan, Jordan,  Korea,  Malaysia,  Mexico, New Zealand,
         Pakistan,  Peru, Poland,  Puerto Rico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sri
         Lanka,  Taiwan,  Thailand,  Turkey,  United  Kingdom,  and United  Arab
         Emirates.

(2)      Sales for 2005 are for the three months ended March 31, 2005.

(3)      Due to the lack of recent sales volume,  the inventory  associated with
         the   Precisionist   Thirty  Thousand  (TM),  the  SIStem(TM)  and  the
         Odyssey(TM) has been deemed obsolete and a reserve has been recorded to
         offset such inventory.

(4)      Due to the lack of recent  evidence  to support the  recoverability  of
         inventory associated with the Photon(TM), we have recorded a reserve to
         offset the majority of such inventory on hand.

(5)      The  Photon(TM)  is  in-process  and not  complete  because we have not
         completed  the  clinical  trials  in order  to  obtain  FDA  regulatory
         approval.

*        FDA 510(K) K844299  represents  domestic approval by U.S. Food and Drug
         Administration

**       ISO 9001: 1994, EN ISO 9001 represents international approval

***      IDE G940151 represents approval for international distribution only

****     Represents full reimbursement in 22 states and partial reimbursement in
         four other states.

         As detailed in the table above,  except for the Photon(TM) Laser Ocular
Surgery  Workstation,  which  requires  additional  development  and  regulatory
approvals, our current products are developed and available for sale in footnote
(1) of the table.  Any possible  future  efforts to complete  development of the
Photon(TM)  laser system and obtain the  necessary  regulatory  approvals  would
depend on adequate  funding.  If these efforts were  undertaken but proved to be
unsuccessful,  the impact would include the costs  associated with these efforts
and the anticipated  future revenues that we would not receive as expected.  The
"Use of Proceeds" section provides  information on the estimated  application of
proceeds for  research and  development.  We  anticipate  that a majority of the
estimated  costs for research and  development  will be used for the enhancement
and upgrading of our current  products  being offered for sale. We estimate that
the liquidity  needed to complete the clinical trials on the Photon(TM) in order
to obtain the necessary FDA regulatory approval to be approximately $225,000.

         We currently purchase  components and parts used in our products from a
limited number of key suppliers.  Our reliance on our principal  suppliers could
result in delays  associated  with  redesigning a product due to an inability to
obtain an adequate supply of required  components and parts, and reduced control
over pricing,  quality and timely  delivery.  The loss of any of these principal
suppliers  or the  inability  of a  supplier  to meet  performance  and  quality
specifications,  requested  quantities  or  delivery  schedules  could cause our
revenues to decline.  In addition,  any  interruption or  discontinuance  in the
supply of  components  or parts  could have an adverse  effect on our  business,
results of operation and financial  condition.  Our principal  suppliers include
Capistrano Labs, US Ultrasound and Anello.

Marketing and Sales

         Ophthalmologists are mainly office based and perform their surgeries in
local  hospitals  or  surgical  centers  that  provide  the  necessary  surgical
equipment and  supplies.  Ophthalmologists  are generally  involved in decisions
relating to the  purchase of equipment  and  accessories  for their  independent
ambulatory   surgical  centers  and  for  the  hospitals  with  which  they  are
affiliated.  This  provides  the  opportunity  for  direct,  targeted,  personal
selling,  responsive  high quality  customer  service and short buying cycles to
achieve a product  sale in the office or  hospital.  Hospitals  also  comprise a
significant  market, as recent demand for ultrasonic  surgery technology has put
pressure on the  ophthalmologist,  who in turn persuades the hospital to install
the latest technology system so that he can offer this procedure to his patients
and the community.

         Industry  analysts  report that the United States  ophthalmic  surgical
device market has been  characterized by slower growth in recent years. This has
apparently been caused by the potential reforms  associated with the health care
industry.  Further,  hospitals  have been  inclined  to keep their  older  phaco
machines  longer than  expected as they have been  forced to mind  budgets  more
carefully and have become less willing to invest in capital equipment until more
information on health care reform becomes available.  However,  analysts predict
that the ophthalmic surgical device market will see renewed growth in the coming
years as the health  care  environment  stabilizes  and as the  growing  elderly
population produces an increased number of cataract surgeries.  As a consequence
of these  factors,  the market should see a greater rate of replacement of older
machines that hospitals and surgeons have been postponing for longer than usual.

                                       43


         Current Market  Acceptance and Potential:  The principal  purchasers of
our  products  have been  ophthalmologists,  optometrists  and  clinics  in many
countries  throughout the world.  We believe that the market for our products is
being  driven by: (i) the aging of the  population,  which is  evidenced  by the
domestic and  international  cataract  surgery volume growth trend over the past
ten years, (The National Eye Institute reported in March 2002 that the number of
blind or  visually  impaired  Americans  is likely  to  double  over the next 30
years.) (ii) the entry by emerging countries (including China, Russia, and other
countries in Asia,  Eastern Europe and Africa) into advanced  technology medical
care for their populations,  (iii) increased awareness worldwide of the benefits
of the minimally  invasive phaco cataract procedure and (iv) the introduction of
technology improvements such as our laser system.

         Marketing Organization:  We market our products internationally through
a network of dealers and  domestically  through  direct  sales  representatives,
independent sales  representatives,  and ophthalmic product distributors.  As of
December 31,  2003,  we had ten direct  domestic  sales  representatives  in the
United  States and 65 foreign  dealers.  As of November  30,  2004,  we had four
direct  domestic  sales  representatives  in the  United  States  and 28 foreign
dealers. These sales representatives are assigned exclusive territories and have
entered into contracts with us that contain performance  quotas.  Domestic sales
channels have been expanded to include  independent  sales  representatives  and
distributors  who began  training with our products in August 2003. We also plan
to continue to market our products by  identifying  customers  through  internal
market research,  trade shows and direct marketing  programs.  We also utilize a
Clinical Advisory Board comprised of leading  ophthalmic  surgeons in the United
States and Europe who speak at  conventions,  train  ophthalmologists  and visit
foreign doctors and dealers to promote our products.

         Product  advertising  is intended  to be focused in the major  industry
trade  newspapers.  Most of the  ophthalmologists  or optometrists in the United
States receive one or more of these magazines through professional  subscription
programs. The media has shown strong interest in our technology and products, as
evidenced by several recent front-page articles in these publications.

         Manufacturing and Raw Materials: Currently, we maintain a 23,238 square
foot facility in Salt Lake City. We transferred the manufacturing activities for
the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) to San Diego from Ocular Blood Flow, Ltd. in England
during 2001.  During the second quarter of 2002, we consolidated  and closed the
San Diego operations into the Salt Lake City facility. The facility accommodates
our manufacturing,  marketing and engineering capabilities. We manufacture under
systems of quality  control and testing,  which  comply with the Quality  System
Requirements  established by the FDA, as well as similar guidelines  established
by foreign governments, including the CE Mark and IS0-9001.

         We subcontract the manufacturing of some of its ancillary  instruments,
accessories  and  disposables  through  specified  vendors in the United States.
These  products are contracted in quantities  and at costs  consistent  with our
financial  purchasing  capabilities  and pricing needs.  We manufacture  certain
accessories and fluidics surgical tubing sets at our facility in Salt Lake City.

         Product Service and Support:  Service for our products is overseen from
our Salt  Lake  City  location  and is  augmented  by our  international  dealer
network,  which provides  technical  service and repair.  Installation,  on-site
training and a limited  product  warranty are included as the standard  terms of
sale. We provide  distributors  with  replacement  parts at no charge during the
warranty period.  International  distributors are responsible for  installation,
repair and other customer service to installed  systems in their territory.  All
systems parts are modular  sub-components  that are easily removed and replaced.
We maintain  adequate parts inventory and provides  overnight  replacement parts
shipments to its dealers.

         On July 11, 2002, we entered into a Major Account Facilitator  Contract
with Peter Kristensen and F. Briton  McConkie.  Under the terms of the contract,
Messrs. Kristensen and McConkie agreed to serve as intermediators between us and
an  international  agent or  customer  that  would  result  in an order  for 150
Photon(TM) laser systems in Asia. The contract provides that upon execution,  we
are to issue  100,000  shares of our  common  stock to  Messrs.  Kristensen  and
McConkie to cover all expenses  associated with the pursuit of the  transaction,
and upon  presentation  of a  verified  order to us, we have  agreed to issue an
additional  100,000  shares of common stock to Messrs.  Kristensen and McConkie.
Upon  completion,  and  delivery  and  receipt  of  payment  in  full  from  the
international  agent or customer for the 150 Photon(TM)  laser systems,  Messrs.
Kristensen and McConkie  would be issued an additional  480,000 shares of common
stock for serving as transaction facilitator.  We have issued a total of 100,000
shares of our common stock to Messrs.  Kristensen  and McConkie  pursuant to the
terms of the contract.

                                       44


         Messrs.  Kristensen  and McConkie have retained Ralph Thompson of Novus
Technologies,  a Utah based firm,  to assist in the  marketing  and sales of our
Photon(TM)  laser system in Asia. Mr.  Thompson,  who lived in China for over 10
years,  represents U.S.  businesses  doing business in China. He currently makes
trips to China on a regular  basis on behalf of the  businesses  he  represents.
Although Mr.  Thompson  continues to represent us in the sale of our  Photon(TM)
laser  system  in  Asia,  he has not  been  successful  to date in  selling  our
Photon(TM) laser system to any customers in China or other Asian countries.

Research and Development

         Our primary  market for our surgical  products is the cataract  surgery
market.  However, we believe that our laser systems may potentially have broader
ophthalmic  applications.  Consequently,  we believe that a strong  research and
development  capability is important for our future. In addition to our expanded
in-house  research  and  development  capabilities,  we  have  enlisted  several
recognized and respected  consultants  and other  technical  personnel to act in
technical and medical advisory capacities.

         We believe our research and  development  capabilities  provide us with
the ability to respond to regulatory  developments,  including new products, new
product features devised from our users and new applications for our products on
a timely and proprietary  basis. We intend to continue investing in research and
development  and to  strengthen  our ability to enhance  existing  products  and
develop new products.

         Research,  development and service expenses (which includes  production
and  manufacturing  support and the service  department  expenses)  decreased by
$264,000,  or 26%, to $768,000 for the twelve  months  ended  December 31, 2004,
from  $1,033,000 for the same period in 2003.  None of the costs of research and
development activities during 2004 and 2003 was borne directly by customers.

         From December 1, 2000 to November 30, 2002, we entered into a series of
consulting  agreements  with  Michael B.  Limberg,  M.D.,  in which he agreed to
evaluate new  technologies  and instruments for us. For his services during that
period,  we issued Dr.  Limberg a total of 48,000 shares of our common stock and
warrants to purchase  300,000 shares of common stock at exercise  prices ranging
from $4.00 to $6.75 per share.

         During the period in which Thomas F. Motter  served as our chairman and
chief executive  officer,  he formed a clinical advisory board and met from time
to time with the board.  Jeffrey F. Poore, who served as our president and chief
executive officer from March 19, 2003 to March 18, 2004,  decided not to utilize
the clinical  advisory board.  Instead,  he consulted with former members of the
advisory board on an informal basis.  John Y. Yoon, who currently  serves as our
president  and chief  executive  officer,  has also  decided  not to utilize the
clinical advisory board. We currently have no agreements with any former members
of the clinical  advisory board and none of these former members hold or own any
rights to our products or technologies.

Competition

         General.  We are subject to competition in the cataract surgery and the
glaucoma  diagnostic  markets from two principal  sources:  (i) manufacturers of
competing  ultrasound systems used when performing  cataract treatments and (ii)
developers of technologies  for ophthalmic  diagnostic and surgical  instruments
used for  treatment.  A few large  companies  that are well  established  in the
marketplace  have  experienced  management,  are well  financed  and  have  well
recognized  trade  names and  product  lines  dominate  the  surgical  equipment
industry.  We believe that the combined sales of five entities  account for over
90% of the cataract  surgery market.  The remaining  market is fragmented  among
emerging smaller companies, some of which are foreign. The ophthalmic diagnostic
market has a similar composition.

         Most major competitors  either entered or expanded into the cataract or
glaucoma  markets  through  the  acquisition  of smaller,  entrepreneurial  high
technology manufacturing companies.  Therefore,  because existing competitors or
other entities  desiring to enter the market could  conceivably  acquire current
entrepreneurial  enterprises with small market activity, any and all competitors
must be considered to be formidable.

         The  Cataract  Surgical  System  Industry.   The  major   manufacturers
utilizing  ultrasonic  technology offer products currently in use. Those systems
rely on  accessories  including  single use cassette  packs and other  ancillary
surgical disposables such as saline solution, sutures and intraocular lenses for
their profits.  The cassette packs are required for fluid and tissue  collection

                                       45


during the surgical  procedure.  The  cassette  packs are  generally  unique and
proprietary  to their  respective  systems and  represent a barrier to entry for
third party,  lower cost  aftermarket  suppliers.  While there is growing market
resistance in the United States and internationally to single use cassettes,  it
is  anticipated  that  manufacturers  of ultrasound  equipment  will continue to
develop and enhance their present ultrasound  products in order to protect their
investments in system and cassette  technology and to protect their profits from
sales of these cassettes and accessories.  Our Precisionist  Thirty Thousand(TM)
ultrasonic  phaco  system has the  ability to use either  reusable or single use
disposable components.  The Photon(TM) laser cataract system will utilize probes
and  cassette  packs  designed  for single use and  semi-disposable  instruments
priced at a level  consistent with the demands of health care cost  containment.
This will  allow  the  health  care  providers  a  substantial  measure  of cost
containment,  while providing us with the quality control and income  capability
of cassette sales.

         The international market, with significantly lower medical budgets, has
not been able to justify the expense of using disposable  components.  Budgetary
constraints have limited current  manufacturers from gaining a significant share
of the international  ultrasound equipment market, and have provided a niche for
the emerging smaller companies discussed above.

         Ultrasound Equipment Manufacturers. As a relatively recent entrant into
the cataract  surgical  equipment  market with a newer  equipment  line,  we are
establishing ourself and, as yet, do not hold a significant share of the market.
We currently recognize Bausch & Lomb, Alcon  Laboratories,  and Allergan Medical
Optics as our primary  competitors  in the ultrasound  phaco cataract  equipment
market.

         Laser  Equipment  Manufacturers.  There  are  several  other  companies
attempting to develop laser equipment for cataract surgery.  These companies can
be  differentiated  by the laser wavelength  employed for the cataract  surgery.
Based on the  information  currently  available to us;  Er:YAG laser  wavelength
appears  to offer a less  viable  means of  removing  cataracts  than the Nd:YAG
wavelength  used by the  Photon(TM).  One competitor  uses a Nd:YAG  wavelength,
however the laser is used only to vibrate an ultrasonic needle.  Thus the device
remains an ultrasonic system subject to the same risk factors of phaco,  thereby
eliminating  the  benefits  of using a laser to  remove  the  cataract.  We also
believe that our product is sufficiently  distinctive and, if properly marketed,
can capture a significant share of the cataract surgical device market. However,
there are  substantial  risks in undertaking a new venture in an established and
already  highly  competitive  industry.  In the  short-term,  we are  seeking to
exploit  these  opportunities.  Depending  upon  further  developments,  we  may
ultimately exploit those  opportunities  through a merger with a stronger entity
already established or one that desires to enter the medical industry.

         We believe that our ability to compete  successfully will depend on our
capability  to create and  maintain  advanced  technology,  develop  proprietary
products,  attract  and  retain  scientific  personnel,  obtain  patent or other
proprietary  protection  for our  products  and  technologies,  obtain  required
regulatory approvals and manufacture,  assemble and successfully market products
either alone or through third parties.

         The  Retinal  Diagnostic  Market.  The  Glaucoma  Research   Foundation
suggests that with the aging of the so-called baby boom  generation,  there will
be an increase of macular  degeneration  and glaucoma in the United States,  the
leading causes of adult blindness  worldwide.  The National Eye Institute stated
in 2002 that the number of visually impaired  Americans is likely to double over
the next three  decades.  Their report  estimated that 2.4 million people suffer
some visual  impairment in this country.  The damage caused by these diseases is
irreversible.  The  preconditions  for the  onset  of  macular  degeneration  or
glaucoma are low ocular blood flow and/or high intraocular pressure.  Diagnostic
screening is important for individuals susceptible to these diseases.  People in
high  risk  categories  include:  African  Americans  over 40 years of age,  all
persons  over 60 years of age,  persons  with a family  history of  glaucoma  or
diabetes, and the very nearsighted.  The Glaucoma Research Foundation recommends
that these high-risk individuals be tested regularly for glaucoma.  According to
the U.S.  Census  Bureau,  in 1995 there were over 30 million adults 65 years of
age and older and 8 million  African  Americans  45 years of age and older.  The
Glaucoma Research  Foundation  reports that glaucoma currently accounts for more
than 7 million visits to physicians annually.

         We are  subject to intense  competition  in the  ophthalmic  diagnostic
market from well financed,  established  companies with recognizable trade names
and product lines and new and developing technologies. The industry is dominated
by  several  large  entities  which  we  believe  account  for the  majority  of
diagnostic  equipment sales. We continue to derive revenues from the sale of its
ultrasound diagnostic equipment and blood flow analyzer. The blood flow analyzer
is designed to detect  glaucoma in an earlier stage than is presently  possible.
In  addition,  the device  performs  tonometry  and blood flow  analysis.  Other
ophthalmic diagnostic devices that do not detect glaucoma in the early stages of
the disease as does our analyzer retail at comparable  prices.  Thus, we believe
that we can compete in the  diagnostic  market  place based upon the lower price
and improved diagnostic functions of the analyzer.

                                       46


Intellectual Property Protection

         Our cataract surgical  products are proprietary in design,  engineering
and performance. Our surgical ultrasonic products have not been patented to date
because the primary technology for ultrasonic tissue fragmentation, as available
to all competitors in the market, is mainly in the public domain.

         We did acquire  proprietary  intellectual  property in the  transaction
with Humphrey Systems when we purchased the diagnostic  ultrasonic  product line
in 1999. This  technology  uses ultrasound to create a high resolution  computer
image of the unseen parts of the eye that is a "map" for the  practitioner.  The
P40 UBM Ultrasound  Biomicroscope,  one of the ultrasonic products we purchased,
is subject to a license  agreement  dated  September 27, 1990,  with  Sunnybrook
Health Science  Center.  Under the terms of the license  agreement,  we have the
exclusive  worldwide rights to manufacture and sell the UBM  biomicroscope,  for
which we are required to pay a royalty of $150 for each  licensed  product sold.
The license agreement was automatically terminated by its terms on September 27,
2002, at which time we had a royalty free worldwide  license to use and sell the
P40 UBM Ultrasound Biomicroscope. However, we have a continuing obligation after
such termination to continue to use and sell the biomicroscope only in the field
of ophthalmology.

         The Photon(TM)  laser cataract probe is protected under a United States
patent issued to Daniel M. Eichenbaum, M.D. in 1987 and subsequently assigned to
PhotoMed International,  Inc. and a Japanese patent issued to us in 1997 for the
utility and  methods of laser  ablation,  aspiration  and  irrigation  of tissue
through a hand held probe of a unique  design.  The United States patent expired
in September 2004.

         We secured the exclusive  worldwide rights to this patent shortly after
its issue, and to the international patents pending, from PhotoMed by means of a
license agreement dated July 7, 1993. The license agreement provided us with the
rights to  manufacture,  distribute and sell a laser system using the Photon(TM)
laser cataract probe and related  components to customers on a worldwide  basis,
for which  PhotoMed is to receive a 1% royalty on all net sales of such  systems
and related components sold worldwide.

         Under  the  license  agreement  PhotoMed  is  entitled  to all  royalty
payments  from net sales at the time of  billing to the  purchaser  or within 30
days of the date of shipment,  whichever  occurs  first.  We are  required  each
quarter to prepare a summary of sales and the  royalties  to which  PhotoMed  is
entitled to be paid. The sales summary must list the number of surgical  systems
and  disposable  units sold in each  country,  the dollar value of gross and net
sales,  the amount of the royalty to which  PhotoMed is entitled,  and any other
information  requested  by  PhotoMed  from time to time.  Under the terms of the
agreement,  we have  agreed  to be  actively  engaged  in  either  research  and
development  of a salable  product  utilizing  the  patent or in  marketing  and
selling such a product.

         The license agreement was amended on December 5, 1997 to allow PhotoMed
the right to conduct research, development and marketing utilizing the patent in
certain  medical  subspecialties  other  than  ophthalmology  for which we would
receive  royalty  payments  equal to 1% of the  proceeds  from the net  sales of
products  utilizing the patent.  The license  agreement  expired when the United
States patent rights expired in September 2004, but the license  agreement could
be  automatically  extended  or  renewed  for any term of  extension  or renewal
awarded for the patent rights.  In addition,  we have the right to terminate the
license  agreement  at any time after  July 7, 2003 upon 90 days  prior  written
notice to PhotoMed.

         PhotoMed  and  Dr.  Eichenbaum  brought  legal  action  against  us  on
September 11, 2000  involving an amount of royalties that were allegedly due and
owing to them from the sale of  equipment  by us. We have paid  $14,736 to bring
all royalty payments up to date through June 30, 2001. We have been working with
PhotoMed and Dr.  Eichenbaum to ensure that the royalty  calculations  have been
correctly  made.  It is  anticipated  that once the parties agree on the correct
royalty  calculations,  the legal  action  will be  dismissed.  However,  if the
parties are unable to agree on a method for  calculating  royalties,  there is a
risk that  PhotoMed  and Dr.  Eichenbaum  might amend the  complaint  to request
termination  of the  license  agreement  and, if  successful,  we would lose our
rights to manufacture or sell the Photon(TM) laser system.

         The Photon(TM)  laser  cataract probe is also protected  under a United
States patent issued to us in 2002 for a laser  surgical  device for the removal
of  intraocular  tissue  including a handpiece and a trap.  The patent is due to
expire in August 2019. There are also two pending United States patents relating
to the Photon(TM) laser cataract probe.

         The Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM) was granted a patent in the United Kingdom
in 1998 and in the  United  States in 1999,  and has a patent  pending in Japan.
These patents relate to pneumatic pressure probes for use in measuring change in

                                       47


intraocular  pressure and in measuring  pulsatile  ocular blood flow. The United
States patent rights expire in January 2019 and the United Kingdom patent rights
expire in November 2015.

         The Dicon(TM) Perimeter and the Dicon(TM) Corneal Topographer each have
a U.S.  patent  with a wide scope of claims.  The United  States  patent for the
Dicon(TM)  Perimeter  was issued in 1991 and the patent  rights  expire in March
2010. The United States patent for the Dicon(TM) Corneal Perimeter was issued in
2002 and the patent rights expire in January 2018.

         Our  trademarks  are  important  to our  business.  It is our policy to
pursue trademark  registrations for its trademarks  associated with its products
as  appropriate.  Also,  we rely on common law  trademark  rights to protect its
unregistered trademarks,  although common law trademark rights do not provide us
with the same level of protection as would U.S. federal  registered  trademarks.
Common law trademark  rights only extend to the  geographical  area in which the
trademark is actually used while U.S. federal registration  prohibits the use of
the trademark by any party anywhere in the United States.

         We also  rely on  trade  secret  law to  protect  some  aspects  of our
intellectual  property.  All of our key employees,  consultants and advisors are
required  to  enter  into a  confidentiality  agreement  with  us.  Most  of our
third-party  manufacturers  and  formulators  are also bound by  confidentiality
agreements with us.

Regulation

         The FDA under the Food,  Drug and  Cosmetics Act regulates our surgical
and  diagnostic  systems as medical  devices.  As such,  these  devices  require
Premarket  clearance or approval by the FDA prior to their  marketing  and sale.
Such clearance or approval is premised on the production of evidence  sufficient
for us to show reasonable  assurance of safety and  effectiveness  regarding our
products.  Pursuant to the Food,  Drug and Cosmetics  Act, the FDA regulates the
manufacture, distribution and production of medical devices in the United States
and the export of medical  devices from the United  States.  Noncompliance  with
applicable  requirements  can  result in fines,  injunctions,  civil  penalties,
recall or seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production, denial
of Premarket clearance or approval for devices.  Recommendations by the FDA that
we not be allowed to enter into government  contracts in order to avoid criminal
prosecution may also be made.

         Following the enactment of the Medical  Device  Amendments to the Food,
Drug and Cosmetics Act in May 1976, the FDA began classifying medical devices in
commercial  distribution  into one of three  classes:  Class I, II or III.  This
classification  is based on the controls  that are  perceived to be necessary to
reasonably  ensure the  safety and  effectiveness  of medical  devices.  Class I
devices are those devices,  the safety and effectiveness of which can reasonably
be ensured through general  controls,  such as adequate  labeling,  advertising,
premarketing notification and adherence to the FDA's Quality System Requirements
regulations.  Some Class I devices are exempt from some of the general controls.
Class II devices  are those  devices the safety and  effectiveness  of which can
reasonably be assured through the use of special  controls,  such as performance
standards, postmarket surveillance, patient registries and FDA guidelines. Class
III devices are devices  that must receive  premarketing  approval by the FDA to
ensure their safety and effectiveness.  Generally, Class III devices are limited
to life sustaining,  life supporting or implantable  devices,  or to new devices
that have been found not to be  substantially  equivalent  to  legally  marketed
devices.

         There are two principal  methods by which FDA approval may be obtained.
One method is to seek FDA approval  through a premarketing  notification  filing
under Section 510(k) of the Food,  Drug and Cosmetics Act. If a manufacturer  or
distributor  of a  medical  device  can  establish  that a  proposed  device  is
"substantially  equivalent"  to a legally  marketed  Class I or Class II medical
device or to a  pre-1976  Class  III  medical  device  for which the FDA has not
called for a premarketing approval, the manufacturer or distributor may seek FDA
Section 510(k) premarketing  clearance for the device by filing a Section 510(k)
premarketing  notification.  The Section  510(k)  notification  and the claim of
substantial  equivalence  will likely have to be supported  by various  types of
data and materials,  possibly including clinical testing results, obtained under
an  Investigational  Device  Exemption  granted by the FDA. The  manufacturer or
distributor may not place the device into interstate  commerce until an order is
issued by the FDA granting  premarketing  clearance for the device. There can be
no assurance that we will obtain Section 510(k)  premarketing  clearance for any
of the future devices for which we seek such clearance  including the Photon(TM)
laser system.

         The FDA may determine that the device is "substantially  equivalent" to
another  legally  marketed  Class I, Class II or  pre-1976  Class III device for
which the FDA has not called for a premarketing approval, and allow the proposed

                                       48


device to be marketed in the United States. The FDA may determine, however, that
the proposed  device is not  substantially  equivalent,  or may require  further
information,  such as  additional  test  data,  before the FDA is able to make a
determination   regarding   substantial   equivalence.   A  "not   substantially
equivalent"  determination or a request for additional  information  could delay
our market introduction of our products and could have a material adverse effect
on our business, operating results and financial condition.

         The  alternate  method  to  seek  approval  is to  obtain  premarketing
approval from the FDA. If a  manufacturer  or  distributor  of a medical  device
cannot establish that a proposed device is  substantially  equivalent to another
legally  marketed  device,  whether or not the FDA has made a  determination  in
response to a Section 510(k) notification,  the manufacturer or distributor will
have to seek  premarketing  approval for the  proposed  device.  A  premarketing
approval  application  would have to be submitted  and be supported by extensive
data,  including  preclinical  and  clinical  trial data to prove the safety and
efficacy  of the  device.  If human  clinical  trials of a  proposed  device are
required and the device  presents a significant  risk, the  manufacturer  or the
distributor of the device will have to file an Investigational  Device Exemption
application  with  the FDA  prior  to  commencing  human  clinical  trials.  The
Investigational   Device  Exemption  application  must  be  supported  by  data,
typically  including  the  results  of animal  and  mechanical  testing.  If the
Investigational Device Exemption application is approved,  human clinical trials
may begin at a specific number of investigational sites, and the approval letter
could include the number of patients approved by the FDA.

         An Investigational  Device Exemption clinical trial can be divided into
several parts or phases.  Sometimes a company will conduct a  feasibility  study
(Phase  I) to  confirm  that a device  functions  according  to its  design  and
operating  parameters.  This is a usual  clinical  trial  site.  If the  Phase I
results are promising, the applicant may, with the FDA's permission,  expand the
number of  clinical  trial  sites and the  number of  patients  to be treated to
assure reasonable stability of clinical results.  Phase II studies are performed
to confirm  predictability of results and the absence of adverse reactions.  The
applicant may, upon receipt of the FDA's authorization,  subsequently expand the
study to a third  phase  with a larger  number  of  clinical  trial  sites and a
greater number of patients. This involves longer patient follow-up times and the
collection of more patient data. Product claims,  labeling and core data for the
premarketing  approval are derived  primarily  from this portion of the clinical
trial. The applicant may also, upon receipt of the FDA's permission, consolidate
one or more of such  portions  of the study.  Sponsors  of  clinical  trials are
permitted to sell those devices distributed in the course of the study, provided
such  compensation  does  not  exceed  recovery  of the  costs  of  manufacture,
research,  development and handling.  Although both approval methods may require
clinical  testing of the device in question  under an  approved  Investigational
Device Exemption,  the premarketing  approval procedure is more complex and time
consuming.

         Upon receipt of the premarketing approval application,  the FDA makes a
threshold  determination  whether the  application is  sufficiently  complete to
permit  a  substantive  review.  If the FDA  determines  that  the  premarketing
approval is sufficiently  complete to permit a substantive  review, the FDA will
"file" the application.  Once the submission is filed, the FDA has by regulation
90 days to review it; however,  the review time is often extended  significantly
by the FDA asking for more information or  clarification of information  already
provided in the submission.  During the review period, an advisory committee may
also  evaluate  the  application  and provide  recommendations  to the FDA as to
whether the device  should be approved.  In  addition,  the FDA will inspect the
manufacturing  facility  to  ensure  compliance  with the FDA's  Quality  System
Requirements prior to approval of a premarketing application.  While the FDA has
responded to premarketing approval applications within the allotted time period,
premarketing  approval reviews  generally take  approximately 12 to 18 months or
more from the date of filing to approval.  The premarketing  approval process is
lengthy and expensive,  and there can be no assurance that such approval will be
obtained for any of our products  determined to be subject to such requirements.
A number of devices for which other companies have sought premarketing  approval
have never been approved for marketing.

         Any products  manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to a premarket
clearance  notification  or  premarketing  approval  are or will be  subject  to
pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA. The Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act
also requires that our products be manufactured in registered establishments and
in  accordance   with  Quality  System   Requirements   regulations.   Labeling,
advertising and  promotional  activities are subject to scrutiny by the FDA and,
in certain  instances,  by the Federal Trade  Commission.  The export of medical
devices is also subject to regulation in certain instances. In addition, the use
of our  products  may  be  regulated  by  various  state  agencies.  All  lasers
manufactured  for us are subject to the Radiation  Control for Health and Safety
Act administered by the Center for Devices and  Radiological  Health of the FDA.
The law requires laser  manufacturers to file new product and annual reports and
to maintain quality control,  product testing and sales records,  to incorporate
certain  design and operating  features in lasers sold to end users  pursuant to
specific  performance  standards,  and to comply with labeling and certification
requirements.  Various warning labels must be affixed to the laser, depending on
the class of the product, as established by the performance standards.

                                       49


         Although  we believe  that we  currently  comply and will  continue  to
comply with all applicable  regulations  regarding the  manufacture  and sale of
medical  devices,  such  regulations  are  always  subject  to change and depend
heavily on administrative interpretations. There can be no assurance that future
changes in review guidelines,  regulations or administrative  interpretations by
the FDA or other regulatory bodies,  with possible  retroactive effect, will not
materially adversely affect us. In addition to the foregoing,  we are subject to
numerous federal,  state and local laws relating to such matters as safe working
conditions,  manufacturing  practices,  environmental  protection,  fire  hazard
control  and  disposal  of  potentially  hazardous  substances.  There can be no
assurance that we will not be required to incur significant costs to comply with
such laws and  regulations  and that such  compliance  will not have a  material
adverse effect upon our ability to conduct business.

         We and the  manufacturers of our products may be inspected on a routine
basis by both the FDA and individual  states for compliance with current Quality
System Requirements regulations and other requirements.

         Congress  has  considered  several  comprehensive  federal  health care
programs  designed  to  broaden  coverage  and  reduce  the  costs  of  existing
government and private insurance programs.  These programs have been the subject
of criticism within Congress and the health care industry,  and many alternative
programs and features of programs have been proposed and  discussed.  Therefore,
we cannot  predict  the content of any federal  health care  program,  if any is
passed by Congress,  or its effect on us and our  business.  Some  measures that
have been  suggested as possible  elements of a new program,  such as government
price  ceilings on  non-reimbursable  procedures  and  spending  limitations  on
hospitals  and other  healthcare  providers  for new  equipment,  could  have an
adverse  effect on our  business,  operating  results  or  financial  condition.
Uncertainty concerning the features of any health care program considered by the
Congress,  its  adoption  by the  Congress  and the effect of the program on our
business could result in volatility of the market price of our common stock.

         Furthermore,  the introduction of our products in foreign countries may
require us to obtain  foreign  regulatory  clearances.  We  believe  that only a
limited  number of foreign  countries have  extensive  regulatory  requirements,
including  France,  Germany,  Korea,  China and  Japan.  The time  involved  for
regulatory  approval in foreign countries varies and can take a number of years.
A number of European and other economically advanced countries, including Italy,
Norway,  Spain and Sweden, have not developed  regulatory agencies for intensive
supervision of such devices. Instead, they generally have been willing to accept
the approval of the FDA. Therefore, a premarketing  approval,  Section 510(k) or
approved Investigational Device Exemption from the FDA is tantamount to approval
in those  countries.  These countries and most developing  countries have simply
deferred  direct  discretion  to licensed  practicing  surgeons to determine the
nature of devices that they will use in medical  procedures.  Our two ultrasound
systems,  the Photon(TM)  laser cataract system we are developing and the ocular
blood flow  analyzer are all devices,  that require FDA approval.  Therefore,  a
significant  aspect of the  acceptance  of the  devices in the market is the our
effectiveness  in  obtaining  the  necessary   approvals.   Having  an  approved
Investigational  Device  Exemption  allows us to export a product  to  qualified
investigational sites.

Regulatory Status of Products

         All of our products, with the exception of the Photon(TM), are approved
for sale in the U.S. by the FDA under a 510(k).  All of our  products  have been
accepted for import into CE countries and various non-CE countries.

         We  acquired  permission  from the FDA to export the  Photon(TM)  Laser
Cataract System outside the United States under an open  Investigational  Device
Exemption  granted by the FDA in September 1994.  Although the Photon(TM)  laser
cataract system is uniquely  configured in an original and  proprietary  manner,
the laser system,  a Nd:YAG laser, is not proprietary to the device or us and is
widely used in the medical  industry and other industries as well. Of particular
significance  is the fact that this particular  component has received  previous
market  clearance from the FDA for other  ophthalmic  and medical  applications.
Also of significance is our belief that the surgical  treatment method used with
the Photon(TM)  laser is similar to the current  ultrasound  cataract  treatment
employed by ophthalmologists.

         We submitted a Premarket Notification 510(k) application to the FDA for
the  Photon(TM)  laser  cataract  system in September  1993.  The FDA  requested
clinical  support  data for claims  made in the 510(k),  and in October  1994 we
submitted  an  Investigational  Device  Exemption  application  to provide for a
"modest  clinical  study" in order to collect  the data  required by the FDA for
clearance  of the  Photon(TM)  laser  cataract  system.  The  FDA  granted  this
Investigational Device Exemption in May 1995 for a Phase I Feasibility Study. We
began human  clinical  trials in April 1996 and  completed  the Phase I study in
November  1997.  We  started  Phase II trials in  September  1998 and  completed
numerous  cases of  treatment  group and  control  group  patients,  which  were
included in our submission to the FDA.

                                       50


         We received a warning  letter  dated August 30, 2000 from the Office of
Compliance,  Center for  Devices  and  Radiological  Health of the Food and Drug
Administration relating to certain deficiencies in the human clinical trials for
our  Photon(TM)  Laser  Cataract  System.   The  warning  letter  concerned  the
conditions  found by the FDA during  several audits at our clinical  sites.  The
FDA's comments were isolated to the administrative  procedures of compiling data
from the clinical  sites.  We  responded  to the warning  letter in a submission
dated  September 27, 2000.  In the  submission  we took  corrective  action that
included  submitting  a revised  clinical  protocol  and case  report  forms and
procedures for the collection and control of data. In a subsequent  letter dated
November 2, 2000 to us, the FDA granted  conditional  approval  provided that we
correct certain deficiencies.  After providing several additional submissions to
the FDA, we received a letter dated  February 13, 2001 from the FDA stating that
the deficiencies had been corrected and the clinical trials could continue.

         Subsequent to the warning letter,  we received approval to continue our
clinical  trials,  the  results  of  which  were  included  in our  supplemental
submission to the FDA in October 2001 for the existing (510)(k) predicate device
application  for the  Photon(TM)  laser system.  In December 2001, we received a
preliminary  review from the FDA regarding  the  supplemental  submission.  As a
result of that preliminary review, we submitted  additional clinical information
to the FDA on February 6, 2002. The  application is receiving  ongoing review by
the FDA. On May 7, 2002,  we received a letter from the FDA  requesting  further
clinical  information.  We have  generated  additional  clinical  information in
response to the letter and are uncertain if we will make a submission to the FDA
with the additional clinical information.  Because of the "going concern" status
of the company,  management has focused efforts on those products and activities
that will, in its opinion,  achieve the most resource efficient  short-term cash
flow to the company.  Our diagnostic  products are currently our major focus and
the Photon(TM) and other extensive research and development  prospects have been
put on hold pending future evaluation until our financial position improves. Our
focus is not on any specific  diagnostic product or products,  but rather on our
entire group of diagnostic products.

Facilities

         Our executive  offices are  currently  located at 2355 South 1070 West,
Salt Lake City, Utah. This facility consists of approximately 23,238 square feet
of leased  office space under a three-year  lease that was to expire on March 1,
2003 with an additional  three-year renewal option.  These facilities are leased
from Eden Roc, a California partnership,  at a base monthly rate of $21,163 plus
a $3,342 monthly common area maintenance fee. In January 2003, we renegotiated a
three- year lease with Eden Roc at a monthly rate of $9,295 plus a $1,859 common
area  maintenance  fee for the year 2003, with rate increases to $9,574 for 2004
and to  $9,861for  2005.  Pursuant  to the  lease,  we pay all real  estate  and
personal property taxes and the insurance costs on the premises.

         We believe that these facilities are adequate and satisfy our needs for
the foreseeable future.

Employees

         As of May 31, 2005, we had 24 full-time employees. This number does not
include  our  manufacturer's  representatives  who are  independent  contractors
rather than our employees.  We also utilize  several  consultants  and advisors.
There can be no assurance  that we will be successful in recruiting or retaining
key  personnel.  None of our employees are a member of a labor union and we have
never experienced any business interruption as a result of any labor disputes.

         In December 2001 we initiated the first phase of a corporate downsizing
program to reduce our operating expenses. We implemented the second phase of our
downsizing  program in the second  quarter of 2002, by closing and  transferring
our  manufacturing  from our site in San  Diego,  California  to Salt Lake City,
resulting  in  further  reductions  in  operating  expenses.  As a result of the
downsizing program and some  resignations,  the number of our employees has been
reduced by 75% from 112 to 30  employees.  The  estimated  cost savings from the
downsizing  program  will be in  excess  of  $2,000,000  annually.  The costs of
downsizing have included onetime  expenses of  approximately  $43,000 for moving
and  travel.   In  addition,   we  incurred   additional   onetime  expenses  of
approximately  $18,000 for housing  accommodations  for key employees working in
Salt Lake City.  We realized a net cost savings from  downsizing in excess of $2
million during each of the years 2003 and 2002.

Legal Proceedings

         An action was  brought  against us in March 2000 by George  Wiseman,  a
former employee, in the Third District Court of Salt Lake County, State of Utah.
The complaint  alleged that we owed Mr. Wiseman 6,370 shares of our common stock

                                       51


plus costs, attorney's fees and a wage penalty (equal to 1,960 additional shares
of our common stock) pursuant to Utah law. The action is based upon an extension
of a written  employment  agreement.  We dispute the amount  allegedly  owed and
intend to vigorously defend against the action.

         An action was  brought  against us on  September  11,  2000 by PhotoMed
International,  Inc. and Daniel M. Eichenbaum,  M.D. in the Third District Court
of Salt Lake County,  State of Utah. The action  involves an amount of royalties
that  were  allegedly  due and owing to  PhotoMed  International,  Inc.  and Dr.
Eichenbaum  under a license  agreement  dated July 7, 1993,  with respect to the
sale of certain equipment,  plus costs and attorney's fees. Discovery took place
and we have paid  royalties  of $14,736 to bring all payments up to date through
June 30, 2001. We have been working with  PhotoMed and Dr.  Eichenbaum to ensure
that the calculations  have been correctly made on the royalties paid as well as
the proper method of calculation for the future.

         It is  anticipated  that  once the  parties  can  agree on the  correct
calculations on the royalties,  the legal action will be dismissed. The issue in
dispute  concerning  the method of  calculating  royalties is whether  royalties
should be paid on returned  equipment.  Since July 1, 2001,  only one Photon(TM)
laser  system  has been  sold and no  systems  returned.  Thus,  the  amount  of
royalties due, according to our calculations, is $981. We intend to make payment
of this  amount to PhotoMed  and Dr.  Eichenbaum  and, as a result,  to have the
legal action dismissed.  However, if the parties are unable to agree on a method
for  calculating  royalties,  there is a risk that  PhotoMed and Dr.  Eichenbaum
might amend their complaint to request termination of the license agreement and,
if successful,  we would lose our right to  manufacture  and sell the Photon(TM)
laser system.

         On May 14, 2003, a complaint  was filed in the United  States  District
Court, District of Utah, captioned Richard Meyer,  individually and on behalf of
all others similarly suited v. Paradigm Medical Industries, Inc., Thomas Motter,
Mark  Miehle and John  Hemmer,  Case No.  2:03  CV00448TC.  The  complaint  also
indicated  that it is a  "Class  Action  Complaint  for  Violations  of  Federal
Securities  Law and  Plaintiffs  Demand a Trial by Jury." We have retained legal
counsel to review the  complaint,  which  appears to be focused on alleged false
and  misleading  statements  pertaining  to  the  Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM)  and
concerning a purchase order from Valdespino Associates  Enterprises and Westland
Financial Corporation.

         More specifically,  the complaint alleged that we falsely stated in our
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  filings  and press  releases  that we had
received  authorization to use an insurance  reimbursement CPT code from the CPT
Code Research and Development  Division of the American Medical  Association for
reimbursement to doctors in connection with the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM),  adding
that the CPT code provides for a reimbursement  to doctors of $57.00 per patient
for use of the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM). According to the complaint, the CPT code
was critical.  Without a reimbursement  code,  physicians would not purchase the
Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM)  because  they  could  not  receive  compensation  for
performance  of medical  procedures  using the  medical  device.  The  complaint
further  contends that we never received the CPT code from the American  Medical
Association  at any time.  Nevertheless,  it is  alleged  that we  continued  to
misrepresent  in our SEC filings and press releases that we had received the CPT
code. It is also alleged that we have never made a full,  corrective  disclosure
with respect to this alleged misstatement.

         The  complaint  also alleged  that on July 11, 2002,  we issued a press
release falsely announcing that we had received a purchase order from Valdespino
Associates  Enterprises and Westland  Financial  Corporation for 200 sets of our
entire portfolio of products, with $70 million in systems to be delivered over a
two-year period, then another $35 million of orders to be completed in the third
year. The complaint  further  alleged that we had never received a true purchase
order  for our  products.  As a  result  of  these  alleged  misstatements,  the
complaint contends that the price of our shares of common stock was artificially
inflated  during the period from April 25, 2001  through May 14,  2003,  and the
persons who purchased or retained our common shares during that period  suffered
substantial  damages.  The complaint requests judgment for unspecified  damages,
together with interest and attorney's fees.

         We dispute having issued false and misleading statements concerning the
Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) and a purchase order from Westland Financial Corporation
and  Valdespino  Associates  Enterprises.  On April 25, 2001,  we issued a press
release  that  stated we had  received  authorization  to use  common  procedure
terminology or CPT code number 92120 for our Blood Flow Analyzer(TM). This press
release was based on a letter we received  from the CPT  Editorial  Research and
Development Department of the American Medical Association stating that CPT code
number 92120 was the appropriate common procedure terminology or CPT code number
for doctors to use when reporting  certain  procedures  performed with our Blood
Flow Analyzer(TM).

         Currently,  there is reimbursement by insurance payors to doctors using
the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM) in 22 states and partial reimbursement in four other
states. The amount of reimbursement to doctors using the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM)

                                       52


generally ranges from $56.00 to $76.00 per patient, depending upon the insurance
payor. Insurance payors providing  reimbursement for the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM)
have the  discretion to increase or reduce the amount of  reimbursement.  We are
endeavoring to obtain  reimbursement  by insurance  payors in other states where
there is currently no reimbursement  being made. We believe we have continued to
correctly  represent in our Securities and Exchange  Commission filings that the
CPT  Editorial  Research and  Development  Department  of the  American  Medical
Association  has advised us that CPT code number  92120 is the  appropriate  CPT
code for our Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM),  for  reimbursement  purposes for doctors
using the device.

         On July 11, 2002,  we issued a press  release that stated we received a
purchase order from Westland  Financial  Corporation  and Valdespino  Associates
Enterprises for 200 complete sets of our entire product  portfolio of diagnostic
and surgical equipment for Mexican ophthalmic practitioners, to be followed by a
second order of 100 sets of equipment. The press release was based on a purchase
order  dated  July  10,  2002  that we  entered  into  with  Westland  Financial
Corporation  for the sale of 200 complete  sets of our  surgical and  diagnostic
equipment to Mexican  ophthalmic  practitioners.  The press  release also stated
that the initial  order was for $70 million of our equipment to be filled over a
two-year  period  followed by the second order of $35 million in equipment to be
completed in the third year.  The press  release  further  stated that  delivery
would be made in traunches of 25 complete sets of our equipment, beginning in 30
days from the date of the purchase order.

         On September  13, 2002,  the board of directors  issued a press release
regarding   the  status  of  our  product   sales  to  the  Mexican   ophthalmic
practitioners.  In that  press  release  the  board  stated  that we had been in
discussions for the prior nine months with Westland Financial Corporation, aimed
at  supplying  our  medical  device  products  to  the  Mexican   market.   Upon
investigation,  the board of directors had  determined  that the purchase  order
referenced  in the July 11, 2002 press release was not of such a nature as to be
enforceable for the purpose of sales or revenue recognition. In addition, we had
not sent any shipment of medical  products to Mexican  ophthalmic  practitioners
nor  received  payment for those  products  pursuant to those  discussions.  The
September 13, 2002 press release also stated that  discussions  were  continuing
with Westland Financial Corporation regarding sales and marketing activities for
our medical device products in Mexico, but we could not, at the time, predict or
provide any assurance that any transactions would result.

         On June 2, 2003, a complaint  was filed in the United  States  District
Court,  captioned Michael Marrone v. Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc., Thomas
Motter,  Mark Miehle and John  Hemmer,  Case No. 2:03  CV00513  PGC. On July 11,
2003, a complaint was filed in the same United States District Court,  captioned
Lidia Milian v. Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc., Thomas Motter,  Mark Miehle
and John Hemmer,  Case No. 2:03  CV00617PGC.  Both  complaints seek class action
status.  These  cases are  substantially  similar  in nature to the Meyer  case,
including  the  contention  that  as a  result  of  allegedly  false  statements
regarding  the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  and the  purchase  order from  Westland
Financial  Corporation and Valdespino Associates  Enterprises,  the price of our
common stock was artificially  inflated and the persons who purchased our common
shares during the class period suffered  substantial damages. In a press release
dated July 11, 2003,  captioned  "Milberg Weiss  announces the filing of a class
action suit against Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc. on behalf of investors,"
the law firm of Milberg  Weiss  Bershad  Hynen & Levach  LLP,  which  represents
purchasers  of our  securities  in the class action suit filed on July 11, 2003,
stated that our alleged  misrepresentations caused the market price of the stock
to be artificially  inflated during the class period. As a result, it is alleged
that  investors  suffered  millions  of  dollars  in  damages  from our  alleged
misstatements.

         The cases  requested  judgment for unspecified  damages,  together with
interest and attorney's  fees. These cases have now been  consolidated  with the
Meyer case into a single action,  captioned In re: Paradigm  Medical  Industries
Securities  Litigation,  Case No.  03-CV-448TC.  The law firm of  Milberg  Weiss
Bershad & Schulman  LLP is  representing  purchasers  of our  securities  in the
consolidated class action. On June 28, 2004, a consolidated amended class action
complaint was filed on behalf of purchasers of our securities.  The consolidated
complaint  is similar to the three class action  complaints  and alleges that we
made  false   representations   regarding  the  CPT  code  for  the  Blood  Flow
Analyzer(TM),  but it includes additional allegations that we failed to disclose
in a timely manner that doctors were being denied  reimbursement  for procedures
performed  with the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM).  The  consolidated  complaint also
alleges that we made false statements regarding the purchase order from Westland
Financial  Corporation  and Valdespino  Associates  Enterprises.  We believe the
consolidated  complaint  is without  merit and intend to  vigorously  defend and
protect our interests in the case.

         We  were  issued  a  Directors  and  Officers   Liability  and  Company
Reimbursement Policy by United States Fire Insurance Company for the period from
July 10, 2002 to July 10, 2003 that  contains a $5,000,000  limit of  liability,
which is excess of a $250,000 retention. The officers and directors named in the
consolidated  cases have  requested  coverage  under the  policy.  U.S.  Fire is

                                       53


currently  investigating  whether it may have a right to deny  coverage  for the
consolidated  cases based upon policy  terms,  conditions  and  exclusions or to
rescind the policy based upon  misrepresentations  contained in our  application
for insurance.

         We have paid $30,000 to U.S. Fire toward  satisfaction  of the $250,000
retention  that is applicable to the  consolidated  cases.  We have advised U.S.
Fire that we cannot pay the  $250,000  retention  due to our  current  financial
circumstances.  As a  consequence,  on  January  8,  2004,  we  entered  into  a
non-waiver  agreement  with  U.S.  Fire in which  U.S.  Fire  agreed to fund and
advance our retention  obligation in  consideration  for which we have agreed to
reimburse  U.S. Fire the sum of $5,000 a month for a period of six months,  with
the first of such payments due on February 15, 2004.  Thereafter,  commencing on
August 15, 2004,  we are required to reimburse  U.S. Fire the sum of $10,000 per
month until the entire amount of $250,000 has been  reimbursed to U.S.  Fire. We
have made payments to U.S. Fire in the aggregate  amount of $30,000 of which our
last payment of $10,000 was made on October 11, 2004.  These  payments  were for
the $5,000 monthly  payments due during the six month period from February 15 to
July  15,  2004,  leaving  a  remaining  retention  obligation  to U.S.  Fire of
$220,000.

         In the event U.S. Fire  determines  that we or our former  officers and
directors named in the consolidated cases are not entitled to coverage under the
policy,  or that it is entitled to rescind the policy,  or should we be declared
in default under the non-waiver  agreement,  for not making the monthly payments
in a timely manner that are owed to U.S.  Fire,  then we agree to pay U.S. Fire,
on demand,  the full amount of all costs advanced by U.S. Fire, except for those
amounts  that we may  have  reimbursed  to U.S.  Fire  pursuant  to the  monthly
payments  due under the  non-waiver  agreement.  Moreover,  if U.S.  Fire denies
coverage  for  the  consolidated  cases  under  the  policy,  we  would  owe our
litigation counsel in the class action lawsuits,  for any legal fees not paid by
U.S.  Fire.  However,  U.S.  Fire has  currently  agreed to pay the  legal  fees
relating to the class action lawsuits.

         We will be in default under the non-waiver agreement if we fail to make
any payment due to U.S. Fire  thereunder  when such payment is due, or institute
proceedings to be adjudicated as bankrupt or insolvent.  U.S. Fire's  obligation
to advance  defense costs under the agreement  will  terminate in the event that
the  $5,000,000  policy  limit of liability is  exhausted.  If U.S.  Fire denies
coverage for the  consolidated  cases under the policy and we are not successful
in defending and protecting our interests in the cases,  resulting in a judgment
against us for  substantial  damages,  we would be unable to pay such  liability
and, as a result, would be forced to seek bankruptcy protection.

         On July 10, 2003, a complaint was filed in the United  States  District
Court,  District of Utah captioned  Innovative Optics,  Inc. and Barton Dietrich
Investments,  L.P. v. Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc.,  Thomas Motter,  Mark
Miehle and John  Hemmer,  Case No. 2:03 CV 00582DB.  The  complaint  claims that
Innovative  and  Barton  entered  into an asset  purchase  agreement  with us on
January 31, 2002, in which we agreed to purchase all the assets of Innovative in
consideration for the issuance of 1,310,000 shares of the Company's common stock
to Innovative.  The complaint  claims we breached the asset purchase  agreement.
The complaint also claims that we allegedly made false and misleading statements
pertaining to the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  and concerning a purchase order from
Valdespino  Associates  Enterprises  and  Westland  Financial  Corporation.  The
purpose  of  these  statements,  according  to  the  complaint,  was  to  induce
Innovative  to sell its assets and  purchase  the shares of our common  stock at
artificially  inflated  prices while  simultaneously  deceiving  Innovative  and
Barton  into  believing  that the  Company's  shares  were  worth more than they
actually were.  The complaint  contends that had Innovative and Barton known the
truth they would not have sold  Innovative  to us, would not have  purchased our
stock for the assets of Innovative, or would not have purchased the stock at the
inflated prices that they allegedly paid. The complaint further contends that as
a result of the  allegedly  false  statements,  Innovative  and Barton  suffered
substantial damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

         The  complaint  also  claims  that  491,250  of the  shares  issued  to
Innovative in the asset purchase  transaction  were not issued on a timely basis
and we also did not  file a  registration  statement  with  the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission within five months of the closing date of the asset purchase
transaction.  As a result, the complaint alleged that the value of the shares of
our  common  stock  issued  to  Innovative  in  the  transaction  declined,  and
Innovative and Barton suffered damages in an unspecified  amount to be proven at
trial. We filed an answer to the complaint and also filed counterclaims  against
Innovative  and Barton for breach of  contract.  We  believe  the  complaint  is
without merit and intend to  vigorously  defend and protect our interests in the
action.  If we are not  successful in defending and  protecting our interests in
this action,  and a judgment for substantial  damages is entered against us, and
U.S.  Fire denies  coverage in the  litigation  under the Directors and Officers
Liability  and  Company  Reimbursement  Policy,  we would be  unable to pay such
liability and, as a result, would be forced to seek bankruptcy protection.

                                       54


         On October 14, 2003, an action was filed in the Third Judicial District
Court,  Salt  Lake  County,  State of Utah,  captioned  Albert  Kinzinger,  Jr.,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated vs. Paradigm Medical
Industries,  Inc.,  Thomas  Motter,  Mark Miehle,  Randall A.  Mackey,  and John
Hemmer,  Case No.  030922608.  The complaint also indicates that it was a "Class
Action Complaint for Violations of Utah Securities Laws and Plaintiffs  Demand a
Trial by Jury." We have retained  legal counsel to review the  complaint,  which
appears to be focused on alleged  false or misleading  statements  pertaining to
the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM).  More  specifically,  the complaint alleged that we
falsely stated in Securities and Exchange  Commission filings and press releases
that we had received  authorization to use an insurance  reimbursement  CPT code
from the CPT Code  Research and  Development  Division of the  American  Medical
Association in connection with the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM),  adding that the CPT
code provides for a reimbursement to doctors of $57.00 per patient for the Blood
Flow Analyzer(TM).

         The purpose of these  statements,  according to the  complaint,  was to
induce investors to purchase shares of our Series E preferred stock in a private
placement  transaction at artificially  inflated prices.  The complaint contends
that as a result of these statements, the investors that purchased shares of our
Series E preferred stock in the private offering suffered substantial damages to
be proven at trial.  The complaint  also alleged that we sold Series E preferred
shares  without  registering  the sale of such shares or  obtaining an exemption
from registration.  The complaint requests rescission,  compensatory damages and
treble damages,  including  interest and attorneys'  fees. We filed an answer to
the  complaint.  We  believe  the  complaint  is  without  merit  and  intend to
vigorously  defend our  interests  in the action.  If we are not  successful  in
defending and  protecting  our interests in the action,  resulting in a judgment
against  us for  substantial  damages,  and U.S.  Fire  denies  coverage  in the
litigation under the Directors and Officers Liability and Company  Reimbursement
Policy,  we would be unable to pay such  liability  and,  as a result,  would be
forced to seek bankruptcy protection.

         On January 26,  2005,  we completed a written  settlement  agreement to
settle the lawsuit that Innovative Optics, Inc. and Barton Dietrich Investments,
L.P.  brought against us and our former executive  officers.  Under the terms of
the  settlement,  U.S.  Fire agreed to pay  Innovative  Optics,  Inc. and Barton
Dietrich  Investments,  L.P. the sum of $367,500 in cash. Payment of this amount
is  contingent,  however,  upon the courts in the federal and state class action
lawsuits granting final approval of the settlements  reached in those respective
actions, and such orders becoming final and not appealable.

         On February 23, 2005,  we executed  written  settlement  agreements  to
settle the federal and state court class action lawsuits that were filed against
us and our  former  executive  officers.  Under the terms of  settlement  of the
federal  court  class  action  lawsuit,  U.S.  Fire  agreed  to pay  the  sum of
$1,507,500 in cash to the class members that purchased our securities during the
period  between  April  17,  2002 and  November  4,  2002.  Under  the  terms of
settlement of the state court class action lawsuit,  U.S. Fire agreed to pay the
sum of $625,000 in cash to the class members that  purchased  shares of Series E
convertible preferred stock on or about July 11, 2001.

         As a condition to the  settlement  agreements to settle the federal and
state court class action lawsuits, the courts in such lawsuits must have entered
orders  granting final approval of the settlements  reached in those  respective
actions, and such orders must have become final and not appealable.  On March 3,
2005,  the federal court entered an order granting  preliminary  approval of the
settlement in the federal court class action lawsuit and providing for notice to
be sent to potential class members. On April 18, 2005, a hearing was held in the
state court and the court entered a minute entry granting  preliminary  approval
of the settlement in the state court class action lawsuit.

         As a further  condition  to the  settlement  agreements  to settle  the
federal  and state court  class  action  lawsuits,  both  settlement  agreements
provided  that U.S.  Fire must not have  exercised  its option to terminate  the
settlement  agreements.  U.S.  Fire has the option to terminate  the  settlement
agreements if the  cumulative  dollar value of the claims held by individuals or
entities that "opt out" of the federal and state class action  lawsuits  exceeds
$250,000. If such "opt outs" exceed $250,000, however, plaintiffs in the federal
and state court class  action  lawsuits  will have five days to cure by reducing
the amount of "opt outs" to less than $250,000.

         If  U.S.  Fire   exercises  its  option  to  terminate  the  settlement
agreements,  then all parties to the settlement  agreements  will be restored to
their  respective  positions  in  the  various  actions  as of the  date  of the
settlement  agreements.  In addition, the terms and provisions of the settlement
agreements will have no further force and effect on the various parties and will
be deemed null and void in their entirety.

         Under the terms of the settlement  agreements regarding the federal and
state court class action lawsuits and the lawsuit that Innovative  Optics,  Inc.
and Barton Dietrich Investors,  L.P. brought against us and our former executive

                                       55


officers,  U.S.  Fire has  agreed  to pay a total of  $2,500,000  in cash to the
classes in the class action lawsuits and to Innovative  Optics,  Inc. and Barton
Dietrich Investments,  L.P. in settlement of these lawsuits.  Under the terms of
settlement,  we are to pay  U.S.  Fire  the  sum of  $220,000  representing  the
remaining amount owing under the $250,000 retention  obligation in the insurance
policy,  and to execute a policy  release in favor of U.S.  Fire as to  coverage
under the insurance policy.

         An action  was filed on June 20,  2003 in the Third  Judicial  District
Court, Salt Lake County,  State of Utah (Civil No. 030914195) by Citicorp Vendor
Finance, Inc., formerly known as Copelco Capital, Inc. The complaint claims that
$49,626  plus  interest  is due for the leasing of two copy  machines  that were
delivered to our Salt Lake City facilities on or about April of 2000. The action
also seeks an award of attorney's fees and costs incurred in the collection.  We
dispute the amounts  allegedly  owed,  asserting  that two of the machines  were
returned to the leasing company because they did not work properly. A responsive
pleading has been filed. We were engaged in settlement discussions with Citicorp
until counsel for Citicorp  withdrew from the case. New counsel for Citicorp has
been appointed and it is anticipated that settlement discussions will resume.

         We received demand letters dated July 18, 2003,  September 26, 2003 and
November 10, 2003 from counsel for Douglas A. MacLeod,  M.D., a  shareholder  of
the  company.  In the July 18, 2003 letter,  Dr.  MacLeod  demanded  that he and
certain  entities  with which he is involved or controls,  namely the Douglas A.
MacLeod, M.D. Profit Sharing Trust, St. Marks' Eye Institute and Milan Holdings,
Ltd., be issued a total of 2,296,667  shares of our common stock and warrants to
purchase  1,192,500  shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $.25 per
share. Dr. MacLeod claims that these common shares and warrants are owing to him
and the related  entities  under the terms of a mutual release dated January 16,
2003,  which he and the  related  entities  entered  into with us.  Dr.  MacLeod
renewed his  request  for these  additional  common  shares and  warrants in the
September  26, 2003 and  November 10, 2003 demand  letters.  We believe that Dr.
MacLeod's  claims and  assertions  are without merit and that neither he nor the
related  entities are entitled to any  additional  shares of our common stock or
any  additional  warrants  under the terms of the mutual  release.  We intend to
vigorously defend against any legal action that Dr. MacLeod may bring.

         On August 3, 2003, a complaint was filed against us by Corinne  Powell,
a former employee, in the Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, State
of Utah (Civil No.  030918364).  Defendants consist of us and Randall A. Mackey,
Dr. David M. Silver and Keith D. Ignotz, directors of the company. The complaint
alleges that at the time we laid off Ms. Powell on March 25, 2003,  she was owed
$2,030 for business  expenses,  $11,063 for accrued  vacation days,  $12,818 for
unpaid commissions, the fair market value of 50,000 stock options exercisable at
$5.00  per  share  that she  claims  she was  prevented  from  exercising,  plus
attorney's fees and a continuing wage penalty under Utah law. On March 29, 2005,
we agreed to a  settlement  with Ms.  Powell of her claims  for unpaid  business
expenses,  accrued vacation days, and unpaid  commissions by agreeing to pay her
$13,000.  We have made the $13,000 payment to Ms. Powell. We dispute the amounts
allegedly  owed under the remaining  claims  concerning the fair market value of
the 50,000 stock option that Ms. Powell claims she was prevented from exercising
and intend to vigorously defend and protect our interests against such claims.

         On September 10, 2003, an action was filed against us by Larry Hicks in
the Third Judicial  District Court,  Salt Lake County,  State of Utah (Civil No.
030922220), for payments due under a consulting agreement with us. The complaint
claimed that monthly  payments of $3,083 were due for the months of October 2002
to  October  2003  under  a  consulting  agreement  and,  if  the  agreement  is
terminated,  for the sum of $110,000  minus whatever we had paid Mr. Hicks prior
to such termination,  plus costs, attorney's fees and a wage penalty pursuant to
Utah law. We dispute the amount  allegedly owed and intend to vigorously  defend
against such action.

         On November 7, 2003, a complaint was filed against us by Todd Smith,  a
former employee,  in the Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County,  State
of Utah (Civil No. 030924951 CN). Defendants consist of us and Randall Mackey, a
director of the company. The complaint alleges that while an employee, Mr. Smith
was granted stock options to purchase 16,800 shares of common stock  exercisable
at $5.00 per share.  Mr.  Smith  claims  unpaid  wages in the amount of the fair
market value of the stock  options he claims he was prevented  from  exercising,
plus  attorney's  fees and a continuing  wage penalty under Utah law. We believe
the claims  are  without  merit and intend to  vigorously  defend  against  such
action.

         On May 25, 2004, an action was brought  against us by Jeffrey F. Poore,
former  President  and Chief  Executive  Officer  of the  company,  in the Third
Judicial  District  Court  of  Salt  Lake  County,  State  of  Utah  (Civil  No.
040910875).  The  complaint  alleges that we unlawfully  terminated  the written
employment  agreement between Mr. Poore and us. As a result,  Mr. Poore demanded
judgment  against us for  $350,000,  representing  his annual salary for the two
remaining years under the employment agreement,  for money judgment based on the

                                       56


value  of his  benefits  for  the  two  remaining  years  under  the  employment
agreement,  including profit sharing plans, 401(k) and cafeteria plans,  health,
hospitalization,  dental,  disability and other  insurance plans canceled by us,
and for money  judgment  equal to the value of the stock options  granted to him
under the  employment  agreement.  We dispute the amounts  allegedly owed in the
complaint and believe that there was a sufficient basis to terminate Mr. Poore's
employment for cause under the terms of the employment  agreement.  Accordingly,
we intend to vigorously defend against the action.

         On August 9, 2004, a third party  complaint  was brought  against us by
Wakefield  Eye Center.  The  original  action was  brought by  American  Express
Business  Corporation  against  Westfield  Eye  Center  on May  27,  2004 in the
District Court, Clark County, State of Nevada (Civil No. A486307, Dept. No. XXI)
concerning the financing of the purchase of a Blood Flow Analyzer(TM)  involving
Westfield Eye Center. The transaction took place during the latter half of 2001.
Westfield  Eye Center took the position  that if there is liability of Westfield
to American  Express this liability is ultimately ours and the other third party
defendants.  The amount being sought  against  Westfield  Eye Center by American
Express in the original  action  includes the sum of  $29,765.83,  together with
interest and  attorney's  fees.  Westfield's  alleged  claims against us include
fraud, breach of contract, promissory estoppel,  declaratory relief, negligence,
negligent   supervision,   damages  for  injuries   resulting  from  actions  of
employee/contractor,  wilful and wanton  misconduct,  conspiracy,  and breach of
fiduciary  duty as well as costs  and  attorney's  fees.  Westfield  also  seeks
punitive damages.  We have filed an answer to the third party complaint in which
we deny liability. Formal discovery in the matter involving us has not commenced
apart  from  initial  disclosure  requirements.  The case has been  referred  to
arbitration. We intend to vigorously defend against the action.

         On March  31,  2005,  an  action  was  filed  against  us by  Joseph W.
Spadafora  in the United  States  District  Court,  District  of Utah (Civil No.
2:05CV00278  TS).  The  complaint  alleges  that Dr.  Spadafora  was a  clinical
investigator  in the study for the FDA  involving  the  Photon(TM)  laser system
where he  performed  numerous  surgeries  using the  Photon(TM).  Dr.  Spadafora
contends  that in meetings  with our  personnel he  suggested  ways in which the
handpiece on the Photon(TM) could be improved.  Dr.  Spadafora  further contends
that on August 5, 1999, we filed a patent  application for an improved handpiece
with the United States  Patent and Trademark  Office but he was not named as one
of the inventors or a coinventor on the patent application.

         On  September  24,  2004,  we were  issued  a patent  entitled,  "Laser
Surgical  Handpiece with Photon Trap." Because we did not list Dr.  Spadafora as
one of the inventors or a coinventor on the patent,  Dr. Spadafora  requested in
his complaint that a court order be entered declaring that he is the inventor or
coinventor  of the patent  and,  as a result,  is entitled to all or part of the
royalties  and profits  that we earned or will earn from the sale of any product
incorporating  or using the improved  handpiece,  plus  interest and  attorney's
fees.  We filed an answer to the  complaint in which we disputed the claims made
by Dr. Spadafora. We intend to vigorously defend against such action.

         We are not a party to any other material legal proceedings  outside the
ordinary  course of its  business or to any other legal  proceedings  which,  if
adversely  determined,  would have a material  adverse  effect on our  financial
condition or results of operations.


                                   MANAGEMENT

Directors and Executive Officers

         As of May 31, 2005, our executive  officers and  directors,  their ages
and their positions are set forth below:

Name                       Age     Position
----                       ---     --------
John Y. Yoon               40      President and Chief Executive Officer
Aziz A. Mohabbat           44      Vice President of Operations and Chief 
                                   Operating Officer
Randall A. Mackey, Esq.    59      Chairman of the Board, Secretary and Director
David M. Silver, Ph.D.     61      Director
Keith D. Ignotz            54      Director
John C. Pingree            64      Director

         The  directors  are  elected for one year terms that expire at the next
annual meeting of shareholders.  Executive  officers are elected annually by the
Board of Directors to hold office until the first meeting of the Board following
the next annual meeting of  shareholders  and until their  successors  have been
elected and qualified.

                                       57


         John Y. Yoon has served as our  President and Chief  Executive  Officer
since  March 19,  2004.  From June 2003 to March 19,  2004,  Mr.  Yoon served as
Senior  Director of  Marketing,  Enterprise  Voice  Solutions  Division of 3 Com
Corporation.  From 1997 to June 2003,  he served as Senior  Director  of Product
Management and Director of Product  Management of 3 Com Corporation.  During the
period  from 1996 to 1997,  Mr.  Yoon was  Director of  Strategic  Planning  and
Product  Development  of US  Robotics.  During the period from 1993 to 1996,  he
served as Manager of  Marketing  and  Strategic  Planning,  Senior  Director  of
Product Management and Management of Product Development for Ericsson, Inc. From
1990 to 1993, Mr. Yoon was Manager of Public Service  Marketing and Product Line
Manager of Mobile Radios for Ericsson, Inc. During the period from 1986 to 1988,
he was  Product  Planner of  Business  and  Industrial  Trucking  and  Marketing
Research Analyst for General Electric Mobile Communications. Mr. Yoon received a
B.A.  degree in Economics  from Harvard  College and an M.B.A.  degree from Duke
University.

         Aziz A. Mohabbat has served as our Chief Operating  Officer since March
23, 2004 and from August 2002 to March 2003,  and Vice  President of  Operations
since March 23, 2004 and from 2001 to March 2003.  From 2000 to 2001,  he served
as Managing  Director of the San Diego  Division of our company and from 1999 to
2000 as its Regulatory Affairs and Quality Assurance Manager. From March 2003 to
March 2004, Mr. Mohabbat served as Division  Manager of the Medical  Division of
TUV  Rheilland  of North  America,  a medical  products  safety  and  compliance
services  company.  From 1997 to 1999,  he served as Operations  and  Regulatory
Affairs and Quality Assurance Manager of Codan U.S., a subsidiary of Codan GmbH,
a manufacturer of disposable sterile and non-sterile  medical devices.  Prior to
1989, Mr. Mohabbat held various management and  bioengineering  positions in the
medical  laboratory  and  diagnostics  field  in  the  Eye  Care  Clinic  of the
University  Hospital-Eppendorf  and the General  Hospital of Barmbek in Hamburg,
Germany.  Mr. Mohabbat received a B.S. degree in Medical  Laboratory  Technology
from St.  George  Hospital  College in Hamburg,  Germany.  He is a member of the
American Society for Quality Assurance.

         Randall A. Mackey, Esq. has been our Chairman of the Board since August
20, 2002,  and a director since January 2000. He had served as a director of the
company from November 1995 to September  1998.  Mr. Mackey has been President of
the Salt Lake City law firm of Mackey Price  Thompson & Ostler since 1992, and a
shareholder and director of the firm and its  predecessor  firms since 1989. Mr.
Mackey  received a B.S.  degree in Economics  from the  University  of Utah,  an
M.B.A.  degree from the Harvard Business School, a J.D. degree from Columbia Law
School and a B.C.L. degree from Oxford University. Mr. Mackey has also served as
Chairman of the Board from June 2001 to May 2003, and as a director from 1998 to
May 2003 of Cimetrix,  Incorporated,  a software development company. Mr. Mackey
has additionally served as Chairman of the Board from July 2000 to July 2003 and
as a trustee from 1993 to July 2003 of Salt Lake Community College.

         David M. Silver,  Ph.D.  has been a director since January 2000. He had
served as a director of the company from  November 1995 to September  1998.  Dr.
Silver is a Principal Senior Scientist in the Milton S. Eisenhower  Research and
Technology  Development  Center at the Johns Hopkins  University Applied Physics
Laboratory,  where he has been  employed  since  1970.  He  served  as the J. H.
Fitzgerald  Dunning  Professor of  Ophthalmology in the Johns Hopkins Wilmer Eye
Institute in Baltimore  during 1998-99.  He received a B.S. degree from Illinois
Institute of  Technology,  an M.A.  degree from Johns Hopkins  University  and a
Ph.D. degree from Iowa State University before holding a postdoctoral fellowship
at Harvard  University  and a visiting  scientist  position at the University of
Paris.

         Keith D. Ignotz has been a director  since  November  2000. He has been
President and Chief  Operating  Officer of SpectRx,  Inc., a medical  technology
company  that he founded  in 1992,  which  develops,  manufactures  and  markets
alternatives  to traditional  blood based medical tests.  From 1986 to 1992, Mr.
Ignotz  was  Senior  Vice  President  of  Allergan  Humphrey,  Inc.,  a  medical
electronics company. From 1985 to 1986, he was President of Humphrey Instruments
Limited-SKB,  a medical electronics  company,  and from 1980 to 1985, Mr. Ignotz
was President of Humphrey  Instruments GmbH, also a medical electronics company.
Mr.  Ignotz also served on the Board of Directors of Vismed,  Inc.,  d/b/a Dicon
from 1992 to June 2000.  Mr.  Ignotz  received a B.A.  degree in  Sociology  and
Political Science from San Jose University and an M.B.A.  degree from Pepperdine
University.  Mr.  Ignotz  has  served as a trustee  of  Pennsylvania  College of
Optometry since 1990, as a director for FluoRx, Inc. since 1997, and as a member
of the American  Marketing  Association of the American  Association of Diabetes
Education.

         John C. Pingree has been a director  since April 2004.  He has been the
Executive  Director of the Semnani  Foundation  since August  2001,  which funds
projects to assist women and children in developing countries. From July 1998 to
July 2001, Mr. Pingree was a Mission President for the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day  Saints,  serving  in Mexico  City,  Mexico.  From 1977 to 1997,  Mr.
Pingree  was  General  Manager  and  Chief  Executive  Officer  of Utah  Transit

                                       58


Authority.  From  1970  to  1975,  he was  Director  of  Marketing  for  Memorex
Corporation. From 1967 to 1970, Mr. Pingree was Regional Manager, Sales Planning
at Xerox  Corporation.  He also  currently  serves as a member of the Utah State
Board of Education.  Mr.  Pingree  received a B.A.  degree in Economics from the
University of Utah and an M.B.A. degree from the Harvard Business School.

Appointment of New President and Chief Executive Officer

         On March 18,  2004,  John Y. Yoon was  appointed as our  President  and
Chief  Executive  Officer,  replacing  Jeffrey  F. Poore who had served in those
positions from March 19, 2003 to March 18, 2004.

Appointment of New Chief Operating Officer and New Vice President of Engineering

         On March 23, 2004, Aziz A. Mohabbat was appointed as our Vice President
of Operations and Chief Operating Officer,  replacing David I. Cullumber who had
resigned as Chief Operating Officer and Chief Technical  Officer.  Mr, Cullumber
served as Chief  Operating  Officer from November 6, 2003 to March 22, 2004. Mr.
Mohabbat had previously  served as our Chief Operating  Officer from August 2002
to March 2003, and as Vice  President of Operations  from 2001 to March 2003. On
May 23,  2005,  Frederick  D.  Geiger was  appointed  as our Vice  President  of
Engineering.

Board Meetings and Committees

         The size of our Board of Directors for the coming year is four members.
Three of the directors, or a majority of the Board of Directors, are independent
directors.  The independent directors have regularly scheduled meetings at which
only independent  directors are present.  The term of office of each director is
for a  period  of one  year or  until  the  election  and  qualification  of his
successor.  The Board of  Directors  held a total of five  meetings  during  the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2004. No directors attended fewer than 75% of all
meetings of the Board of Directors during the 2004 fiscal year.

         There  are  three  committees  of the Board of  Directors,  which  meet
periodically during the year: the Compensation  Committee,  the Audit Committee,
and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

         The Compensation Committee is responsible for recommending to the Board
of Directors for approval the annual  compensation of each executive  officer of
the Company, developing policy in the areas of compensation and fringe benefits,
contribution under the 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan, granting of options under
the stock option plans,  and creating other  employee  compensation  plans.  The
Compensation  Committee consists of Messrs. Keith D. Ignotz, John C. Pingree and
Dr. David M. Silver  (Chairman of the Committee).  During 2004, the Compensation
Committee met on one occasion.

         The Audit Committee  directs the auditing  activities of our registered
public  independent  accounting  firm and reviews the services  performed by the
registered  public  independent  accounting  firm and evaluates  our  accounting
practices and procedures  and our system of internal  accounting  controls.  The
Audit Committee consists of Messrs. Keith D. Ignotz (Chairman of the Committee),
John C. Pingree and Dr. David M. Silver. During 2004, the Audit Committee met on
one  occasion.  The Board of Directors has  determined  that Keith D. Ignotz and
John C.  Pingree,  who  currently  serve as  directors as well as members of the
audit committee, are independent audit committee financial experts.

         The   Nominating   and  Corporate   Governance   Committee   identifies
individuals  qualified to become board members consistent with criteria approved
by the board,  recommends  to the board the persons to be nominated by the board
for  election  as  directors  at a meeting of  stockholders,  and  develops  and
recommends to the board a set of corporate governance principles. The Nominating
and Corporate  Governance Committee consists of Messrs. Keith D. Ignotz, John C.
Pingree (Chairman of the Committee) and Dr. David M. Silver.  The Nominating and
Corporate Governance Committee is composed solely of independent directors.

Director Nominating Process

         The process for  identifying  and  evaluating  nominees  for  directors
include  the  following  steps:  (1) the  Nominating  and  Corporate  Governance
Committee,  Chairman of the Board or other board members identify a need to fill
vacancies or add newly created directorships; (2) the Chairman of the Nominating
and Corporate Governance Committee initiates a search and seeks input from board
members and senior  management  and, if necessary,  obtains advice from legal or
other  advisors  (but  does not  hire an  outside  search  firm);  (3)  director
candidates,  including  any  candidates  properly  proposed by  stockholders  in
accordance  with our bylaws,  are identified and presented to the Nominating and

                                       59


Corporate  Governance  Committee;  (4) initial  interviews  with  candidates are
conducted by the Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance  Committee;
(5) the  Nominating  and Corporate  Governance  Committee  meets to consider and
approve final candidate(s) and conduct further interviews as necessary;  and (6)
the Nominating and Corporate Governance  Committee makes  recommendations to the
board for  inclusion  in the  slate of  directors  at the  annual  meeting.  The
evaluation  process  will be the same  whether the nominee is  recommended  by a
stockholder or by a member of the Board of Directors.

         The Nominating and Corporate  Governance Committee operates pursuant to
a written  charter.  The full text of the charter is published on the  Company's
website at www.paradigm-medical.com.  A copy of the charter may also be obtained
without  charge  by  written  request  to the  attention  of Luis A.  Mostacero,
Controller,  Paradigm Medical Industries,  Inc., 2355 South 1070 East, Salt Lake
City, Utah 84119.

Meetings of Non-Management Directors

         Our   non-management   directors   regularly  meet  without  management
participation.  In addition, an executive session including only the independent
directors is held at least annually.

Corporate Governance

         Corporate Governance Guidelines. Our Board of Directors has adopted the
Paradigm  Medical  Industries,  Inc.  Corporate  Governance  Guidelines.   These
guidelines  outline the  functions  of the board,  director  qualifications  and
responsibilities,  and  various  processes  and  procedures  designed  to insure
effective and  responsive  governance.  The guidelines are reviewed from time to
time in response to regulatory  requirements  and best practices and are revised
accordingly.  The full text of the  guidelines  is  published  on our website at
www.paradigm-medical.com. A copy of the Corporate Governance Guidelines may also
be  obtained  at no  charge  by  written  request  to the  attention  of Luis A.
Mostacero,  Controller,  Treasurer and Secretary,  Paradigm Medical  Industries,
Inc., 2355 South 1070 East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84119.

         Code of Business Conduct. All of our officers,  employees and directors
are  required  to comply  with our Code of  Business  Conduct and Ethics to help
insure that our business is conducted in accordance with  appropriate  standards
of ethical behavior. Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics covers all areas of
professional conduct,  including customer relationships,  conflicts of interest,
insider trading,  financial disclosures,  intellectual property and confidential
information,  as  well  as  requiring  adherence  to all  laws  and  regulations
applicable to our business.  Employees are required to report any  violations or
suspected  violations  of  the  Code.  The  Code  includes  an  anti-retaliation
statement. The full text of the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics is published
on our  website  at  www.paradigm-medical.com.  A copy of the  Code of  Business
Conduct and Ethics may also be  obtained at no charge by written  request to the
attention of Luis A. Mostacero,  Controller,  Treasurer and Secretary,  Paradigm
Medical Industries, Inc., 2355 South 1070 East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84119.

Executive Compensation

         The  following  table sets  forth,  for each of the last  three  fiscal
years, the compensation  received by John Y. Yoon, President and Chief Executive
Officer, and other executive officers whose salary and bonus for all services in
all  capacities  exceed  $100,000 for the fiscal years ended  December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002.

                                       60




                           Summary Compensation Table
                           --------------------------

                                                    Annual Compensation                           Long Term Compensation
                                                                                                  Awards              Payouts
                                                                 Other                      Securities
                                                                 Annual    Restricted      Underlying     Long-term   All Other
Name and                                                        Compen-      Stock          Options/      Incentive   Compensa--
Principal Position      Year        Salary$        Bonus($)     sation($)    Awards($)       SARs(#)      Payouts($)  tion($)
------------------      ----        -------        --------     ---------    ---------       -------      ----------  ----------
                                                                                               
John Y. Yoon            2004(1)     $110,961(4)                   $18,494(4)        0      1,000,000(5)           0        0
President and Chief
Executive Officer

Aziz A. Mohabbat        2004(1)     $106,244             0              0           0              0              0        0
Vice President of       2003(2)     $ 24,219             0              0           0              0              0        0
Operations and          2002(3)     $126,878             0              0           0              0              0   $9,634(7)
Chief Operating
Officer(6)
 
Jeffrey F. Poore        2004(1)     $ 41,052             0              0           0              0              0        0
Former President        2003(2)     $136,015             0              0           0      1,000,000(8)           0        0
and Chief Executive
Officer

David I. Cullumber,     2004(1)     $ 15,894             0        $18,059(9)        0              0              0        0
Former Chief            2003(2)     $ 22,312             0        $16,616(9)        0        150,000(10)          0        0
Operating Officer
and Chief Technical
Officer

Gregory C. Hill         2004(1)            0             0              0           0              0              0        0
Former Vice             2003(2)     $ 34,000             0              0           0              0              0        0
President of Finance
and Chief Financial
Officer

Thomas F. Motter        2004(1)            0             0              0           0              0              0        0
Former Chairman of      2003(2)            0             0              0           0              0              0        0
the Board and Chief     2002(3)     $187,483(11)         0              0           0              0              0  $19,750(12)(13)
Executive Officer

Mark R. Miehle          2004(1)            0             0              0           0              0              0        0
Former President        2003(2)            0             0              0           0              0              0        0
and Chief Operating     2002(3)     $134,202             0              0           0         55,000(14)          0  $18,000(12)(15)
Officer

Heber C. Maughan        2004(1)            0             0              0           0              0              0        0
Former Vice             2003(2)     $ 36,855             0              0           0        150,000(17)          0        0
President of Finance    2002(3)     $114,416             0              0           0              0              0        0
and Chief Financial
Officer(16)


--------------------

      (1)     For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004
      (2)     For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003
      (3)     For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002
      (4)     Of the  salary  payable to Mr.  Yoon  pursuant  to his  employment
              agreement,  $110,961 was paid to him during 2004 and the remaining
              amount of $18,494  payable in 2004 was deferred until our board of
              directors has determined that our financial condition is improved.
      (5)     On March 18, 2004, our board of directors granted Mr. Yoon options
              to purchase  1,000,000  shares of our common  stock at an exercise
              price of $.13 per share.
      (6)     Mr.  Mohabbat has served a Vice  President of Operations and Chief
              Operating  Officer  since  March 22,  2004 and as Chief  Operating
              Officer from August 30, 2002 to March 2003.  He was not an officer
              in prior years.

                                       61


      (7)     The amounts  under "All Other  Compensation"  for 2004  consist of
              payments to Mr.  Mohabbat for accrued  vacation  days prior to his
              resignation from the Company in March 2003.
      (8)     On March  19,  2003,  our board of  directors  granted  Mr.  Poore
              options to  purchase  1,000,000  shares of our common  stock at an
              exercise price of $.16 per share. These options were terminated on
              March 18, 2003 when our board of directors  terminated Mr. Poore's
              employment for cause as defined in the employment agreement.
      (9)     We paid  A-Mech  Engineering,  Inc. a total of $16,616 and $18,059
              for consulting services during 2003 and 2004,  respectively.  From
              1982 to March 2004,  Mr.  Cullumber  served as President of A-Mech
              Engineering, Inc.
      (10)    On November 6, 2003, our board of directors  granted Mr. Cullumber
              options  to  purchase  150,000  shares of our  common  stock at an
              exercise price of $.21 per share. These options were terminated on
              June 20, 2003, 90 days after Mr.  Cullumber  resigned as our Chief
              Operating Officer and Chief Technical Officer.
      (11)    Although  Mr.  Motter  resigned  as Chairman  and Chief  Executive
              Officer on August 30,  2002,  he  continued  to receive his salary
              under the terms of his employment  agreement  through December 16,
              2002.
      (12)    The amounts under "All Other Compensation" for 2004, 2003 and 2002
              include  payments  related to the operation of automobiles  and/or
              automobiles and insurance by the named executives.
      (13)    The  amounts  under  "All  Other  Compensation"  for 2002  include
              payments related to the residential housing accommodations for our
              employees,  living  outside of Utah while they were working at our
              corporate  headquarters in Salt Lake City,  leased from Mr. Motter
              at $2,500 per month.
      (14)    On January 29,  2002,  our Board of Directors  granted Mr.  Miehle
              options to purchase  the 55,000  shares of our common  stock at an
              exercise price of $2.75 per share.  These options were  terminated
              on February 28,  2004,  one year after  expiration  of a six month
              consulting  agreement with the Company,  which expired on February
              28, 2003.
      (15)    On September 3, 2002, we entered into a consulting  agreement with
              Mr. Miehle in which we were required to pay him monthly consulting
              fees of $5,000 over a period of six months. We paid him a total of
              $15,000 for  consulting  services  during the months of September,
              October and November of 2002.
      (16)    Mr. Maughan served as Interim Chief Executive  Officer from August
              30,  2002 to March  19,  2003.  He  served  as Vice  President  of
              Finance,  Treasurer  and Chief  Financial  Officer from October 1,
              2001 until his resignation on May 31, 2003.
      (17)    On May 13,  2003,  our  Board of  Directors  granted  Mr.  Maughan
              options  to  purchase  150,000  shares of our  common  stock at an
              exercise price of $.16 per share. These options were terminated on
              August  29,  2003,  90 days  after Mr.  Maughan  resigned  as Vice
              President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer.

 Options

         The  following  table sets forth  information  regarding  stock options
granted during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, to each named  executive
officer.




                        Option Grants in Last Fiscal Year


                                                                      Individual Grants
                                                      Percentage of Total
                            Number of Securities       Options Granted to      Exercise Price
                              UnderlyingOptions           Employees in           Per Share           Expiration
 Name                            Granted (#)             Fiscal Year(%)            ($/Sh)               Date
 ----                            -----------             --------------            ------               ----
                                                                                             
 John Y. Yoon..............       1,000,000(1)                56.3%                  $.13               4/1/09
 Aziz A. Mohabbat..........         200,000(2)                11.3%                  $.12               4/1/09


(1)      Options vest in 36 monthly installments of 27,778 shares,  beginning on
         April 30, 2004, until such shares are vested.

(2)      Options vest in 36 monthly  installments of 5,556 shares,  beginning on
         April 30, 2004, until such shares are vested.

         The  following  table  sets  forth  information  regarding  unexercised
options to acquire  shares of our common stock held as of December 31, 2004,  by
each named executive officer.

                                       62




 Aggregated Option Exercises in Last Fiscal Year and Fiscal Year-End Option Values


                                                                       Number of Securities
                                                                            Underlying                    Value of Unexercised
                                                                       Unexercised Options                In-the-Money Options
                                                                     at December 31, 2004(#)            at December 31, 2004($)
                                                                     -----------------------            -----------------------
                             Shares Acquired       Value
 Name                          on Exercise      Realized($)       Exercisable       Unexercisable      Exercisable    Unexercisable
 ----                          -----------      -----------       -----------       -------------      -----------    -------------
                                                                                                          
 John Y. Yoon.............          0                0                250,002           749,998             0               0
 Aziz A. Mohabbat...........        0                0                 50,004           149,996             0               0


Director Compensation

         On April 19, 2004,  John C.  Pingree,  a director of our  company,  was
granted  options to purchase  125,000  shares of our common stock at an exercise
price of $.12 per share. On September 30, 2004,  Messrs.  Randall A. Mackey, Dr.
David M. Silver and Keith D. Ignotz, directors of our company, were each granted
options to purchase  125,000  shares of our common stock at an exercise price of
$.13 per share.  In addition,  outside  directors are also  reimbursed for their
expenses in attending board and committee meetings.  Directors are not precluded
from serving us in any other capacity and receiving compensation therefore.  The
options were not issued at a discount to the then market price.

Employee 401(k) Plan

         In October  1996,  our board of directors  adopted a 401(k)  Retirement
Savings  Plan.  Under the terms of the 401(k) plan,  effective as of November 1,
1996, we may make discretionary employer matching contributions to our employees
who choose to  participate  in the plan.  The plan allows the board to determine
the amount of the  contribution at the beginning of each year. The Board adopted
a contribution  formula  specifying that such  discretionary  employer  matching
contributions would equal 100% of the participating  employee's  contribution to
the  plan  up  to a  maximum  discretionary  employee  contribution  of  3% of a
participating employee's  compensation,  as defined by the plan. All persons who
have  completed  at least six months'  service  with us and  satisfy  other plan
requirements are eligible to participate in the plan.

1995 Stock Option Plan

         We adopted a 1995  Stock  Option  Plan,  for the  officers,  employees,
directors  and  consultants  of our  company  on  November  7,  1995.  The  plan
authorized  the  granting of stock  options to purchase an aggregate of not more
than 300,000  shares of our common  stock.  On February  16,  1996,  options for
substantially all 300,000 shares were granted. On June 9, 1997, our shareholders
approved an  amendment  to the plan to  increase  the number of shares of common
stock reserved for issuance thereunder from 300,000 shares to 600,000 shares. On
September  3,  1998,  our  shareholders  approved  an  amendment  to the plan to
increase the number of shares of common stock  reserved for issuance  thereunder
from 600,000 shares to 1,200,000  shares. On November 29, 2000, our shareholders
approved an  amendment  to the plan to  increase  the number of shares of common
stock  reserved  for  issuance  thereunder  from  1,200,000  shares to 1,700,000
shares.  On September 11, 2001,  our  shareholders  approved an amendment to the
1995 plan to increase the number of shares of common stock reserved for issuance
thereunder  from  1,700,000  shares to 2,700,000  shares.  On June 13, 2003, our
shareholders  approved an amendment to the plan to increase the number of shares
of common stock  reserved  for  issuance  thereunder  from  2,700,000  shares to
3,700,000 shares.

         The compensation  committee  administers the 1995 Stock Option Plan. In
general, the compensation  committee will select the person to whom options will
be granted  and will  determine,  subject to the terms of the plan,  the number,
exercise,  and other provisions of such options.  Options granted under the plan
will become  exercisable at such times as may be determined by the  compensation
committee. Options granted under the plan may be either incentive stock options,
as such term is defined in the Internal  Revenue  Code, or  non-incentive  stock
options.  Incentive  stock  options  may only be granted to persons  who are our
employees.  Non-incentive stock options may be granted to any person, including,
but not  limited  to, our  employees,  independent  agents,  consultants  as the
compensation  committee  believes has contributed,  or will  contribute,  to our
success.  The  compensation  committee  determines the exercise price of options
granted  under  the  1995  Stock  Option  Plan,  provided  that,  in the case of
incentive  stock options,  such price is not less than 100% (110% in the case of
incentive  stock options granted to holders of 10% of voting power of our stock)
of the fair  market  value (as  defined in the plan) of the common  stock on the
date of grant. The aggregate fair market value (determined at the time of option
grant) of stock with respect to which incentive stock options become exercisable
for the first time in any year cannot exceed $100,000.

                                       63


         The term of each option shall not be more than ten years (five years in
the case of  incentive  stock  options  granted  to holders of 10% of the voting
power of our stock) from the date of grant.  The Board of Directors  has a right
to amend, suspend or terminate the 1995 Stock Option Plan at any time; provided,
however, that unless ratified by our shareholders, no amendment or change in the
plan will be effective  that would  increase the total number of shares that may
be issued under the plan,  materially  increase the benefits accruing to persons
granted under the plan or materially  modify the  requirements as to eligibility
and  participation in the plan. No amendment,  supervision or termination of the
plan  shall,  without  the  consent  of an  employee  to  whom an  option  shall
heretofore  have been  granted,  affect the rights of such  employee  under such
option.

Employment Agreements

         We entered into an employment  agreement  with Thomas F. Motter,  which
commenced on January 1, 1998 and expired on December 31,  2002.  The  employment
agreement required Mr. Motter to devote substantially all of his working time as
our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, provided that he may be terminated for
"cause" (as provided in the  agreements)  and prohibited him from competing with
us for two years  following the  termination  of his employment  agreement.  The
employment  agreement  provided  for the  payment of an initial  base  salary of
$135,000,  effective  as of January  1,  1998.  The  employment  agreement  also
provided  for  salary  increases  and  bonuses  as  would be  determined  at the
discretion of the Board of Directors. Effective as of October 1, 1999, the Board
of  Directors  approved  an  increase  in Mr.  Motter's  annual  base  salary to
$160,000,  and effective as of July 1, 2000,  the board  approved an increase in
his annual base salary to $200,000,  which  remained in effect during 2002.  Mr.
Motter resigned as Chairman and Chief  Executive  Officer on August 30, 2002. He
continued  to receive  his salary  under the terms of the  employment  agreement
through December 16, 2002.

         We entered into an  employment  agreement  with Mark R.  Miehle,  which
commenced on June 5, 2000, and expired on June 4, 2003. The employment agreement
required  Mr.  Miehle to devote  substantially  all of his  working  time as our
President and Chief  Operating  Officer,  provided that he may be terminated for
"cause" (as provided in the agreement) and prohibited him from competing with us
for two  years  following  the  termination  of his  employment  agreement.  The
employment  agreement  provided for the payment of an initial annual base salary
of $150,000,  effective as of June 5, 2000, and the issuance of stock options to
purchase  150,000 shares of our common stock at $6.00 per share, to be vested in
equal annual  amounts over a three year period.  The  employment  agreement also
provided for salary  increases and bonuses as to be determined at the discretion
of the Board of  Directors.  The stated annual  compensation  remained in effect
through  December 31, 2001 and into 2002. The Board of Directors  terminated the
employment  agreement  with Mr. Miehle on August 30, 2002. He entered into a six
month consulting  agreement,  which expired on February 28, 2003, for $5,000 per
month.  Mr.  Miehle was paid  $15,000 in 2002 under the terms of the  consulting
agreement.

         We entered into an employment  agreement  with Jeffrey F. Poore,  which
commenced  on March 19,  2003 and  expires  on March 19,  2006.  The  employment
agreement requires Mr. Poore to devote  substantially all of his working time as
our President and Chief  Executive  Officer,  provided that he may be terminated
for "cause" (as provided in the  agreements)  and prohibits  him from  competing
with us for two years following the termination of the employment agreement. The
employment  agreement  provided  for the  payment of an initial  base  salary of
$175,000, effective as of March 19, 2003. The employment agreement also provided
for salary increases and bonuses as shall be determined at the discretion of our
Board of Directors.  The employment  agreement further provided for the issuance
of stock  options to purchase  1,000,000  shares of our common stock at $.16 per
share,  of which options to purchase  800,000 shares of common stock were vested
on March 19, 2003,  options for an additional 100,000 shares of common stock was
vested on March 19, 2004, and options for an additional 100,000 shares of common
stock were vested on March 19, 2005.

         On March  18,  2004,  our Board of  Directors  terminated  Mr.  Poore's
employment for cause as defined in the employment agreement.  As a result of the
termination  of the  employment  agreement,  we believe  that we have no further
obligations  to make salary or bonus  payments or provide  benefits to Mr. Poore
and all of his stock options have terminated. On May 25, 2004, Mr. Poore brought
a lawsuit against us. In his complaint he alleged that we unlawfully  terminated
his employment and, as a consequence,  demands judgment against us for $350,000,
representing  his annual salary for the two remaining years under the employment
agreement,  for  money  judgment  for  the  value  of his  benefits  for the two
remaining years under the employment  agreement,  and for the value of the stock
options granted to him. We dispute the claims in the complaint and believe there
was a sufficient  basis to terminate Mr. Poore's  employment for cause under the
terms of the employment agreement.

         We  entered  into an  employment  agreement  with John Y.  Yoon,  which
commenced  on March 18,  2004 and  expires  on March 18,  2007.  The  employment
agreement  requires Mr. Yoon to devote  substantially all of his working time as
our President and Chief  Executive  Officer,  provided that he may be terminated
for "cause" (as provided in the agreement) and prohibits him from competing with
us for two years  following the  termination  of the employment  agreement.  The
employment  agreement  provides  for the  payment of an initial  base  salary of
$175,000,  effective as of April 1, 2004. The employment agreement also provides
for salary increases and bonuses as shall be determined at the discretion of our
Board of Directors.  The employment  agreement further provides for the issuance
of stock  options to purchase  1,000,000  shares of our common stock at $.13 per
share.  These options vest in 36 equal monthly  installments  of 27,778  shares,
beginning on April 30, 2004, until such shares are vested.

                                       64


         In  the  event  of a  change  of  control  of  the  company,  then  all
outstanding  stock options  granted to Mr. Yoon shall be immediately  vested.  A
change of control  shall be deemed to have  occurred if (i) a tender offer shall
be made and  consummated  for the ownership of more than 25% of our  outstanding
shares;  (ii) we are merged or consolidated  with another  corporation and, as a
result,  less  than  25% of  the  outstanding  common  shares  of the  surviving
corporation shall be owned in the aggregate by our former  shareholders,  as the
same shall have listed prior to such merger or consolidation;  (iii) we sell all
or substantially  all of its assets to another  corporation that is not a wholly
owned  subsidiary or affiliate;  (iv) as a result of any contested  election for
our Board of  Directors,  or any tender or  exchange  offer,  merger of business
combination or sale of assets,  the persons who were our directors before such a
transaction  shall cease to constitute a majority of our Board of Directors;  or
(v) a person other than an officer or director of the company shall acquire more
than 20% of the outstanding shares of our common stock.

         We  entered  into an  employment  agreement  with Aziz A.  Mohabbat  on
October 5, 2004,  which was effective as of April 1, 2004,  and expires on March
18, 2006.  However,  the term shall be extended an additional one year period to
March 18, 2007 in the event Mr.  Mohabbat  moves from San Diego,  California  to
Salt Lake City, Utah and becomes a resident of the state of Utah. The employment
agreement requires Mr. Mohabbat to devote  substantially all of his working time
as our Vice President of Operations and Chief Operating  Officer,  provided that
he may be terminated  for "cause" (as provided in the  agreement)  and prohibits
him from  competing  with us for two  years  following  the  termination  of the
employment  agreement.  The employment  agreement provides for the payment of an
initial base salary of $144,500,  effective as of April 1, 2004.  The employment
agreement also provides for salary  increases and bonuses as shall be determined
at the discretion of our Board of Directors.  The employment  agreement  further
provides for the  issuance of stock  options to purchase  200,000  shares of our
common  stock  at  $.12  per  share.  These  options  vest in 36  equal  monthly
installments of 5,556 shares, beginning on April 30, 2004, until such shares are
vested.

         In  the  event  of a  change  of  control  of  the  company,  then  all
outstanding stock options granted to Mr. Mohabbat shall be immediately vested. A
change of control  shall be deemed to have  occurred if (i) a tender offer shall
be made and  consummated  for the ownership of more than 25% of our  outstanding
shares;  (ii) we are merged or consolidated  with another  corporation and, as a
result,  less  than  25% of  the  outstanding  common  shares  of the  surviving
corporation shall be owned in the aggregate by our former  shareholders,  as the
same shall have listed prior to such merger or consolidation;  (iii) we sell all
or substantially  all of its assets to another  corporation that is not a wholly
owned  subsidiary or affiliate;  (iv) as a result of any contested  election for
our Board of  Directors,  or any tender or  exchange  offer,  merger of business
combination or sale of assets,  the persons who were our directors before such a
transaction  shall cease to constitute a majority of our Board of Directors;  or
(v) a person other than an officer or director of the company shall acquire more
than 20% of the outstanding shares of our common stock.

Severance Agreement

         On August 30, 2002,  the Board of Directors  terminated  the employment
agreement  with Mark R. Miehle who had been serving as our  President  and Chief
Operating Officer. Under the terms of the termination of Mr. Miehle's employment
agreement, the stock options issued to him on April 19, 2000 to purchase 150,000
shares of our common stock at $6.00 per share, on September 11, 2001 to purchase
110,000  shares of our common stock at $2.75 per share,  and on January 28, 2002
to  purchase  55,000  shares of our  common  stock at $2.75 per share were fully
vested as of the date of such  termination  and continue to be exercisable for a
period of one year following the termination of a consulting agreement, at which
time such options would expire.

         The  termination of the employment  agreement also required us to enter
into a consulting  agreement with Mr. Miehle.  Under the terms of the consulting
agreement,  Mr. Miehle was to provide consulting  services to us for a period of
six months for a fee of $5,000 per month.  The  consulting  agreement  was to be
automatically  renewed for an additional six months at a fee of $3,000 per month
unless we delivered  written  notice to Miehle at least 30 days prior to the end
of the initial six month term that we would not renew the agreement. We paid Mr.
Miehle a total of $15,000 under the consulting agreement for consulting services
during the months of  September,  October and November of 2002. We also provided
written  notice to Mr.  Miehle more than 30 days prior to the end of the initial
six month term of the  consulting  agreement of our  intention not to review the
agreement.

Limitation of Liability and Indemnification

         We  reincorporated  in  Delaware  in February  1996,  in part,  to take
advantage  of  certain  provisions  in  Delaware's  corporate  law  relating  to
limitations on liability of corporate  officers and  directors.  We believe that
the  reincorporation  into  Delaware,  the  provisions  of  its  Certificate  of
Incorporation and Bylaws and the separate  indemnification  agreements  outlined
below are  necessary to attract and retain  qualified  persons as directors  and
officers.  Our Certificate of Incorporation limits the liability of directors to
the maximum  extent  permitted by Delaware  law.  This  provision is intended to
allow our  directors  the  benefit  of  Delaware  General  Corporation  Law that

                                       65


provides  that  directors of Delaware  corporations  may be relieved of monetary
liabilities  for breach of their  fiduciary  duties as  directors,  except under
certain  circumstances,  including  breach  of their  duty of  loyalty,  acts or
omissions  not in good faith or involving  intentional  misconduct  or a knowing
violation of law,  unlawful  payments of dividends or unlawful stock repurchases
or redemptions or any  transaction  from which the director  derived an improper
personal  benefit.  Our Bylaws provide that we shall  indemnify our officers and
directors to the fullest extent  provided by Delaware law. Our Bylaws  authorize
the use of  indemnification  agreements and we have entered into such agreements
with each of our directors and executive officers.

         There is pending  litigation  against Thomas F. Motter,  Mark R. Miehle
and  John  W.  Hemmer,   former  officers  of  the  company,  to  whom  we  have
indemnification  obligations.  The pending  litigation  consists of class action
complaints for alleged  violations of the federal  securities  laws filed in the
United  States  District  Court,  District  of Utah,  captioned  Richard  Meyer,
individually  and on behalf of others  similarly  situated v.  Paradigm  Medical
Industries,  Inc.,  Thomas  Motter,  Mark Miehle and John Hemmer,  Case No. 2:03
CV00448TC,  Michael Marrone v. Paradigm Medical Industries, Inc., Thomas Motter,
Mark Miehle, and John Hemmer,  Case No. 2:03 CV00513PGC,  and Milian v. Paradigm
Medical  Industries,  Inc., Thomas Motter, Mark Miehle and John Hemmer, Case No.
2:03 CV00617PGC. We have retained legal counsel to review the complaints,  which
appear to be focused on alleged false and  misleading  statements  pertaining to
the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  and  concerning a purchase  order from  Valdespino
Associates Enterprises and Westland Financial Corporation.

         More  specifically,  each of the  complaints  alleges  that we  falsely
stated in our Securities and Exchange Commission filings and press releases that
we had received  authorization to use an insurance  reimbursement  CPT code from
the  CPT  Code  Research  and  Development  Division  of  the  American  Medical
Association in connection with the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM),  adding that the CPT
code  provides for a  reimbursement  to doctors of $57.00 per patient for use of
the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM).  The complaints also allege that on July 11, 2002,
we issued a press  release  falsely  announcing  that we had received a purchase
order from Valdespino Associates  Enterprises and Westland Financial Corporation
for 200 sets of our entire portfolio of products, with $70 million in systems to
be delivered  over a two-year  period,  then another $35 million of orders to be
completed in the third year.  As a result of these  statements,  the  complaints
contend that the price of our shares of common stock was  artificially  inflated
during the period from April 25, 2001 through May 14, 2003,  and the persons who
purchased our common shares during that period suffered substantial damages. The
complaints request judgment for unspecified damages,  together with interest and
attorneys' fees. These three cases have been  consolidated into a single action.
If we are not  successful  in defending  and  protecting  our interests in these
cases, resulting in a judgment against us for substantial damages, and U.S. Fire
Insurance  Company denies coverage in the cases under the Directors and Officers
Liability  and  Company  Reimbursement  Policy,  we would not be able to pay the
indemnification obligations and, as a result, would be forced to seek bankruptcy
protection.

         There is also pending  litigation  against Messrs.  Motter,  Miehle and
Hemmer in an action filed in the United States District Court,  District of Utah
by Innovative  Optics,  Inc. The  complaint  claims that  Innovative  and Barton
entered into an asset  purchase  agreement with us on January 31, 2002, in which
we agreed to purchase  all the assets of  Innovative  in  consideration  for the
issuance of 1,310,000  shares of the Company's  common stock to Innovative.  The
complaint  also claims that we allegedly  made false and  misleading  statements
pertaining to the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  and concerning a purchase order from
Valdespino  Associates  Enterprises  and  Westland  Financial  Corporation.  The
purpose  of  these  statements,  according  to  the  complaint,  was  to  induce
Innovative  to sell its assets and  purchase  the shares of our common  stock at
artificially  inflated  prices while  simultaneously  deceiving  Innovative  and
Barton  into  believing  that the  Company's  shares  were  worth more than they
actually  were.  Had  Innovative  and  Barton  known the  truth,  the  complaint
contends,  they would not have sold  Innovative to us, would not have  purchased
our stock for the assets of Innovative, or would not have purchased the stock at
the inflated  prices that were paid.  The complaint  further  contends that as a
result of these statements,  Innovative and Barton suffered  substantial damages
in an amount to be proven at trial.

         The complaint further claims that 491,250 of the shares to be issued to
Innovative in the asset purchase  transaction  were not issued on a timely basis
and we also did not  file a  registration  statement  with  the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission within five months of the closing date of the asset purchase
transaction.  As a result, the complaint alleges that the value of the shares of
our  common  stock  issued  to  Innovative  in  the  transaction  declined,  and
Innovative and Barton  suffered  damages in an amount to be proven at trial.  We
filed an answer to the complaint and also filed counterclaims against Innovative
and Barton for breach of contract.  If we are not  successful  in defending  and
protecting our interests in this action,  resulting in a judgment against us for
substantial  damages,  and U.S.  Fire  denies  coverage  in the cases  under the
Directors and Officers Liability and Company  Reimbursement Policy, we would not
be able to pay the indemnification obligations and, as a result, would be forced
to seek bankruptcy protection.

         Finally,  there is also  pending  litigation  against  Messrs.  Motter,
Miehle and Hemmer and Randall A. Mackey, Chairman of the Board and Secretary, to
whom we have indemnification  obligations,  in a class action complaint filed in
the Third Judicial  District Court, Salt Lake County,  State of Utah,  captioned
Albert  Kinzinger,  Jr.,  individually  and on  behalf of all  others  similarly
situated vs. Paradigm  Medical  Industries,  Inc.,  Thomas Motter,  Mark Miehle,

                                       66


Randall A. Mackey, and John Hemmer,  Case No. 030922608.  We have retained legal
counsel to review the complaint, which appears to be focused on alleged false or
misleading   statements   pertaining  to  the  Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM).   More
specifically, the complaint alleges that we falsely stated in its Securities and
Exchange   Commission   filings  and  press   releases   that  it  had  received
authorization  to use an  insurance  reimbursement  CPT  code  from the CPT Code
Research  and  Development  Division  of the  American  Medical  Association  in
connection with the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM),  adding that the CPT code provides
for a  reimbursement  to  doctors  of $57.00  per  patient  for the  Blood  Flow
Analyzer(TM).

         The purpose of these  statements,  according to the  complaint,  was to
induce investors to purchase shares of our Series E preferred stock in a private
placement  transaction at artificially  inflated prices.  The complaint contends
that as a result of these statements, the investors that purchased shares of our
Series E preferred stock in the private offering suffered substantial damages to
be proven at trial.  The complaint  also alleges that we sold Series E preferred
shares  without  registering  the sale of such shares or  obtaining an exemption
from registration.  The complaint requests rescission,  compensatory damages and
treble damages,  including  interest and attorneys'  fees. We filed an answer to
the  complaint.  If we are  not  successful  in  defending  and  protecting  our
interests  in the action,  resulting  in a judgment  against us for  substantial
damages,  and U.S.  Fire denies  coverage in this action under the Directors and
Officers Liability and Company Reimbursement Policy, we would not be able to pay
the  indemnification  obligations  and,  as a  result,  would be  forced to seek
bankruptcy protection.

         Except for these litigation matters,  there is no pending litigation or
proceedings  involving  a  director,  officer,  employee  or other  agent of our
company as to which  indemnification  is being  sought,  nor are we aware of any
threatened  litigation  that may  result in claims  for  indemnification  by any
director, officer, employee or other agent.

         Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities
Act of 1933 may be permitted to  directors,  officers  and  controlling  persons
pursuant to the foregoing provisions, or otherwise, we have been advised that in
the opinion of the Securities and Exchange  Commission,  such indemnification is
against  public policy as expressed in the  Securities  Act of 1933, as amended,
and is, therefore, unenforceable.

Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

         Section  16(a) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934  requires  our
executive officers,  directors and persons who own more than 10% of any class of
our common stock to file initial  reports of ownership and reports of changes of
ownership of common stock. Such persons are also required to furnish us with all
Section 16(a) reports they file.

         Based solely on our review of the copies of such reports received by us
with respect to fiscal 2004, or written  representations  from certain reporting
persons,  we believe that all filing  requirements  applicable to its directors,
officers and greater than 10% beneficial  owners were complied with, except that
Dr. David M. Silver,  a director of the company,  through an oversight,  filed a
late stock transaction report covering four transactions.  No other late filings
occurred during 2004.

         SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

         The  following  table sets forth  certain  information  with respect to
beneficial  ownership  of our  common  stock  as of May 31,  2005  for (i)  each
executive  officer (ii) each  director,  (iii) each person known to us to be the
beneficial  owner  of more  than 5% of the  outstanding  shares,  and  (iv)  all
directors and officers as a group.

                                                Number of       Percent of
 Name and Address(1)                             Shares         Ownership
 -------------------                             ------         ---------
 Douglas A. MacLeod, M.D. (2)                   3,068,451         11.1%
     502 South M Street
     Tacoma Washington 98405
 Dr. David M. Silver (3)                          761,166          2.7%
 Randall A. Mackey (3)                            725,000          2.6%
 Keith D. Ignotz (3)                              454,560          1.6%
 John Y. Yoon (3)                                 222,224             *
 John C. Pingree (3)                              231,500             *
 Aziz A. Mohabbat (3)                              44,448             *
                                             ------------
 Executive officers and directors
    as a group (six persons)                    2,438,898          8.8%
         -----------------
         *Less than 1%.

                                       67


(1)      Unless otherwise  indicated,  the address of each listed stockholder is
         c/o Paradigm Medical Industries,  Inc., 2355 South 1070 West, Salt Lake
         City, Utah, 84119.
(2)      Based on our shareholder  records, Dr. McLeod owns 1,218,451 shares and
         is our largest sole shareholder.  Dr. McLeod's beneficial  ownership is
         believed to also include 400,000 shares held by the Douglas A. MacLeod,
         M.D.  Profit  Sharing  Trust,  200,000  shares  held by St.  Mark's Eye
         Institute and 720,000  shares held by Milan  Holdings,  Ltd.,  which we
         believe  Dr.  MacLeod  to have sole or shared  voting  and  dispositive
         powers with regard to such shares.  Dr. McLeod's  beneficial  ownership
         further  includes  shares that may be acquired  currently  or within 60
         days after  January  31,  2005  through  the  exercise  of  warrants as
         follows: Dr. MacLeod,  200,000 shares;  Douglas A. MacLeod, M.D. Profit
         Sharing Trust; 100,000 shares; St. Mark's Eye Institute, 50,000 shares;
         and Milan Holdings, Ltd., 180,000 shares.
(3)      The amounts shown  include  shares that may be acquired  currently,  or
         within 60 days after  January  31, 2005  through the  exercise of stock
         options are follows:  Dr. Silver,  725,000 shares; Mr. Mackey,  725,000
         shares;  Mr. Ignotz,  453,851 shares; Mr. Yoon,  222,224;  Mr. Pingree,
         125,000 shares; and Mr. Mohabbat, 44,448 shares.

                              CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS

         The information set forth herein describes certain transactions between
us and certain affiliated parties. Future transactions, if any, will be approved
by a  majority  of the  disinterested  members  and  will  be on  terms  no less
favorable to us than those that could be obtained from unaffiliated parties.

         Thomas F. Motter,  our former Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
Officer, leased his former residence to us for $2,500 per month. The primary use
of the  residential  property was for housing  accommodations  for our employees
living outside of Utah while they were working at our corporate  headquarters in
Salt Lake  City.  We paid  $2,500  and  $14,000  in rent  during  2003 and 2002,
respectively. This agreement was terminated on January 31, 2003.

         We entered into a consulting  agreement with Mark R. Miehle, our former
President and Chief Operating  Officer for a period of six-months  commencing on
September 3, 2002.  The agreement was renewable for  additional six month terms.
We did not renew the contract  upon its  expiration.  We paid $1,000 and $15,000
under this agreement during 2003 and 2002,  respectfully,  and had an accrual of
$5,000 as of December 31, 2002.

         Randall  A.  Mackey,  a  director  since  January  21,  2000,  and from
September  1995 to  September 3, 1998 and Chairman of the Board since August 30,
2002, is President and a shareholder  of the law firm of Mackey Price Thompson &
Ostler,  which  rendered  legal  services in connection  with various  corporate
matters.  Legal fees and  expenses  paid to Mackey  Price  Thompson & Ostler for
legal services during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, totaled
$90,000 and $97,000, respectively.  Legal fees and expenses paid to Mackey Price
Thompson & Ostler for legal  services  during the three  months  ended March 31,
2005 totaled $25,000. As of December 31, 2004, we owed this firm $188,705, which
is included in accounts payable.

                             SELLING SECURITYHOLDERS

         The following  table sets forth  information  regarding the  beneficial
ownership  of our common stock being  registered  for resale as of May 31, 2005,
(i) by each of the holders of common stock pursuant to registration  rights, and
(ii) by each of the  holders  of  Series E and  Series F  Convertible  preferred
stock, assuming each of the Series E and Series F preferred  shareholders elects
to convert the respective  Series E and Series F preferred shares into shares of
common stock for resale; (iii) by each of the holders of warrants, assuming each
of the  warrantholders  elects to exercise  the  warrants to purchase  shares of
common  stock for  resale;  and (iv) by each of the  holders  of stock  options,
assuming  each of the  optionholders  elects to exercise the options to purchase
shares of common  stock for resale;  the number of shares of common  stock to be
sold  by  each  selling  securityholder,  and the  percentage  of  each  selling
securityholder after the sale of the common stock included in this prospectus.

                                       68





                                                  Shares Beneficially         Number of
                                                    Owned Prior to           Shares Being        Shares Beneficially
                                                        Offering                 Offered        Owned After Offering
                                                  --------------------       -------------      --------------------
      Shareholders                                Number       Percent                          Number        Percent
      ------------                                ------       -------                          ------        ------- 
                                                                                                         
John T. Ablamsky(1)                               35,000             *             3,000        32,000            *
Steven J. Ablamsky(2)                             35,000             *             3,000        32,000            *
Morris Ades(3)                                    29,167             *             2,500        26,667            *
Francis Anderson(4)                                8,346             *             8,346             0            *
Joseph S. Anile II                               112,933             *           112,933             0            *
Paul L. Archambeau, M.D.(5)                      255,000           1.0%          255,000             0            *
BNB Associates Investments LP (6)                 43,750             *             3,750        40,000            *
Dr. Ronald A. and Karen Balkin(7)                155,833             *            12,500       143,333            *
Darin Baker(8)                                     2,604             *             2,604             0            *
John H. Banzhaf(9)                                 7,887             *             7,887             0            *
Jerry Bassin(10)                                  29,167             *             2,500        26,667            *
Steven J. Bayern (11)                            112,500             *           112,500             0            *
Alan Beinhacker(12)                                  541             *               541             0            *
Dr. Valery Berger(13)                              2,500             *             2,500             0            *
Michael Bollag(14)                                 3,750             *             3,750             0            *
Dr. Richard G. Bowe, IRA(15)                      29,167             *             2,500        26,667            *
Craig S. Brewer(16)                                5,000             *             5,000             0            *
Christopher Brothers1(17)                          2,604             *             2,604             0            *
Roland A. Catalano, IRA(18)                       87,500             *             7,500        80,000            *
Chicago Investments, Inc. (19)                    87,500             *             7,500        80,000            *
James Corman(20)                                  29,167             *             2,500        26,667            *
Cyndel & Co., Inc. (21)                          487,500           1.9%          487,500             0            *
Lenore Deluca(22)                                  1,234             *             1,234             0            *
Paul Dorfman(23)                                   1,287             *             1,287             0            *
Jack Dushey(24)                                    2,500             *             2,500             0            *
Michael Fenton(25)                                   467             *               467             0            *
Henry A. Fredericks Sep. Property Trust                                                      
     dated 10/12/88 (26)                          29,167             *             2,500        26,667            *
Robert L. Frome (27)                             222,917             *           156,250        66,667            *
Generation Capital Associates (28)                23,208             *            23,208             0            *
Richard E. Gerzof(29)                              1,250             *             1,250             0            *
John Harte(30)                                    58,333             *             5,000        53,333            *
John W. Hemmer(31)                                60,000             *            60,000             0            *
Keith D. Ignotz(32)                              200,709             *           200,000           709            *
International Bio-Immune Systems, Inc.(33)       344,000           1.3%          344,000             0            *
Scott Jernigan(34)                                 5,000             *             5,000             0            *
Kenneth Jerome & Company, Inc.(35)               200,000             *           200,000             0            *
KSH Strategic Investment Fund I, LP (36)         237,333           1.0%           20,000       217,333            *
Frances Kehoe(37)                                  1,234             *             1,234             0            *
Terry F. King(38)                                  2,500             *             2,500             0            *
Albert F. Kinzinger, Jr.(39)                      49,220             *             4,220        45,000            *
Albert F. Kinzinger, Sr., IRA(40)                 29,167             *             2,500        26,667            *
Arthur Klansky(41)                                14,583             *             1,250        13,333            *
Helen Kohn(42)                                   139,300             *           139,300             0            *
Patrick N. Kolenik (43)                          112,500             *           112,500             0            *
Jason Konior(44)                                     515             *               515             0            *
Nicole Kregar(45)                                  1,234             *             1,234             0            *
James H. Levi(46)                                 14,499             *             2,500        11,999            *
Joe Levine(47)                                       450             *               450             0            *
Dr. Michael B. Limberg (48)                      309,375           1.2%          309,375             0            *
Daniel S. Lipson(49)                             250,000           1.0%          250,000             0            *
Randall A. Mackey(50)                            475,000           1.6%          475,000             0            *
Douglas A. MacLeod, M.D.(51)                   1,418,451           5.6%        1,000,000       418,451          1.6%
Douglas A. MacLeod, M.D. Profit Sharing                                                                                   
     Trust(52)                                   500,000           2.0%          500,000             0            *
Damian Maggio(53)                                    515             *               515             0            *
Thomas L. Martin(54)                               7,500             *             7,500             0            *
Lewis Mason(55)                                    3,887             *             3,887             0            *
Frank G. Mauro(56)                               153,225             *           153,225             0            *


                                       69


                                                                                                         
Mentor Corporation (57)                          763,651           3.0%          763,651             0            *
Mid-Lakes Profit Sharing Trust
     dated 1/1/66 (58)                            29,167             *             2,500        26,667            *
Milan Holdings, Ltd.(59)                         900,000           3.5%          900,000             0            *
James McKeever(60)                                 1,000             *             1,000             0            *
James A. Milgard(61)                             218,750             *            18,750       200,000            *
Robert Moulallem(62)                               1,000             *             1,000             0            *
Kay Murcer(63)                                    11,667             *             1,000        10,667            *
Nancy Murdocco(64)                                 1,234             *             1,234             0            *
Bernard Musmand(65)                                  450             *               450             0            *
Dr. Joseph R. Nemeth(66)                           9,375             *             9,375             0            *
Jules M. Ness, Jr.(67)                            39,167             *             2,500        36,667            *
Karen Ann Orlando(68)                              1,234             *             1,234             0            *
OTATO Limited Partnership (69)                    12,500             *            12,500             0            *
Michael Pancer Profit Sharing Plan(70)             2,500             *             2,500             0            *
Roberto E. Parra(71)                               6,500             *             6,500             0            *
Barry Pearl(72)                                   10,000             *            10,000             0            *
Perceptive Life Sciences Master Fund (73)         64,132             *            20,000        44,132            *
David Peterson(74)                                 3,750             *             1,250         2,500            *
John Petrucco(75)                                  1,320             *             1,320             0            *
Victor Polakof(76)                                 2,500             *             2,500             0            *
Polycore Optical Pte., Ltd. (77)                 694,816           2.7%          694,816             0            *
Sal Vatore Ponzo(78)                               4,500             *             4,500             0            *
Charles S. Pritchard(79)                          10,103             *            10,103             0            *
ProMed Partners, L.P.(80)                        283,728           1.1%           23,035       260,693          1.0%
ProMed Partners I (81)                            24,440             *            24,440             0            *
ProMed Partners II (82)                           29,517             *             2,530        26,987            *
Dr. Soleiman Rabanipour(83)                       14,583             *             1,250        13,333            *
Dr. Sheldon Rabin, IRA(84)                         5,000             *             5,000             0            *
Delbert D. Reichardt(85)                           7,888             *             7,888             0            *
Marsha and Barry Reiss(86)                         5,833             *               500         5,333            *
Rodman & Renshaw, Inc.(87)                        35,000             *            35,000             0            *
Edwin W. and Cheryl S. Richardson(88)             29,167                           2,500        26,667            *
St. Mark's Eye Institute(89)                     250,000           1.0%          250,000             0            *
Joel Schoenfeld, IRA(90)                          29,167             *             2,500        26,667            *
Judy Shapiro Trust dated 5/15/01(91)              58,333             *             5,000        53,333            *
Shadow Capital LLC (92)                           58,333             *             5,000        53,333            *
Dr. David M. Silver(93)                          491,666           1.6%          475,000        16,666            *
Richard C. Siskey(94)                             47,766             *            10,000        37,766            *
Mary Ellen Spedale(95)                             1,234             *             1,234             0            *
Ronit Sucoff(96)                                  93,503             *            86,800         6,703            *
Scott Sucoff(97)                                   5,928             *             5,928             0            *
WEC Asset Management LLC (98)                     10,000             *            10,000             0            *
White Living Trust (99)                           14,583             *             1,250        13,333            *
Jeffrey A. Wietzman(100)                          14,583             *             1,250        13,333            *
James C. Wilson(101)                              56,333             *             5,000        51,333            *
Matthew Zagon(102)                                 2,833             *             2,833             0            *
Class A Warrantholders                         1,000,000                       1,000,000             0
                                              ----------                       ---------     ---------   
       TOTAL                                  11,791,710                       9,471,437     2,320,273
_________________


(1)      Includes the resale of 3,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(2)      Includes the resale of 3,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.

                                       70


(3)      Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(4)      Includes the resale of 8,346 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(5)      Includes the resale of 51,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $.25 per share.
(6)      Includes the resale of 3,750 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         managing  partner of BNB Associates  Investments LP is Benjamin Bollag,
         who exercises sole voting and investment powers.
(7)      Includes the resale of 12,500 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(8)      Includes the resale of 2,604 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(9)      Includes the resale of 7,887 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $.25 per share.
(10)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(11)     Includes the resale of 112,500 shares of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of stock  options  with an exercise  price of $4.00 per share.
         Mr. Bayern is a former director of the company.
(12)     Includes  the resale of 541 shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(13)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(14)     Includes the resale of 3,750 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(15)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(16)     Includes the resale of 5,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(17)     Includes the resale of 2,604 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(18)     Includes the resale of 7,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(19)     Includes the resale of 7,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         president  of Chicago  Investments,  Inc.  is Linda  Gallenberger,  who
         exercises sole voting and investment powers.
(20)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(21)     Includes the resale of 237,000 shares of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share,  and
         250,000  shares of common stock  issuable upon the exercise of warrants
         with an exercise price of $3.00 per share.  The chairman,  director and
         50%  shareholder  of Cyndel & Co.,  Inc.  is Stephen J.  Bayern and the
         president,  director  and 50%  shareholder  of  Cyndel  is  Patrick  N.
         Kolenik,  who together  exercise  share voting and  investment  powers.
         Messrs.  Bayern and Kolenik are each a former  director of the company.
         On October 1, 1999 an April 1, 2000,  Cyndel  entered  into  consulting
         agreements with the company to perform  unspecified  investment banking
         services for the company.
(22)     Includes the resale of 1,234 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(23)     Includes the resale of 1,287 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(24)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(25)     Includes  the resale of 467 shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(26)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         trustee of Henry A. Fredericks  Sep.  Property Trust is James D. White,
         who exercises sole voting and investment powers.

                                       71


(27)     Includes the resale of 156,250 shares of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of stock  options  with an exercise  price of $4.00 per share.
         Mr. Frome is a former director of the company.
(28)     Includes the resale of 23,208 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         general partner of Generation  Capital Associates is Frank E. Hart, who
         exercises sole voting and investment powers.
(29)     Includes the resale of 1,250 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(30)     Includes the resale of 5,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(31)     Includes the 60,000  shares of common stock  issuable upon the exercise
         of warrants  with an exercise  price of $5.00 per share.  Mr. Hemmer is
         the former senior vice president of the company
(32)     Includes the resale of 75,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of stock options with an exercise price of $4.00 per share and
         125,000  shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the  exercise of stock
         options  with an  exercise  price of $2.75 per share.  Mr.  Ignotz is a
         director o the company.
(33)     The president of International  Bio-Immune  Systems,  Inc. is Leslie F.
         Stern, who exercises sole voting and investment powers.
(34)     Includes the resale of 5,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(35)     Includes the resale of 100,000 shares of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an exercise  price of $8.125 per share,  and
         100,000  shares of common stock  issuable upon the exercise of warrants
         with an exercise price of $7.50 per share.
(36)     Includes the resale of 20,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         managing  partners of KSH Strategic  Investment  Fund I, LP are Cary W.
         Sucoff and Harvey R. Kohn,  who exercise  shared voting and  investment
         powers.
(37)     Includes the resale of 1,234 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(38)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(39)     Includes the resale of 4,220 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(40)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(41)     Includes the resale of 1,250 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(42)     Includes the resale of 86,800 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(43)     Includes the resale of 112,500 shares of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of stock  options  with an exercise  price of $4.00 per share.
         Mr. Kolenik is a former director of the company.
(44)     Includes  the resale of 515 shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(45)     Includes the resale of 1,234 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(46)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(47)     Includes  the resale of 450 shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(48)     Includes the resale of 100,000 shares of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share,  50,000
         shares of common stock  issuable  upon the exercise of warrants with an
         exercise  price of $6.75 per  share,  50,000  shares  of  common  stock
         issuable upon the exercise of warrants with an exercise  price of $4.75
         per  share,  and  100,000  shares of  common  stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  Dr.
         Limberg served as a consultant to the company.
(49)     Includes the resale of 50,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of stock options with an exercise price of $.25 per share.
(50)     Includes the resale of 75,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of stock  options  with an exercise  price of $6.00 per share,
         75,000  shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the  exercise  of stock
         options with an exercise  price of $4.00 per share,  and 325,000 shares
         of common stock  issuable  upon the  exercise of stock  options with an
         exercise  price of $2.75 per share.  Mr.  Mackey is the chairman of the
         board and secretary of the company.

                                       72


(51)     Includes the resale of 200,000 shares of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $.25 per share.
(52)     Includes the resale of 100,000 shares of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $.25 per share.
(53)     Includes  the resale of 515 shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(54)     Includes the resale of 5,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of stock  options  with an exercise  price of $5.00 per share,
         and 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable upon the exercise of options
         wit an exercise price of $2.75 per share.
(55)     Includes the resale of 3,887 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(56)     Includes the resale of 141,975 shares of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of  warrants  with an  exercise  price of $.25 per share,  and
         11,250  shares of common stock  issuable  upon the exercise of warrants
         with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(57)     The  senior  vice  president  and  chief  financial  officer  of Mentor
         Corporation  is Adel Michael,  who exercises sole voting and investment
         powers.  On October 24, 1999,  Mentor  entered  into an asset  purchase
         agreement with the Company to sell Mentor's  cataract  surgery  product
         line.
(58)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         trustee of the  Mid-Lakes  Profit  Sharing  Trust dated  1/1/66 is John
         Harte, who exercises sole voting and investment powers.
(59)     Includes the resale of 180,000 shares of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $.25 per share.
(60)     Includes the resale of 1,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(61)     Includes the resale of 18,750 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(62)     Includes the resale of 1,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(63)     Includes the resale of 1,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(64)     Includes the resale of 1,234 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(65)     Includes  the resale of 450 shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(66)     Includes the resale of 9,375 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(67)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(68)     Includes the resale of 1,234 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(69)     Includes the resale of 12,500 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         chief  financial  officer  of OTAT  Limited  Partnership  is  James  W.
         Santori, who exercises sole voting and investment powers.
(70)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(71)     Includes the resale of 4,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of options wit an exercise price of $5.00 per share, and 2,500
         shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the exercise of options with an
         exercise price of $2.75 per share.
(72)     Includes the resale of 10,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(73)     Includes the resale of 20,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         director of Perceptive Life Sciences Master Fund is Joseph Adelman, who
         exercises sole voting and investment powers.
(74)     Includes the resale of 1,250 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(75)     Includes the resale of 1,320 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.

                                       73


(76)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(77)     The managing director of Polycore Optical Pte., Ltd. is Sammy Summargo,
         who exercises sole voting and investment powers.
(78)     Includes the resale of 4,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(79)     Includes the resale of 4,103 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of stock  options  with an exercise  price of $5.00 per share,
         and 6,000  shares of common stock  issuable  upon the exercise of stock
         options with an exercise price of $2.75 per share.
(80)     Includes the resale of 23,035 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         managing  directors of ProMed  Partners,  L.P.  are Barry  Kurokawa and
         David B. Muskett, who exercise sole voting and investment powers.
(81)     Includes the resale of  24,440shares  of common stock issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         managing directors of ProMed Partners I are Barry Kurokawa and David B.
         Muskett, who exercise shared voting and investment powers.
(82)     Includes the resale of 2,530 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         managing  directors of ProMed  Partners II are Barry Kurokawa and David
         B. Muskett, who exercise shared voting and investment powers.
(83)     Includes the resale of 1,250 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(84)     Includes the resale of 5,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(85)     Includes the resale of 7,888 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $.25 per share.
(86)     Includes  the resale of 500 shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(87)     Includes the resale of 35,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $2.00 per share.
(88)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(89)     Includes the resale of 50,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $.25 per share.
(90)     Includes the resale of 2,500 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(91)     Includes the resale of 5,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         trustees  of the Judy  Shapiro  Trust  dated  5/15/01 are Alan and Judy
         Shapiro, who exercise shared voting and investment powers.
(92)     Includes the resale of 5,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         manager of Shadow  Capital LLC i B. Kent  Garlinghouse,  who  exercises
         sole voting and investment powers.
(93)     Includes the resale of 75,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of stock  options  with an exercise  price of $6.00 per share,
         75,000  shares of common  stock  issuable  upon the  exercise  of stock
         options with an exercise  price of $4.00 per share,  and 325,000 shares
         of common stock  issuable  upon the  exercise of stock  options with an
         exercise  price of $2.75 per  share.  Dr.  Silver is a  director  o the
         company.
(94)     Includes the resale of 10,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(95)     Includes the resale of 1,234 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(96)     Includes the resale of 86,800 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(97)     Includes the resale of 5,928 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(98)     Includes the resale of 10,000 shares of common stock  issuable upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         managing  director of WEC Asset  Management  LLC is Daniel J. Saks, who
         exercises sole voting and investment powers.
(99)     Includes the resale of 1,250 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants  with an  exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  The
         trustees of the White  Living  Trust are James and Jean Ann White,  who
         exercis shared voting and investment powers.

                                       74


(100)    Includes the resale of 1.250 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(101)    Includes the resale of 5,000 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.
(102)    Includes the resale of 2,833 shares of common stock  issuable  upon the
         exercise of warrants with an exercise price of $4.00 per share.

         Our authorized  capital stock  consists of 80,000,000  shares of common
stock,  $.001 par value per share,  of which  28,530,074  shares were issued and
outstanding as of May 31, 2005, and 5,000,000  shares of undesignated  preferred
stock,  $.001 par value per share.  We have created  seven  classes of preferred
stock,  designated as Series A preferred stock, Series B preferred stock, Series
C convertible  preferred stock,  Series D convertible  preferred stock, Series E
convertible  preferred stock, Series F convertible  preferred stock and Series G
convertible  preferred  stock.  The following is a summary of the material terms
and  provisions  of our capital  stock and related  securities.  Because it is a
summary,  it does not  include  all of the  information  that is included in our
certificate of  incorporation.  The text of our  certificate  of  incorporation,
which is attached as an exhibit to this registration  statement, is incorporated
into this section by reference.

Common Stock

         Voting  Rights.  The holders of our common stock will have one vote per
share and are not entitled to vote  cumulatively  for the election of directors.
Generally,  all  matters to be voted on by  stockholders  must be  approved by a
majority  or, in the case of election of  directors,  by  plurality of the votes
cast at a meeting at which a quorum is present  and  voting  together  as single
class,  subject  to any  voting  rights  granted  to  the  holders  of any  then
outstanding preferred stock.

         Dividends.  Holders  of  common  stock  are  entitled  to  receive  any
dividends declared by our board of directors, subject to the preferential rights
of any  preferred  stock then  outstanding.  Dividends  consisting  of shares of
common stock may be paid to holders of shares of common stock.

         Other  Rights.  Upon our  liquidation,  dissolution  or winding up, the
holders of common stock are entitled preferential to share ratably in any assets
available for  distribution  to holders of shares of common stock. No holders of
shares  are  subject  to  redemption  or  have  preemptive  rights  to  purchase
additional shares of common stock.

Preferred Stock

         Our  certificate of  incorporation  provides that  5,000,000  shares of
preferred stock may be issued from time to time in one or more series. Our board
of directors  is  authorized  to fix the voting  rights,  if any,  designations,
powers, preferences, qualifications, limitations and restrictions, applicable to
the shares of each  series.  Our board of  directors  may,  without  stockholder
approval,  issue  preferred  stock  with  voting  and other  rights  that  could
adversely  affect the voting power and other rights of the holders of the common
stock and could have anti-takeover effects,  including preferred stock or rights
to acquire preferred stock in connection with implementing a stockholder  rights
plan.  The ability of our board of directors to issue  preferred  stock  without
stockholder approval could have the effect of delaying,  deferring or preventing
a change of control  with  respect to our  company  or the  removal of  existing
management.  As of May 31,  2005,  we have  created  and issued  shares of seven
classes of preferred stock.

Series A, B, C, D, E, F and G Preferred Stock.

         The Board of Directors has authorized the issuance of 500,000 shares of
Series A Preferred  Stock,  500,000 shares of Series B Preferred  Stock,  30,000
shares of  Series C  Preferred  Stock,  1,140,000  shares of Series D  Preferred
Stock,  50,000  shares of Series E Preferred  Stock,  50,000  shares of Series F
Preferred Stock,  and 2,000,000 shares of Series G Preferred Stock.  Each of the
shares of  preferred  stock are  convertible  into  shares of common  stock at a
different  conversion  price.  As  of  May  31,  2005,  there  were  issued  and
outstanding  5,627  shares of Series A Preferred  Stock  convertible  into 6,753
shares of our common stock; 8,986 shares of Series B Preferred Stock convertible
into 10,783 shares of our common stock;  no shares of Series C Preferred  Stock;
5,000  shares of Series D Preferred  Stock;  1,000  shares of Series E Preferred
Stock convertible into 53,333 shares of common stock;  4,598.75 shares of Series
F Preferred  Stock  convertible  into 245,267  shares of our common  stock;  and
1,726,560  shares of Series G Preferred Stock  convertible into 1,726,560 shares
of our common stock The voting rights, dividends,  conversion rights, redemption
rights,  and  liquidation  rights of the Series A, Series B, Series C, Series D,
Series E, Series F and Series G Preferred Stock are more fully described below.

                                       75


Series A Preferred Stock

         Voting  Rights.  Except as provided  by  applicable  law,  the Series A
preferred  stockholders  have  neither  voting  power,  nor the right to receive
notice of any  meetings of our  stockholders.  Except as  required  by law,  the
consent of the Series A preferred  stockholders is not required or authorized to
take any corporate action.

         Dividends.  Our Series A preferred stock is entitled to  non-cumulative
preferred  dividends at $.24 per share per annum payable, at our option, in cash
from surplus earnings.

         Conversion.  At any time the Series A preferred stockholder may convert
each share of Series A  preferred  stock  into 1.2  shares of our common  stock,
subject to adjustment for stock splits, stock dividends,  recapitalizations  and
similar transactions involving our common stock.

         Other  Rights.   Upon  our   liquidation,   dissolution,   or  sale  of
substantially  all of our  assets,  the  Series  A  preferred  stockholders  are
entitled  to  distributions  equal to $1.00 per share,  plus  accrued and unpaid
dividends.  The shares of Series A preferred stock are subject to redemption but
have no preemptive  rights to purchase  additional  shares of Series A preferred
stock or our common stock.

Series B Preferred Stock

         Voting  Rights.  Except as provided  by  applicable  law,  the Series B
preferred  stockholders  have  neither  voting  power,  nor the right to receive
notice of any  meetings of our  stockholders.  Except as  required  by law,  the
consent of the Series B preferred  stockholders is not required or authorized to
take any corporate action.

         Dividends.  Our Series B preferred stock is entitled to  non-cumulative
preferred  dividends at $.24 per share per annum payable, at our option, in cash
from surplus earnings.

         Conversion.  At any time the Series B preferred stockholder may convert
each share of Series B  preferred  stock  into 1.2  shares of our common  stock,
subject to adjustment for stock splits, stock dividends,  recapitalizations  and
similar transactions involving our common stock.

         Other  Rights.   Upon  our   liquidation,   dissolution,   or  sale  of
substantially  all of our  assets,  the  Series  B  preferred  stockholders  are
entitled  to  distributions  equal to $4.00 per share,  plus  accrued and unpaid
dividends.  The Series B preferred  stockholders  are  entitled to  preferential
distributions  over all other  classes of  capital  stock,  other than  Series A
preferred  stock.  The  shares  of  Series B  preferred  stock  are  subject  to
redemption but have no preemptive rights to purchase additional shares of Series
B preferred stock or our common stock.

Series C Preferred Stock

         Voting  Rights.  Except as provided  by  applicable  law,  the Series C
preferred  stockholders  have  neither  voting  power,  nor the right to receive
notice of any  meetings of our  stockholders.  Except as  required  by law,  the
consent of the Series C preferred  stockholders is not required or authorized to
take any corporate action.

         Dividends.   Our  Series  C   preferred   stock  is   entitled  to  12%
non-cumulative  preferred  dividends payable,  at our option, in common stock or
cash from surplus earnings.

         Conversion.  At any time the Series C preferred stockholder may convert
each  share of Series C  preferred  stock  into  57.14  shares of common  stock,
subject to adjustment for stock splits, stock dividends,  recapitalizations  and
similar  transactions  involving  our  common  stock.  Any  shares  of  Series C
preferred stock outstanding  after January 1, 2002, are automatically  converted
into our shares to common stock at the conversion price then in effect.

         Other   Rights.   Upon  our   liquidation,   dissolution   or  sale  of
substantially  all of our  assets,  the  Series  C  preferred  stockholders  are
entitled  to   distributions   equal  to  the  greater  of  (i)  the  amount  of
distributions  such shares would have  received had such holders  converted  the
Series C preferred stock into common stock immediately prior to liquidation,  or
(ii) the stated value of $100.00 per share,  plus declared but unpaid dividends.
The Series C preferred  stockholders are entitled to preferential  distributions
over all other  classes  of  capital  stock,  other  than  Series A and Series B
preferred stock. No shares of Series C preferred stock are subject to redemption
or have preemptive  rights to purchase  additional  shares of Series C preferred
stock or our common stock.

                                       76


Series D Preferred Stock

         Voting  Rights.  Except as provided  by  applicable  law,  the Series D
preferred  stockholders  have  neither  voting  power,  nor the right to receive
notice of any  meetings of our  stockholders.  Except as  required  by law,  the
consent of the Series D preferred  stockholders is not required or authorized to
take any corporate action.

         Dividends.   Our  Series  D   preferred   stock  is   entitled   to  8%
non-cumulative  preferred  dividends payable,  at our option, in common stock or
cash from surplus earnings.

         Conversion.  At any time the Series D preferred stockholder may convert
each share of Series D preferred  stock into one share of common stock,  subject
to adjustment for stock splits, stock dividends,  recapitalizations  and similar
transactions  involving our common stock. Any shares of Series D preferred stock
outstanding after January 1, 2002, are  automatically  converted into our shares
of common stock at the conversion price then in effect.

         Other   Rights.   Upon  our   liquidation,   dissolution   or  sale  of
substantially  all of our  assets,  the  Series  D  preferred  stockholders  are
entitled  to   distributions   equal  to  the  greater  of  (i)  the  amount  of
distributions  such shares would have  received had such holders  converted  the
Series D preferred stock into common stock immediately prior to liquidation,  or
(ii) the stated value of $1.75 per share,  plus  declared but unpaid  dividends.
The Series D preferred  stockholders are entitled to preferential  distributions
over all other  classes of capital  stock,  other  than  Series A,  Series B and
Series C preferred  stock.  No shares of Series D preferred stock are subject to
redemption or have preemptive  rights to purchase  additional shares of Series D
preferred stock or our common stock. 

Series E Preferred Stock

         Voting  Rights.  Except as provided  by  applicable  law,  the Series E
preferred  stockholders  have  neither  voting  power,  nor the right to receive
notice of any  meetings of our  stockholders.  Except as  required  by law,  the
consent of the Series E preferred  stockholders is not required or authorized to
take any corporate action.

         Dividends.   Our  Series  E   preferred   stock  is   entitled   to  8%
non-cumulative  preferred  dividends payable,  at our option, in common stock or
cash from surplus earnings.

         Conversion.  At any time the Series E preferred stockholder may convert
each  share of Series E  preferred  stock  into  53.33  shares of common  stock,
subject to adjustment for stock splits, stock dividends,  recapitalizations  and
similar  transactions  involving  our  common  stock.  Any  shares  of  Series E
preferred  stock  outstanding  are  automatically  converted  into shares of our
common stock (i) after January 1, 2005, or (ii) after a  registration  statement
registering  our common shares issuable upon conversion has been effective for a
least 30 days and the average  closing  price of our common stock for the 20-day
period is at least $3.50 per share.

         Other   Rights.   Upon  our   liquidation,   dissolution   or  sale  of
substantially  all of our  assets,  the  Series  E  preferred  stockholders  are
entitled  to   distributions   equal  to  the  greater  of  (i)  the  amount  of
distributions  such shares would have  received had such holders  converted  the
Series E preferred stock into common stock immediately prior to liquidation,  or
(ii) the stated value of $100.00 per share,  plus declared but unpaid dividends.
The Series E preferred  stockholders are entitled to preferential  distributions
over all other classes of capital stock, other than Series A, Series B, Series C
and Series D preferred  stock. No shares of Series E preferred stock are subject
to redemption or have preemptive rights to purchase  additional shares of Series
E preferred stock or our common stock.

Series F Preferred Stock

         Voting  Rights.  Except as provided  by  applicable  law,  the Series F
preferred  stockholders  have  neither  voting  power,  nor the right to receive
notice of any  meetings of our  stockholders.  Except as  required  by law,  the
consent of the Series F preferred  stockholders is not required or authorized to
take any corporate action.

         Dividends.   Our  Series  F   preferred   stock  is   entitled   to  8%
non-cumulative  preferred  dividends payable,  at our option, in common stock or
cash from surplus earnings.

         Conversion.  At any time the Series F preferred stockholder may convert
each  share of Series F  preferred  stock  into  53.33  shares of common  stock,
subject to adjustment for stock splits, stock dividends,  recapitalizations  and
similar  transactions  involving  our  common  stock.  Any  shares  of  Series F
preferred  stock  outstanding  are  automatically  converted  into shares of our
common stock (i) after January 1, 2005, or (ii) after a  registration  statement
registering  our common shares issuable upon conversion has been effective for a
least 30 days and the average  closing  price of our common stock for the 20-day
period is at least $3.50 per share.

                                       77


         Other   Rights.   Upon  our   liquidation,   dissolution   or  sale  of
substantially  all of our  assets,  the  Series  F  preferred  stockholders  are
entitled to the  greater of (i) the amount of  distributions  such shares  would
have  received  had such  holders  converted  the Series F preferred  stock into
common stock immediately prior to liquidation, or (ii) the stated value of $1.00
per  share,  plus  declared  but  unpaid  dividends.   The  Series  F  preferred
stockholders are entitled to preferential  distributions  over all other classes
of capital stock, other than Series A, Series B, Series C, Series D and Series E
preferred stock. No shares of Series F preferred stock are subject to redemption
or have preemptive  rights to purchase  additional  shares of Series F preferred
stock or our common stock.

Series G Preferred Stock

         Voting  Rights.  Except as provided  by  applicable  law,  the Series G
preferred  stockholders  have  neither  voting  power,  nor the right to receive
notice of any  meetings of our  stockholders.  Except as  required  by law,  the
consent of the Series G preferred  stockholders is not required or authorized to
take any corporate action.

         Dividends.   Our  Series  G   preferred   stock  is   entitled   to  8%
non-cumulative  preferred  dividends payable,  at our option, in common stock or
cash from surplus earnings.

         Conversion.  At any time the Series G preferred stockholder may convert
each share of Series G preferred  stock into one share of common stock,  subject
to adjustment for stock splits, stock dividends,  recapitalizations  and similar
transactions  involving our common stock. Any shares of Series G preferred stock
outstanding  are  automatically  converted  into shares of our common  stock (i)
after August 1, 2005, or (ii) after a  registration  statement  registering  our
common shares  issuable upon  conversion  has been effective for a least 30 days
and the average  closing  price of our common stock for the 20-day  period is at
least $.50 per share.

         Other   Rights.   Upon  our   liquidation,   dissolution   or  sale  of
substantially  all of our  assets,  the  Series  G  preferred  stockholders  are
entitled to the  greater of (i) the amount of  distributions  such shares  would
have  received  had such  holders  converted  the Series G preferred  stock into
common stock immediately prior to liquidation,  or (ii) the stated value of $.25
per  share,  plus  declared  but  unpaid  dividends.   The  Series  G  preferred
stockholders are entitled to preferential  distributions  over all other classes
of capital  stock,  other than  Series A, Series B, Series C, Series D, Series E
and Series F preferred  stock. No shares of Series G preferred stock are subject
to redemption or have preemptive rights to purchase  additional shares of Series
G preferred stock or our common stock.  Under the terms of the private  offering
of Series G preferred shares,  we are required to file a registration  statement
with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  to register  the common  shares
issuable to the Series G preferred  stockholders upon conversion of their Series
G preferred shares and exercise of their warrants. If the registration statement
has not been declared  effective  within 120 days of the initial closing of such
offering on August 29, 2003,  there is a penalty of 2% per month  payable to the
Series G preferred  stockholders  in common  shares (or 39,631 common shares per
month) until the registration  statement is declared effective.  As of September
30, 2004, we had recorded a liability of $43,000  related to the 356,682  common
shares  to be  issued  to  the  Series  G  preferred  stockholders  because  the
registration statement had not been declared effective as of that date.

Warrants

         Between  June 10,  1997  and  June 23,  2005,  we  issued  warrants  to
individuals  and entities that are currently  outstanding to purchase a total of
15,371,881  shares of our common stock at exercise  prices ranging from $.15 per
share to $8.125 per share. The warrants all contain  provisions that protect the
holders  against  dilution by adjustment of the exercise price per share and the
number of shares  issuable upon exercise  thereof upon the occurrence of certain
events,  including  stock  splits,  stock  dividends,  mergers,  and the sale of
substantially  all of our assets. We are not required to issue fractional shares
of common stock,  and in lieu thereof we will make a cash payment based upon the
current market value of such fractional  shares. A holder of these warrants will
not possess any rights as a  shareholder  unless and until the holder  exercises
the warrants.

         The warrants that are currently issued and have not been exercised, and
the exercise price and expiration date of such warrants are as follows:

         o    Class A Warrants to purchase  1,000,000  shares of common stock at
              an exercise price of $7.50 per share, exercisable through July 10,
              2006.

         o    Warrants  issued to Series E  preferred  stockholders  to purchase
              241,095  shares of common stock at an exercise  price of $4.00 per
              share, exercisable through May 23, 2006.

         o    Warrants  issued to Series F  preferred  stockholders  to purchase
              251,114  shares of common stock at an exercise  price of $4.00 per
              share, exercisable through August 20, 2006.

                                       78


         o    Warrants  issued to Kenneth  Jerome & Company,  Inc.  to  purchase
              200,000  shares of common  stock at exercise  prices  ranging from
              $7.50 to $8.125 per share, exercisable through July 10, 2005.
         o    Warrants  issued to Cyndel & Company,  Inc.  to  purchase  475,000
              shares of common  stock at exercise  prices  ranging from $3.00 to
              $4.00 per share,  exercisable  during the period  from  August 10,
              2005 to February 7, 2006.
         o    Warrants  issued to Dr.  Michael B.  Lindberg to purchase  300,000
              shares of common  stock at exercise  prices  ranging from $4.00 to
              $6.75 per share, exercisable during the period of from December 1,
              2008 through June 1, 2011.
         o    Warrants  issued to Helen Kohn and Ronit Sucoff to purchase 50,000
              shares  each of  common  stock at an  exercise  price of $4.00 per
              share, exercisable through February 7, 2006.
         o    Warrants  issued to Rodman & Renshaw to purchase  35,000 shares of
              common stock at an exercise price of $2.00 per share,  exercisable
              through May 13, 2006.
         o    Warrants  issued to Paul L.  Archanbeau,  M.D.,  John H.  Banzhaf,
              Daniel S. Lipson,  Douglas A. MacLeod,  M.D.,  Douglas A. MacLeod,
              M.D.  Profit  Sharing  Trust,  St.  Mark's  Eye  Institute,  Milan
              Holdings,  Inc.,  Frank G.  Mauro,  and  Delbert G.  Reichardt  to
              purchase  an  aggregate  of 788,750  shares of common  stock at an
              exercise price of $.25 per share, exercisable through September 6,
              2005.
         o    Warrants  issued  to  certain  investors  in a  private  placement
              transaction  to purchase an aggregate of 422,634  shares of common
              stock at an exercise price of $.75 per share, exerciseable through
              June 25, 2005.
         o    Warrants issued to Series G Preferred  warrantholders  to purchase
              470,589  shares of common  stock at an exercise  price of $.50 per
              share, exercisable through September 1, 2006.
         o    Warrants  issued to Alpha  Advisory  Services,  Inc.  to  purchase
              25,000  shares of common  stock at an  exercise  price of $.15 per
              share, exerciseable through September 28, 2007.
         o    Warrants  issued to Valvidia  Trading,  Inc.  to purchase  200,000
              shares of common  stock at an  exercise  price of $.15 per  share,
              exerciseable through January 14, 2008.
         o    Warrants  issued to AJW  Partners,  LLC, AJW Offshore,  Ltd.,  AJW
              Qualified  Partners,  LLC and New Millennium  Capital Partners II,
              LLC to purchase  5,621,694  shares of common  stock at an exercise
              price of $.20 per share, exercisable through April 27, 2010.
         o    Warrants  issued to AJW  Partners,  LLC, AJW Offshore,  Ltd.,  AJW
              Qualified Partners, and New Millennium Capital Partners II, LLC to
              purchase  5,291,005 shares of common stock at an exercise price of
              $.20 per share, exercisable through June 23, 2010.

Convertible Notes and Warrants

      To obtain funding for our ongoing operations, we entered into a securities
purchase agreement with four accredited investors on April 27, 2005 for the sale
of (i) $2,500,000 in callable secured convertible notes and (ii) warrants to
purchase 16,534,392 shares of our common stock. The sale of the callable secured
convertible notes and warrants is to occur in three traunches and the investors
are obligated to provide us with an aggregate of $2,500,000 as follows:

         o    $850,000 was disbursed on April 27, 2005;

         o    $800,000   was   disbursed   on  June  23,  2005  after  filing  a
              registration  statement on June 22, 2005,l which covered shares of
              common stock underlying the callable secured convertible notes and
              the warrants; and

         o    $850,000 will be disbursed  within five days of the  effectiveness
              of the registration statement.

        Each  closing under the  securities purchase agreement is subject to the
following conditions:

         o    We must have  delivered to the investors  duly  executed  callable
              secured convertible notes and warrants;

                                       79


         o    No  litigation,  statute,  regulation  or order  shall  have  been
              commenced,  enacted or  entered  by or in any court,  governmental
              authority  or  any  self-regulatory  organization  that  prohibits
              consummation  of the  transactions  contemplated by the securities
              purchase agreement; and

         o    No event shall have occurred that could  reasonably be expected to
              have a material adverse effect on our business.

         We  also  agreed  not,   without  the  prior   written   consent  of  a
majority-in-interest  of the investors,  to negotiate or contract with any party
to obtain additional  equity financing  (including debt financing with an equity
component)  that  involves (i) the issuance of common stock at a discount to the
market  price of the common  stock on the date of issuance  (taking into account
the value of any  warrants  or  options to acquire  common  stock in  connection
therewith),  (ii) the issuance of convertible  securities  that are  convertible
into an indeterminate number of shares of common stock, or (iii) the issuance of
warrants  during the lock-up period  beginning  April 27, 2005 and ending on the
later of (A) 270 days from  April 27,  2005,  and (B) 180 days from the date the
registration statement is declared effective.

         In addition,  we agreed not to conduct any equity financing  (including
debt financing with an equity  component)  during the period beginning April 27,
2005 and ending two years after the end of the above  lock-up  period  unless we
have first  provided  each  investor an option to purchase  its  pro-rata  share
(based on the ratio of each  investor's  purchase under the securities  purchase
agreement) of the  securities  being offered in any proposed  equity  financing.
Each investor must be provided  written notice  describing  any proposed  equity
financing at least 20 business days prior to the closing of such proposed equity
financing  and the option must be extended  to each  investor  during the 15-day
period following delivery of such notice.

         The callable  secured  convertible  notes bear interest at 8% per annum
from the date of  issuance.  Interest is computed on the basis of a 365-day year
and is payable  quarterly in cash, with six months of interest payable up front.
The interest  rate resets to zero percent for any month in which the stock price
is greater than 125% of the initial  market price,  or $.0945,  for each trading
day during  that month.  Any amount of  principal  or  interest on the  callable
secured  convertible  notes that is not paid when due will bear  interest at the
rate of 15% per annum from the date due thereof  until such amount is paid.  The
callable  secured  convertible  notes  mature  in three  years  from the date of
issuance, and are convertible into our common stock at the selling stockholders'
option,  at the lower of (i) $.09 or (ii) 60% of the average of the three lowest
intraday  trading prices for the common stock on the  Over-the-Counter  Bulletin
Board for the 20 trading  days before but not  including  the  conversion  date.
Accordingly,  there is no limit on the number of shares into which the notes may
be converted.

         As of June 20, 2005, the average of the three lowest  intraday  trading
prices of our common stock  during the  preceding 20 trading days as reported on
the  Over-the-Counter  Bulletin  Board was $.05 and,  therefore,  the conversion
price  for the  callable  secured  convertible  notes  was  $.03.  Based on this
conversion price, the $2,500,000 callable secured  convertible notes,  excluding
interest,  were  convertible  into 83,333,333  shares of our common stock. As of
June  20,  2005,  none of the  callable  secured  convertible  notes  have  been
converted.

         The  callable  secured  convertible  notes are  secured by our  assets,
including  our  inventory,   accounts  receivable  and  intellectual   property.
Moreover,  we have a call option  under the terms of the notes.  The call option
provides  us with the right to prepay all of the  outstanding  callable  secured
convertible  notes at any time,  provided there is no event of default by us and
our stock is trading at or below  $.09 per share.  An event of default  includes
the  failure by us to pay the  principal  or interest  on the  callable  secured
convertible  notes  when  due or to  timely  file a  registration  statement  as
required  by us  or  obtain  effectiveness  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission of the  registration  statement.  Prepayment of the callable  secured
convertible  notes  is to be  made in  cash  equal  to  either  (i)  125% of the
outstanding  principal and accrued interest for prepayments  occurring within 30
days  following  the  issue  date of the  notes;  (ii)  130% of the  outstanding
principal and accrued interest for prepayments  occurring between 31 and 60 days
following  the  issue  date of the  notes;  and  (iii)  145% of the  outstanding
principal  and accrued  interest for  prepayments  occurring  after the 60th day
following the issue date of the notes.

         The warrants are exercisable until five years from the date of issuance
at a purchase  price of $.20 per share.  The investors may exercise the warrants
on a cashless  basis if the shares of common stock  underlying  the warrants are
not then  registered  pursuant to an effective  registration  statement.  In the
event the investors  exercise the warrants on a cashless basis, then we will not
receive any proceeds therefrom.  In addition, the exercise price of the warrants
will be adjusted  in the event we issue  common  stock at a price below  market,
with the  exception of any  securities  issued as of the date of the warrants or
issued in connection with the callable secured convertible notes issued pursuant
to the securities purchase agreement.

         The  selling  stockholders  have agreed to  restrict  their  ability to
convert their callable secured  convertible notes or exercise their warrants and
receive  shares of our  common  stock  such that the  number of shares of common
stock held by them in the aggregate and their  affiliates  after such conversion
or exercise does not exceed 4.99% of the then issued and  outstanding  shares of

                                       80


common stock.  However,  the selling  stockholders may repeatedly sell shares of
common stock in order to reduce their  ownership  percentage,  and  subsequently
convert additional callable secured convertible notes.

         We are  required to register  the shares of our common  stock  issuable
upon the conversion of the callable secured  convertible  notes and the exercise
of the warrants.  The  registration  statement must be filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  within 60 days of the April 27, 2005 closing date and
the  effectiveness  of the registration is to be within 135 days of such closing
date.  Penalties  of 2% of the  outstanding  principal  balance of the  callable
secured convertible notes plus accrued interest are to be applied for each month
the  registration is not effective  within the required time. The penalty may be
paid in cash or stock at our option.
            
         See the  "Risk  Factors"  section  for a  complete  description  of the
callable secured convertible notes and warrants.
     
         Certain Provisions of Certificate of Incorporation.  Our Certificate of
Incorporation provides that to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law, our
directors  shall not be liable to us and our  stockholders.  The  Certificate of
Incorporation also contains  provisions  entitling the officers and directors to
indemnification  by us to the fullest extent  permitted by the Delaware  General
Corporation Law.

         Indemnification   Agreements.  We  have  entered  into  indemnification
agreements  with our officers and  directors.  Such  indemnification  agreements
provide  that we will  indemnify  its officers and  directors  against  expenses
(including  attorneys'  fees),  judgments,  fines and amounts paid in settlement
arising out of threatened, pending or completed legal action against any officer
or director to the fullest extent  permitted by the Delaware  General  Corporate
Law.

         Transfer and Warrant  Agent.  Our transfer  agent and registrar for our
common stock and the Warrant Agent for the Class A warrants is Continental Stock
Transfer & Trust Company, New York, New York.

                              PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION

         We may solicit the exercise of Class A warrants through a registered or
licensed  broker-dealer.  Upon  exercise of Class A warrants,  Paradigm will pay
such  soliciting  broker-dealer  a fee of 5% of the aggregate  exercise price of
Class A warrants exercised,  if: (i) the market price of the common stock on the
date the Class A warrant is exercised is greater than the then exercise price of
the Class A warrant; (ii) the exercise of the Class A warrant was solicited by a
member of the National Association of Securities Dealers,  Inc.; (iii) the Class
A  warrant  is not  held in a  discretionary  account;  (iv)  disclosure  of the
compensation  arrangements was made by delivery of this prospectus or otherwise)
both at the time of the  offering  and at the time of  exercise  of the  Class A
warrant;  and (v) the  solicitation of exercise of the Class A warrant is not in
violation of Regulation M.

         In connection with the  solicitation of the Class A warrant  exercises,
the  soliciting   broker-dealer   will  be  prohibited   from  engaging  in  any
market-making  activities  with respect to Paradigm's  securities for the period
commencing  either two or nine business  days  (depending on the market price of
the common stock) prior to any solicitation activity for the exercise of Class A
warrants until the later of (a) the termination of such  solicitation  activity,
or (b)  the  termination  (by  waiver  or  otherwise)  of any  right  which  the
soliciting  broker-dealer  may have to receive a fee for the exercise of Class A
warrants following such solicitation.  As a result, the soliciting broker-dealer
may be unable to provide a market for Paradigm's securities, should it desire to
do so,  during  certain  periods  while  the  respective  Class A  warrants  are
exercisable.

         We do not plan to solicit  Series E or Series F preferred  stockholders
regarding  the  conversion  of their Series E or Series F preferred  shares into
shares of common stock, which have been registered for resale upon conversion.

         The resale of the common  stock by the Series E and Series F  preferred
stockholders  that  elect to  convert  their  respective  shares of Series E and
Series F  preferred  stock to shares of common  stock and the holders of Class A
warrants,  Kenneth Jerome  warrants,  Cyndel warrants and warrants issued to Dr.
Michael B. Limberg,  John W. Hemmer, Helen Kohn, Ronit Sucoff, Rodman & Renshaw,
Inc., Paul L. Archambeau,  M.D., John H. Banzhaf,  Daniel S. Lipson,  Douglas A.
MacLeod,  M.D.,  Douglas A. MacLeod,  M.D. Profit Sharing Trust,  St. Mark's Eye
Institute,  Milan Holdings,  Ltd.,  Frank G. Mauro and Delbert D. Reichardt that
elect  to  exercise  their   respective   warrants  and  purchase  common  stock
(collectively, the "Selling Securityholders"), may be effected from time to time
in transactions  (which may include block  transactions by or for the account of
the Selling  Securityholders)  in the Nasdaq  SmallCap  Market or in  negotiated
transactions,  a combination of such methods of sale or otherwise.  Sales may be
made at fixed prices which may be changed,  at market  prices  prevailing at the
time of sale, or at negotiated prices.

                                       81


         Selling  Securityholders  may effect such transactions by selling their
shares of common stock directly to purchasers,  through broker-dealers acting as
agents for the Selling  Securityholders  or to  broker-dealers  who may purchase
securities as principals and thereafter  sell the common stock from time to time
in the over-the-counter  market, in negotiated  transactions or otherwise.  Such
broker-dealers,  if any,  may  receive  compensation  in the form of  discounts,
concessions  or  commissions  from  the  Selling   Securityholders   and/or  the
purchasers for whom such  broker-dealers  act as agents or to whom they may sell
as principals or otherwise (which compensation as to a particular  broker-dealer
may exceed  customary  commissions).  The Selling  Securityholders  will pay all
commissions,  transfer  taxes,  and other expenses  associated  with the sale of
common stock by them.

         The  Selling  Securityholders  and  broker-dealers,  if any,  acting in
connection with such sales may be deemed to be "underwriters" within the meaning
of Section 2(11) of the Securities  Act and any commission  received by them and
any  profit  on the  resale  of the  securities  by them  might be  deemed to be
underwriting  discounts and commissions under the Securities Act. We have agreed
to indemnify the Selling  Securityholders  against certain liabilities under the
Securities Act.

         The only Selling  Securityholders  who are affiliates of broker-dealers
are Steven J. Bayern and Patrick N. Kolenik, who are each an officer, a director
and a shareholder of Win Capital Corp. Messrs.  Bayern and Kolenik each received
stock  options as  consideration  for services as a director of Paradigm.  At no
time  has Mr.  Bayern  or Mr.  Kolenik  had any  agreements  or  understandings,
directly or  indirectly,  with any person to distribute the stock options or the
underlying  common shares to be issued in  connection  with the exercise of such
options.

         From time to time this prospectus  will be supplemented  and amended as
required  by the  Securities  Act of 1933,  as  amended.  During any time when a
supplement or amendment is so required, the Selling Securityholders are to cease
sales until the prospectus  has been  supplemented  or amended.  Pursuant to the
registration rights granted to certain of the Selling  Securityholders,  we have
agreed to update and maintain the  effectiveness of this prospectus.  Certain of
the Selling  Securityholders  also may be entitled to sell their shares  without
the use of this  prospectus,  provided that they comply with the requirements of
Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act.

                                     EXPERTS

         Our consolidated  financial statements for year ended December 31, 2003
included  in this  prospectus  have  been  audited  by  Tanner  LC,  independent
auditors,  as  stated  in  their  report  appearing  herein.  We  have  included
consolidated  financial statements in this prospectus in reliance on such report
given  upon  their  authority  as  experts  in  auditing  and  accounting.   Our
consolidated  financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2004 included
in this prospectus have been audited by Chisholm, Bierwolf & Nilson, independent
auditors,  as  stated  in  their  report  appearing  herein.  We  have  included
consolidated  financial statements in this prospectus in reliance on such report
given upon their authority as experts in auditing and accounting.

                                  LEGAL MATTERS

         The  validity of the shares of common  stock in this  offering  will be
passed  upon for us by Mackey  Price  Thompson & Ostler,  Salt Lake City,  Utah.
Randall A. Mackey,  the President,  a director and a shareholder of the law firm
of Mackey Price  Thompson & Ostler is our  Chairman of the Board and  Secretary.
Legal  fees and  expenses  paid to  Mackey  Price  Thompson  & Ostler  for legal
services  during the fiscal  years  ended  December  31,  2004 and 2003  totaled
$90,000 and $97,000, respectively.  Legal fees and expenses paid to Mackey Price
Thompson & Ostler for legal  services  during the three  months  ended March 31,
2005 totaled $25,000. As of December 31, 2004, we owed the firm $188,705,  which
is included in the accounts payable.

                       WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION

         We have filed with the  Securities and Exchange  Commission,  or SEC, a
registration  statement  on Form SB-2  (including  the  exhibits  and  schedules
thereto)  under  the  Securities  Act of 1933  and  the  rules  and  regulations
promulgated thereunder, for the registration of the common stock offered hereby.
This prospectus is part of the registration statement.  This prospectus does not
contain all the information  included in the registration  statement  because we
have omitted certain parts of the registration statement as permitted by the SEC
rules and regulations.  For further  information  about us and our common stock,
you should refer to the  registration  statement.  Statements  contained in this
prospectus as to any contract,  agreement or other document  referred to are not
necessarily complete.  Where the contract or other document is an exhibit to the
registration  statement,  each  statement is qualified by the provisions of that
exhibit.

         You can inspect and copy the  registration  statement  and the exhibits
and schedules thereto at the public reference facility  maintained by the SEC at
Room 1024, 450 Fifth Street,  N.W.,  Washington,  D.C.  20549,  and at the SEC's
regional offices at 233 Broadway, New York, New York 10279, and 500 West Madison
Street,  Suite  1400,  Chicago,   Illinois  60661.  You  may  call  the  SEC  at
1-800-732-0330  for  further  information  about  the  operation  of the  public
reference rooms. Copies of all or any portion of the registration  statement can
be obtained  from the Public  Reference  Section of the SEC,  450 Fifth  Street,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549, at prescribed rates. In addition, the registration
statement is publicly  available  through the SEC's site on the Internet's World
Wide Web, located at http://www.sec.gov.

         We also file annual,  quarterly and current  reports,  proxy statements
and  other  information  with the  SEC.  You can also  request  copies  of these
documents,  for a copying  fee, by writing to the SEC.  Our SEC filings are also
available to the public from the SEC's website at http://www.sec.gov. We furnish
to our stockholders  annual reports containing audited financial  statements for
each fiscal year.

                                       82




                        PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                   FORM 10-QSB

                      FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2005


                                      INDEX

                                                                                        
PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.  Financial Statements.............................................................. 1

         Condensed Balance Sheet (unaudited) - March 31, 2005.............................. 1

         Condensed Statements of Operations (unaudited) for the three months ended
         March 31, 2005 and March 31, 2004................................................. 2

         Condensed Statements of Cash Flows (unaudited) for the three months ended
              March 31, 2005 and March 31, 2004 ........................................... 3

         Notes to Condensed Financial Statements (unaudited)............................... 4

Item 2.  Management's Discussion and Analysis or
              Plan of Operation ........................................................... 7

Item 3.  Controls and Procedures  ........................................................ 12

PART II - OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1.  Legal Proceedings................................................................ 12

Item 2.  Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds...................... 18

Item 3.  Defaults Upon Senior Securities.................................................. 18

Item 4.  Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.............................. 18

Item 5.  Other Information................................................................ 19

Item 6.  Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K................................................. 19

Signature Page ........................................................................... 22






                        PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                             CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET
                                   (UNAUDITED)

                                                                March 31,  2005
                                                               -----------------

ASSETS
Current Assets
  Cash & Cash Equivalents                                      $         70,000
  Receivables, Net                                                      535,000
  Inventory                                                             745,000
  Prepaid Expenses                                                       43,000
                                                               -----------------

              Total Current Assets                                    1,393,000

Intangibles, Net                                                        679,000
Property and Equipment, Net                                              86,000
                                                               -----------------
                    Total Assets                               $      2,158,000
                                                               =================

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
Current Liabilities:
  Trade Accounts Payable                                       $        745,000
  Accrued Expenses                                                      797,000
  Current Portion of Long-term Debt                                      42,000
                                                               -----------------
                    Total Current Liabilities                         1,584,000
  Long-term Debt                                                          5,000
                                                               -----------------
               Total Liabilities (Commitment)                         1,589,000
                                                               -----------------

Stockholders' Equity:
Preferred Stock, Authorized:
5,000,000 shares, $.001 par value
     Series A
        Authorized:  500,000 shares; issued and
        outstanding: 5,627 shares at March 31, 2005                          -
     Series B
        Authorized:  500,000 shares; issued and
        outstanding: 8,986 shares at March 31, 2005                          -
     Series C
        Authorized:  30,000 shares; issued and
        outstanding: zero shares at March 31, 2005                           -
     Series D
        Authorized:  1,140,000 shares; issued and
        outstanding: 5,000 shares at March 31, 2005                          -
     Series E
        Authorized:  50,000 shares; issued and
        outstanding: 1,000 shares at March 31, 2005                          -
     Series F
        Authorized:  50,000 shares; issued and
        outstanding: 4,598.75 shares at March 31, 2005                       -
     Series G
        Authorized:  2,000,000 shares; issued and
        outstanding: 1,726,560 shares at March 31, 2005                   2,000
Common Stock, Authorized:
80,000,000 shares, $.001 par value; issued and
outstanding: 28,280,074 at March 31, 2005                                28,000
Additional paid-in-capital                                           57,669,000
Accumulated Deficit                                                 (57,130,000)
                                                               -----------------
                      Total Stockholders' Equity                        569,000
                                                               -----------------
                 Total Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity    $      2,158,000
                                                               =================

            See accompanying notes to condensed financial statements


                                       1


                        PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                 CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
                                   (UNAUDITED)



                                                        Three Months Ended
                                                              March 31,
                                                       2005             2004    
                                                    ------------    ------------

Sales                                               $    528,000    $   583,000

Cost of Sales                                            214,000        227,000
                                                    ------------    ------------

                   Gross Profit                          314,000        356,000
                                                    ------------    ------------

Operating Expenses:
  Marketing and Selling                                  180,000        185,000
  General and Administrative                             258,000        304,000
  Research, Development and Service                      210,000        227,000
                                                    ------------    ------------

                  Total Operating Expenses               648,000        716,000
                                                    ------------    ------------

Operating Income (Loss)                                 (334,000)      (360,000)

Other Income and (Expense):
  Interest Income                                              -          2,000
  Interest Expense                                        (4,000)        (6,000)
  Other Income (Expense)                                  15,000              - 
                                                    ------------    ------------

    Total Other Income and (Expense)                      11,000         (4,000)
Net Income (Loss) Before Provision
    for Income Taxes                                    (323,000)      (364,000)

Income Taxes                                                   -              -
                                                    ------------    ------------

Net Income (Loss)                                   $   (323,000)   $  (364,000)
                                                    ============    ============

Net Loss Per Common Share
      - Basic and Diluted                           $      (0.01)   $     (0.01)
                                                    ============    ============

Weighted Average Outstanding
    Shares - Basic and Diluted                        27,121,000      25,373,000
                                                    ============    ============


            See accompanying notes to condensed financial statements.



                                       2


                        PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                 CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
                                   (UNAUDITED)



                                                                         Three Months Ended March 31,
                                                                           2005               2004 
                                                                        -----------------------------
                                                                                             
Cash Flows from Operating Activities:
-------------------------------------
  Net Loss                                                              $  (323,000)      $  (364,000)
  Adjustment to Reconcile Net Loss to Net
    Cash Used In Operating Activities:
       Depreciation and Amortization                                         23,000            41,000
       Issuance of Common Stock for Satisfaction of Penalty                  52,000                 -
       Issuance of Stock Option/Warrant for Services                              -                 -
       Increase/Decrease in Inventory Reserve                                     -                 -
       Provision for Losses on Receivables                                   (7,000)                -
(Increase) Decrease from Changes in:
       Trade Accounts Receivable                                            129,000           218,000
       Inventories                                                          (25,000)          135,000
       Prepaid Expenses                                                      22,000          (102,000)
Increase (Decrease) from Changes in:
       Trade Accounts Payable                                                (7,000)          (20,000)
       Accrued Expenses and Deposits                                        (61,000)           73,000
                                                                        -----------       -----------

       Net Cash Used in Operating Activities                               (197,000)          (19,000)
                                                                        -----------       -----------

Cash Flow from Investing Activities:
------------------------------------
  Net Cash Paid in Acquisition                                                    -                 -  
                                                                        -----------       -----------

  Net Cash (Used) Provided By Investing Activities                                -                -  
                                                                        -----------       -----------

Cash Flows from Financing Activities:
-------------------------------------
  Principal Payments on Notes Payable                                       (14,000)          (13,000)
  Proceeds from Issuance of Common Stocks                                   150,000                 - 
                                                                        -----------       -----------

  Net Cash (Used) Provided by Financing Activities                          136,000           (13,000)
                                                                        -----------       -----------

  Net Decrease in Cash and Cash Equivalents                                 (61,000)          (32,000)

Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period                            131,000           132,000
                                                                        -----------       -----------

Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period                              $    70,000       $   100,000
                                                                        ===========       ===========

Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information:

  Cash Paid for Interest                                                $     4,000       $     6,000
                                                                        ===========       ===========

  Cash Paid for Income Taxes                                            $         -       $         -  
                                                                        ===========       ===========



                 See accompanying notes to financial statements



                                       3


                        PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
                                   (UNAUDITED)


Significant Accounting Policies
-------------------------------

         The  accompanying  condensed  financial  statements of the Company have
been  prepared  by  the  Company,  without  audit,  pursuant  to the  rules  and
regulations of the Securities and Exchange  Commission.  Certain information and
disclosures  normally  included in financial  statements  prepared in accordance
with  accounting  principles  generally  accepted in the United States have been
condensed or omitted  pursuant to such rules and  regulations.  These  condensed
financial  statements  reflect  all  adjustments   (consisting  only  of  normal
recurring  adjustments)  that,  in the opinion of  management,  are necessary to
present  fairly  the  results  of  operations  of the  Company  for the  periods
presented.  These condensed  financial  statements should be read in conjunction
with the financial  statements  and the notes thereto  included in the Company's
Form 10-KSB for the year ended  December 31, 2004. The results of operations for
the three months ended March 31, 2005,  are not  necessarily  indicative  of the
results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005.

Going Concern 
-------------

         The  accompanying  financial  statements  have been prepared on a going
concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction
of liabilities in the normal course of business.  Historically,  the Company has
not demonstrated  the ability to generate  sufficient cash flows from operations
to satisfy its liabilities and sustain operations,  and the Company has incurred
significant  losses.  These factors raise  substantial doubt about the Company's
ability to continue as a going concern.

         The  Company's  continuation  as a going  concern is  dependent  on its
ability to generate sufficient income and cash flow to meet its obligations on a
timely basis and/or obtain additional financing as may be required.  The Company
is actively seeking options to obtain additional capital and financing.

         In addition,  the Company has taken  significant  steps to reduce costs
and increase operating efficiencies. Specifically, the Company has significantly
reduced  the use of  consultants,  which has  resulted  in a large  decrease  in
expenses.  In  addition,  the Company has reduced the number of its direct sales
representatives,  which has resulted in less payroll, travel and other expenses.
Although these cost savings have significantly  reduced the Company's losses and
ongoing  cash flow  needs,  if the  Company  is unable to obtain  equity or debt
financing,  it may be unable to continue  development of its products and may be
required to substantially curtail or cease operations.

Net Loss Per Share 
------------------

         Net loss per common share is computed on the weighted average number of
common and common equivalent shares outstanding during each period. Common stock
equivalents  consist of convertible  preferred  stock,  common stock options and
warrants.  Common equivalent shares are excluded from the computation when their
effect is anti-dilutive.  Other common stock  equivalents  consisting of options
and  warrants to purchase  8,760,000  and  5,879,000  shares of common stock and
preferred stock  convertible into 2,047,000 and 2,302,000 shares of common stock
at March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, have not been included in loss periods
because they are anti-dilutive.

         For the three months ended March 31, 2005,  the options and warrants to
purchase  8,760,000 shares of common stock were excluded because of the treasury
stock method.

         The following  table is a  reconciliation  of the net loss numerator of
basic and diluted net loss per common share for the three and six month  periods
ended March 31, 2005 and March 31, 2004:

                                       4


                                                    Three Months Ended
                                                               March 31,
                                                          2005          2004  
                                                    --------------------------

Basic weighted average shares outstanding           27,121,000     $25,373,000
Common stock equivalents - convertible preferred 
   stock                                             2,047,000       2,302,000
                                                    -----------    ------------

Diluted weighted average shares outstanding         29,168,000      27,675,000
                                                    ==========      ==========

Preferred Stock Conversions 
---------------------------

         Under the Company's Articles of Incorporation, holders of the Company's
Class A and Class B  preferred  stock have the right to convert  such stock into
shares of the  Company's  common stock at the rate of 1.2 shares of common stock
for each share of preferred stock. During the three months ended March 31, 2005,
no shares of Series A preferred  stock and no shares of Series B preferred stock
were converted to the Company's common stock.

         Holders of Series D preferred have the right to convert such stock into
shares of the  Company's  common  stock at the rate of one share of common stock
for each share of preferred stock. During the three months ended March 31, 2005,
no shares of Series D preferred  stock were  converted to the  Company's  common
stock.

         Holders of Series E preferred have the right to convert such stock into
shares of the Company's  common stock at the rate of 53.3 shares of common stock
for each share of preferred stock. During the three months ended March 31, 2005,
no shares of Series E preferred  stock were  converted to the  Company's  common
stock.

         Holders of Series F preferred have the right to convert such stock into
shares of the Company's  common stock at the rate of 53.3 shares of common stock
for each share of preferred stock. During the three months ended March 31, 2005,
no shares of Series F preferred  stock were converted to shares of the Company's
common stock.

         Holders of Series G preferred have the right to convert such stock into
shares of the  Company's  common  stock at the rate of one share of common stock
for each share of preferred stock. During the three months ended March 31, 2005,
no shares of Series G preferred  stock were converted to shares of the Company's
common stock.

Warrants 
--------

         The fair value of warrants  granted as described herein is estimated at
the date of grant using the  Black-Scholes  option pricing  model.  The exercise
price per share is reflective of the then current market value of the stock.  No
grant exercise price was  established at a discount to market.  All warrants are
fully vested,  exercisable and  nonforfeitable as of the grant date. As a result
of the issuance of 2,000,000  shares of the Company's  common stock for $150,000
cash,  the Company  granted  200,000  warrants to purchase the Company's  common
stock  during the period ended March 31,  2005.  The  warrants  have an exercise
price of $.15 per share and expire on January 14, 2008.

Stock - Based Compensation 
--------------------------

         For stock  options  and  warrants  granted to  employees,  the  Company
employs the footnote disclosure  provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.  SFAS No. 123
encourages  entities to adopt a fair-value  based method of accounting for stock
options or similar  equity  instruments.  However,  it also  allows an entity to
continue  measuring  compensation  cost for stock-based  compensation  using the
intrinsic-value  method of accounting  prescribed by Accounting Principles Board
(APB)  Opinion No. 25,  Accounting  for Stock Issued to Employees  (APB 25). The
Company has elected to  continue to apply the  provisions  of APB 25 and provide
pro forma footnote disclosures required by SFAS No. 123. No stock-based employee
compensation cost is reflected in net income, as all options granted under those
plans had an  exercise  price equal to or greater  than the market  value of the
underlying common stock on the date of grant.

         Stock options and warrants  granted to  non-employees  for services are
accounted for in accordance  with SFAS 123 which  requires  expense  recognition
based on the fair value of the options/warrants  granted. The Company calculates
the fair  value of options  and  warrants  granted  by use of the  Black-Scholes

                                       5


pricing  model.  The following  table  illustrates  the effect on net income and
earnings  per  share if the  Company  had  applied  the fair  value  recognition
provisions of FASB Statement No. 123, "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,"
to stock-based employee compensation.

                                                    Three Months Ended June 30,
                                                      2005              2004    
                                                   -----------------------------

 Net income (loss) - as reported                   $  (322,000)     $  (364,000)

Deduct:  total stock-based employee
compensation determined under fair value
based method for all awards, net of
related tax effects                                    (78,000)               -
                                                   -----------      ------------

Net loss - pro forma                               $  (401,000)     $  (364,000)
                                                   ===========      ============

Earnings per share:
     Basic and diluted - as reported               $     (0.01)     $     (0.01)
     Basic and diluted - pro forma                 $     (0.01)     $     (0.01)

Related Party Transactions 
--------------------------

         Payments  for legal  services to the firm of which the  chairman of the
board of directors is a partner  were  approximately  $25,000 and $5,000 for the
three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

Accrued Expenses 
----------------

         Accrued expenses consist of the following at March 31, 2005:

        Accrued consulting and litigation reserve             $  457,000
        Accrued payroll and employee benefits                    127,000
        Sales taxes payable                                       14,000
        Customer deposits                                         29,000
        Accrued royalties                                         14,000
        Deferred revenue                                           4,000
       Warranty and return allowance                             123,000
        Other accrued expenses                                    30,000
                                                              ----------
         Total                                                $  797,000
                                                              ==========

Stockholders' Equity
--------------------

         On January 14,  2005,  the Company  issued  2,000,000  shares of common
stock to an accredited  investor through a private placement at a price of $.075
per share.  The  Company  received a total of  $150,000 in cash from the private
placement  transaction and issued as a commission  warrants to purchase  200,000
shares of the Company's common stock at $.15 per share.

         On February 1, 2005,  the Company  issued a total of 515,206  shares of
common  stock to two  accredited  investors  that had  purchased  shares  of the
Company's  Series  G  convertible   preferred  stock  in  a  private   placement
transaction.  Under the terms of the private offering,  the Company was required
to file a registration  statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission to
register the common shares issuable to the Series G preferred  stockholders upon
conversion  of their Series G preferred  shares and exercise of their  warrants.
The  515,206  shares  represented  a  penalty  for  the  Company  not  having  a
registration statement declared effective within 120 days of the initial closing
of the offering. The value of these shares was $52,000.

                                       6


Subsequent Event
----------------

         On April 27, 2005, the Company completed  financing  involving the sale
of $2,500,000  in secured  convertible  notes.  The notes are to be purchased in
three  traunches:  the first  traunche is in the amount of  $850,000,  which the
Company  received upon the signing of the  definitive  investment  agreements on
April 27, 2005; the second traunche in the amount of $800,000 upon the filing of
a registration  statement with the Securities and Exchange  Commission;  and the
third  traunche  in  the  amount  of  $850,000  upon  the  effectiveness  of the
registration statement.

         Under the terms of the notes,  the unpaid  principal  balance of notes,
together  with any accrued  interest  thereon,  are due and payable  three years
after the date of issuance.  The unpaid principal balance on the notes that were
purchased on April 27, 2005 is due on April 27, 2008. Interest is payable on the
notes at 8% per annum,  payable  quarterly in cash,  with six months of interest
payable up front.  However,  the  interest  rate resets to zero  percent for any
month in which the stock price is greater than 125% of the initial market price,
or $.0945, for each trading date during that month.

         The notes are secured by the Company's assets,  including the Company's
inventory,  accounts  receivable and intellectual  property.  The notes are also
convertible.  The  Purchasers  have the right to convert their notes at any time
into shares of the Company's  common stock. The conversion price of the notes is
equal to the lesser of (i) $.09 and (ii) the  average  of the  lowest  intra-day
trading  prices during the 20 trading days  immediately  prior to the conversion
date discounted by 40%.



PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
Financial Statements
December 31, 2004 and 2003


                                       



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Index to Financial Statements

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                                          Page
                                                                          ----


Report of Chisholm, Bierwolf & Nilson                                     F-2


Report of Tanner LC                                                       F-3


Balance Sheet                                                             F-4


Statements of Operations                                                  F-5


Statements of Stockholders' Equity                                        F-6


Statements of Cash Flows                                                  F-7


Notes to Financial Statements                                             F-8



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             F-1




                                                                     
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors
Paradigm Medical Industries, Inc.
Salt Lake City, Utah

We have audited the accompanying  balance sheet of Paradigm Medical  Industries,
Inc.  (the  Company) as of December  31,  2004,  and the related  statements  of
operations,  stockholders'  equity and cash flows for the year then ended. These
financial  statements are the  responsibility of the Company's  management.  Our
responsibility  is to express an opinion on these financial  statements based on
our audit.

We conducted  our audit in accordance  with the standards of the Public  Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
statements  are free of material  misstatement.  The Company is not  required to
have,  nor were we engaged  to  perform,  audits of its  internal  control  over
financial reporting.  Our audit included  consideration of internal control over
financial  reporting  as  a  basis  for  designing  audit  procedures  that  are
appropriate  in the  circumstances,  but not for the  purpose of  expressing  an
opinion on the  effectiveness  of the Company's  internal control over financial
reporting.  Accordingly,  we express  no such  opinion.  An audit also  includes
examining,  on a test basis,  evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the  financial   statements,   assessing  the  accounting  principles  used  and
significant  estimates  made by  management,  as well as evaluating  the overall
financial  statement  presentation.   We  believe  that  our  audit  provides  a
reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion,  the financial  statements  referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects,  the financial  position of Paradigm Medical  Industries,
Inc. as of December 31, 2004, and the results of their operations and their cash
flows  for the  year  then  ended,  in  conformity  with  accounting  principles
generally accepted in the United States of America.

The accompanying  financial  statements have been prepared  assuming the Company
will  continue  as a going  concern.  As  discussed  in Note 2 to the  financial
statements, the Company has a working capital deficit and has suffered recurring
operating losses,  which raises  substantial doubt about its ability to continue
as a going  concern.  Management's  plans in  regard to these  matters  are also
described in Note 2. The  financial  statements  do not include any  adjustments
that might result from the outcome of these uncertainties.

Chisholm, Bierwolf & Nilson
Bountiful, Utah
April 8, 2005


                                                                             F-2



REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the Board of Directors and stockholders of
Paradigm Medical Industries, Inc.

We have audited the statements of  operations,  stockholders'  equity,  and cash
flows of Paradigm  Medical  Industries,  Inc.  (the  Company) for the year ended
December 31, 2003.  These  financial  statements are the  responsibility  of the
Company's  management.  Our  responsibility  is to  express  an opinion on these
financial statements based on our audit.

We conducted  our audit in accordance  with the standards of the Public  Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
statements are free of material misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a
test basis,  evidence  supporting  the amounts and  disclosures in the financial
statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant  estimates  made by  management,  as well as evaluating  the overall
financial  statement  presentation.   We  believe  that  our  audit  provides  a
reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion,  the financial  statements  referred to above present fairly, in
all  material  respects  the  results of  operations  and cash flows of Paradigm
Medical  Industries,  Inc. for the year ended  December 31, 2003,  in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

The  accompanying  financial  statements  have been  prepared  assuming that the
Company will  continue as a going  concern.  As discussed in note 2, the Company
has incurred significant losses, and has been unable to generate cash flows from
operations. These conditions raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability
to continue as a going  concern.  Management's  plans in regard to these matters
are also  described  in note 2. The  financial  statements  do not  include  any
adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.


Tanner LC
Salt Lake City, Utah
March 5, 2004

                                                                             F-3

                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                                   Balance Sheet

                                                               December 31, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Assets
              ------

Current assets:
     Cash                                                     $         131,000
     Receivables, net                                                   657,000
     Inventories, net                                                   720,000
     Prepaid and other assets                                            65,000
                                                              ------------------

                  Total current assets                                1,573,000

Intangibles, net                                                        679,000
Property and equipment, net                                             109,000
                                                              ------------------

                  Total assets                                $       2,361,000
                                                              ------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity
              ------------------------------------  

Current liabilities:
     Accounts payable                                         $         752,000
     Accrued liabilities                                                858,000
     Current portion of capital lease obligations                        47,000
                                                              ------------------

                  Total current liabilities                           1,657,000
                                                              ------------------

Capital lease obligations, net of current portion                        14,000
                                                              ------------------

Commitments and contingencies                                                 -

Stockholders' equity:
     Preferred stock, $.001 par value, 5,000,000 
       shares authorized, 1,751,770 shares issued 
       and outstanding (aggregate liquidation
       preference of $1,043,000)                                          2,000
     Common stock, $.001 par value, 80,000,000 
       shares authorized, 25,627,764 shares issued 
       and outstanding                                                   25,000
     Additional paid-in capital                                      57,470,000
     Accumulated deficit                                            (56,807,000)
                                                              ------------------

                  Total stockholders' equity                            690,000
                                                              ------------------

                  Total liabilities and stockholders' equity  $       2,361,000
                                                              ------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See accompanying notes to financial statements.                              F-4





                                                                PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                                         Statements of Operations

                                                                         Years Ended December 31,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                                    2004              2003
                                                               ----------------------------------
                                                                                        
Sales                                                         $       3,062,000   $     3,059,000
Cost of sales                                                         1,217,000         2,086,000
                                                              -----------------------------------

         Gross profit                                                 1,845,000           973,000
                                                              -----------------------------------

Operating expenses:
     General and administrative                                        (874,000)       (2,446,000)
     Marketing and selling                                             (801,000)         (920,000)
      Research and development                                         (768,000)       (1,033,000)
      Impairment of assets                                                    -          (150,000)
      Gain on settlement of liabilities                                 206,000           436,000
                                                              -----------------------------------

         Total operating expenses                                    (2,237,000)       (4,113,000)
                                                              -----------------------------------

         Operating loss                                                (392,000)       (3,140,000)
                                                              -----------------------------------
Other income (expense):
     Interest income                                                          -             3,000
      Other expenses                                                    (27,000)                -
     Interest expense                                                   (22,000)          (24,000)
      Gain on sale of investment                                        505,000                 -
                                                              -----------------------------------

         Total other income (expense)                                   456,000           (21,000)
                                                              -----------------------------------

         Income (loss) before provision for income taxes                 64,000        (3,161,000)
Provision for income taxes                                                    -                 -
                                                              -----------------------------------

         Net income (loss)                                    $          64,000   $    (3,161,000)
                                                              -----------------------------------

Beneficial conversion feature on Series G preferred stock                     -          (217,000)
Series G preferred stock dividend due to registration rights            (54,000)                -
Deemed dividend from Series G preferred detachable
  warrants                                                                    -           (53,000)
                                                              -----------------------------------

Net income (loss) applicable to common shareholders           $          10,000   $    (3,431,000)
                                                              -----------------------------------
Earnings (loss) per common share - basic                      $               -   $         (0.14)
                                                              -----------------------------------
Earnings (loss) per common share - diluted                    $               -   $         (0.14)
                                                              -----------------------------------
Weighted average common shares - basic                               25,405,000        24,058,000
                                                              -----------------------------------
Weighted average common shares - diluted                             27,669,000        24,058,000
                                                              -----------------------------------


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See accompanying notes to financial statements.                                               F-5







                                                                                       PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                                                      Statements of Stockholders' Equity

                                                                                  Years Ended December 31, 2004 and 2003
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                          
                                        Preferred                          Additional      Stock                      
                                          Stock      Common                  Paid-In     Subscription       Accumulated
                                       (See Note 8)  Shares     Amount      Capital      Receivable           Deficit
                                        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                                                    
Balance at January 1, 2003              $     -    21,954,238  $ 22,000   $ 56,775,000   $ (294,000)       $ (53,656,000)

Conversion of preferred stock                 -       115,998         -              -            -                    -

Issuance of common stock for:
  Cash                                        -     1,658,032     2,000        428,000            -                    -
  Settlement of litigation                    -     1,562,000     1,000        258,000            -                    -
  Commission on sale on sale of common 
     stock                                    -        82,526         -              -            -                    -

Issuance of stock options and warrants
  for Services                                -             -         -         35,000            -                    -

Issuance of Series G preferred stock 
  for:
     Cash                                 2,000             -         -        268,000            -                    -

Write off of subscription receivable          -             -         -       (294,000)     294,000                    -

Net loss                                      -             -         -              -            -           (3,161,000)
                                        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Balance at December 31, 2003              2,000    25,372,794    25,000    57,470,0000            -          (56,817,000)

Conversion of preferred stock                 -       255,000         -              -            -                    -

Series G preferred stock dividend due
  to registration rights                      -             -         -              -            -              (54,000)

Net income                                    -             -         -              -            -               64,000
                                        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Balance at December 31, 2004            $ 2,000    25,627,764  $ 25,000   $ 57,470,000   $        -        $ (56,807,000)
                                        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See accompanying notes to financial statements.                                                                      F-6





                                                                          PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                                                   Statements of Cash Flows

                                                                                   Years Ended December 31,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                                              2004               2003
                                                                        -----------------------------------
                                                                                                   
Cash flows from operating activities:
     Net income (loss)                                                  $         64,000    $    (3,161,000)
     Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net
     cash used in operating activities:
         Depreciation and amortization                                           137,000            319,000

         Issuance of stock option/warrant for services                                 -             35,000
         Common stock issued for settlement of litigation                              -            259,000
         Provision for losses on receivables                                    (369,000)           123,000
         Provision for losses on inventory                                      (224,000)           403,000

               Gain on sale of investment                                       (505,000)                 -

Impairment of Intangibles and investments                                                           150,000
(Gain) loss on settlement of liabilities                                        (206,000)          (436,000)
         (Gain) loss on disposal of assets                                        13,000                  -
         (Increase) decrease in:
              Receivables                                                        420,000            113,000
              Inventories                                                        507,000          1,243,000

              Prepaid and other assets                                            76,000            (44,000)
         Increase (decrease) in:
              Accounts payable                                                    42,000             53,000
              Accrued liabilities                                               (432,000)           236,000
                                                                        -----------------------------------

                  Net cash used in
                  operating activities                                          (477,000)          (707,000)
                                                                        -----------------------------------

Cash flows from investing activities:
     Purchase of property and equipment                                                -             (2,000)
     Cash proceeds from sales of investment                                      532,000                  -
                                                                        -----------------------------------

                  Net cash provided by (used in)
                  investing activities                                           532,000             (2,000)
                                                                        -----------------------------------

Cash flows from financing activities:
     Proceeds from issuance of Series G preferred stock                                -            270,000
     Principal payments on notes payable and long-term debt                      (56,000)           (53,000)
     Proceeds from exercise of common stock warrants and options                       -            430,000
                                                                        -----------------------------------
                  Net cash (used in) provided by
                  financing activities                                           (56,000)           647,000

                                                                        -----------------------------------

Net change in cash                                                                (1,000)           (62,000)

Cash, beginning of year                                                          132,000            194,000
                                                                        -----------------------------------

Cash, end of year                                                       $        131,000    $       132,000
                                                                        -----------------------------------


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See accompanying notes to financial statements.                                                         F-7



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements

                                                      December 31, 2004 and 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.   Organization       Organization
     and Significant    Paradigm  Medical  Industries,  Inc.  (the Company) is a
     Accounting         Delaware  Corporation  incorporated in October 1989. The
     Policies           Company   is  engaged   in  the   design,   development,
                        manufacture,  and sale of high  technology  surgical and
                        diagnostic eye care products.  Its surgical equipment is
                        designed to perform minimally  invasive cataract surgery
                        and  is  comprised  of  surgical   devices  and  related
                        instruments  and   accessories,   including   disposable
                        products.  Its diagnostic  products include a blood flow
                        analyzer,   a  pachymeter,   an  A-Scan,  an  A/B  Scan,
                        ultrasound  biomicroscopes,  a perimeter,  and a corneal
                        topographer.

                        Cash Equivalents
                        For  purposes  of the  statement  of  cash  flows,  cash
                        includes  all  cash  and   investments   with   original
                        maturities to the Company of three months or less.

                        The Company  maintains its cash in bank deposit accounts
                        which, at times,  may exceed  federally  insured limits.
                        The  Company  has not  experienced  any  losses  in such
                        account   and   believes   it  is  not  exposed  to  any
                        significant credit risk on cash and cash equivalents.

                        Accounts Receivable
                        Accounts  receivable  are  carried at  original  invoice
                        amount less an estimate  made for  doubtful  receivables
                        based  on a  review  of  all  outstanding  amounts  on a
                        monthly  basis.   Specific  reserves  are  estimated  by
                        management  based on certain  assumptions and variables,
                        including the customer's financial condition, age of the
                        customer's   receivables,   and   changes   in   payment
                        histories. Trade receivables are written off when deemed
                        uncollectible.    Recoveries   of   trade    receivables
                        previously written off are recorded when received.

                        A trade  receivable  is considered to be past due if any
                        portion of the receivable  balance has not been received
                        by the contractual  pay date.  Interest is not charge on
                        trade receivables that are past due.

                        Inventories
                        Inventories  are  stated at the lower of cost or market,
                        cost is determined using the weighted average method.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             F-8



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1.   Organization       Property and Equipment
     and Significant    Property  and  equipment  are  recorded  at  cost,  less
     Accounting         accumulated  depreciation.  Depreciation on property and
     Policies           equipment is determined using the  straight-line  method
     Continued          over the  estimated  useful lives of the assets or terms
                        of the lease.  Expenditures  for maintenance and repairs
                        are  expensed   when   incurred  and   betterments   are
                        capitalized.  Gains and losses on sale of  property  and
                        equipment are reflected in operations.

                        Intangible Assets
                        As of December 31, 2004,  intangible assets consisted of
                        goodwill  related to the  purchase of Ocular Blood Flow,
                        Ltd.,   product   rights,    capitalized   payments   to
                        manufacturers  for  engineering  and design services and
                        patent costs.  The company  performed an impairment test
                        on all  intangible  assets at December  31,  2004.  As a
                        result  it was not  necessary  to incur  any  impairment
                        expense of intangible assets.

                        Intangible  assets  determined to have indefinite useful
                        lives  are  not   amortized.   The  Company  tests  such
                        intangible  assets  with  indefinite  useful  lives  for
                        impairment  annually  or more  frequently  if  events or
                        circumstances  indicate that an asset might be impaired.
                        Intangible  assets determined to have definite lives are
                        amortized  on a  straight-line  basis over their  useful
                        lives.  Product  rights,  capitalized  engineering,  and
                        patents  were fully  amortized  as of December 31, 2004.
                        The Company reviews such intangible assets with definite
                        lives for  impairment  to ensure they are  appropriately
                        valued  if  conditions   exist  that  may  indicate  the
                        carrying value may not be  recoverable.  Such conditions
                        may include an economic  downturn in a geographic market
                        or a change in the assessment of future operations.

                        Goodwill is not  amortized.  The Company  performs tests
                        for impairment of goodwill  annually or more  frequently
                        if  events  or   circumstances   indicate  it  might  be
                        impaired. Such tests include comparing the fair value of
                        a  reporting  unit with its  carrying  value,  including
                        goodwill.

                        Impairment  assessments are performed using a variety of
                        methodologies,   including   cash  flow   analysis   and
                        estimates  of  sales  proceeds.  Where  applicable,   an
                        appropriate   discount  rate  is  used,   based  on  the
                        Company's  cost of  capital  rate  or  location-specific
                        economic factors.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             F-9



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



1.   Organization       Evaluation of Other Long-Lived Assets
     and Significant    The  Company   evaluates  the  carrying   value  of  the
     Accounting         unamortized  balances  of  other  long-lived  assets  to
     Policies           determine  whether any  impairment  of these  assets has
     Continued          occurred  or  whether   any   revision  to  the  related
                        amortization  periods should be made. This evaluation is
                        based on  management's  projections of the  undiscounted
                        future  cash  flows   associated  with  each  asset.  If
                        management's   evaluation  were  to  indicate  that  the
                        carrying  values of these  assets  were  impaired,  such
                        impairment  would be  recognized  by a write down of the
                        applicable asset.

                        Income Taxes
                        Deferred income taxes are provided in amounts sufficient
                        to  give  effect  to   temporary   differences   between
                        financial and tax reporting,  principally related to net
                        operating loss carryforwards,  depreciation,  impairment
                        of intangible assets,  stock compensation  expense,  and
                        accrued liabilities.

                        Stock - Based Compensation
                        For stock options and warrants  granted to employees the
                        Company  employs the footnote  disclosure  provisions of
                        Statement of Financial  Accounting  Standards (SFAS) No.
                        123, Accounting for Stock-Based  Compensation.  SFAS No.
                        123  encourages  entities  to adopt a  fair-value  based
                        method of accounting for stock options or similar equity
                        instruments.  However,  it  also  allows  an  entity  to
                        continue  measuring  compensation  cost for  stock-based
                        compensation   using  the   intrinsic-value   method  of
                        accounting  prescribed  by Accounting  Principles  Board
                        (APB)  Opinion No. 25,  Accounting  for Stock  Issued to
                        Employees  (APB 25). The Company has elected to continue
                        to apply the  provisions of APB 25 and provide pro forma
                        footnote  disclosures  required  by  SFAS  No.  123.  No
                        stock-based  employee  compensation cost is reflected in
                        net income, as all options granted under those plans had
                        an exercise  price  equal to or greater  than the market
                        value  of the  underlying  common  stock  on the date of
                        grant.

                        Stock options and warrants granted to non-employees  for
                        services are accounted  for in accordance  with SFAS No.
                        123, which  requires  expense  recognition  based on the
                        fair value of the options/warrants  granted. The Company
                        calculates  the  fair  value  of  options  and  warrants
                        granted by use of the Black-Scholes pricing model.

                        The following table illustrates the effect on net income
                        and  earnings  per share if the  company had applied the
                        fair value recognition  provisions of FASB Statement No.
                        
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-10



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



1.   Organization       Stock - Based Compensation - Continued
     and Significant    123,  "Accounting  for  Stock-Based   Compensation,"  to
     Accounting         stock-based employee compensation.
     Policies       
     Continued      
                                                    Years Ended December 31,
                                             --------------------------------
                                                   2004           2003
                                             --------------------------------

Net income (loss) applicable to common
shareholders- as reported                      $      10,000  $  (3,431,000)

Deduct:  total stock-based employee
compen-sation determined under fair value
based method for all awards, net of related         (362,000)      (595,000)
tax effects
                                             --------------------------------

Net loss applicable to common shareholders -
pro forma                                      $    (352,000) $  (4,026,000)
                                             --------------------------------

Earnings per share:
     Basic and diluted - as reported           $           -  $        (.14)
                                             --------------------------------
     Basic and diluted - pro forma             $        (.01) $        (.17)
                                             --------------------------------

                        The fair value of each option  grant is estimated at the
                        date of grant  using the  Black-Scholes  option  pricing
                        model with the following assumptions:

                                                  December 31,
                                     ----------------------------------------
                                             2004                2003
                                     ----------------------------------------

    Expected dividend yield            $                 - $               -
    Expected stock price
      Volatility                               112% - 173%         110%-117%
    Risk-free interest rate                             4%                4%
    Expected life of options                     2-7 years         2-7 years


                        The  weighted  average  fair  value of  options  granted
                        during 2004 and 2003 are $0.09 and $0.16, respectively.

                        Earnings Per Share
                        The  computation  of basic  earnings per common share is
                        based  on  the   weighted   average   number  of  shares
                        outstanding during each year.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-11



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1.   Organization       Earnings Per Share- Continued
     and                The computation of diluted  earnings per common share is
     Significant        based  on  the   weighted   average   number  of  shares
     Accounting         outstanding  during  the  year  plus  the  common  stock
     Policies           equivalents,  which would arise from the  conversion  of
     Continued          preferred stock to common stock and from the exercise of
                        stock  options  and  warrants   outstanding   using  the
                        treasury  stock method and the average  market price per
                        share during the year.  Options and warrants to purchase
                        6,036,469  shares of common stock at prices ranging from
                        $0.16 to $12.98 per share were  outstanding  at December
                        31, 2003, but were not included in the diluted  earnings
                        per share  calculation for 2003 because the effect would
                        have been antidilutive.

                        The  following  table is a  reconciliation  of basic and
                        diluted  weighted  average  shares  for the years  ended
                        December 31, 2004 and 2003.

                                                    Years Ended December 31,
                                             --------------------------------
                                                      2004           2003
                                             --------------------------------

Basic weighted average shares outstanding          25,405,000     24,058,000

Common stock equivalent-convertible
preferred stock                                     2,047,000        -


Diluted effect of stock options and warrants          217,000        -
                                             --------------------------------


Diluted weighted average shares outstanding        27,669,000     24,058,000
                                             --------------------------------

                        Revenue Recognition
                        Revenues  for sales of products  that  require  specific
                        installation   and   acceptance   by  the  customer  are
                        recognized upon such  installation and acceptance by the
                        customer.  Revenues for sales of other surgical systems,
                        ultrasound  diagnostic devices,  and disposable products
                        are  recognized  when the product is  shipped.  A signed
                        purchase agreement and a deposit or payment in full from
                        customers  is  required  before  a  product  leaves  the
                        premises.  Title  passes  at  time of  shipment  (F.O.B.
                        shipping point).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-12



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



1.   Organization       Research and Development
     and                Costs   incurred  in   connection   with   research  and
     Significant        development  activities are expensed as incurred.  These
     Accounting         costs  consist of direct and indirect  costs  associated
     Policies           with  specific  projects as well as fees paid to various
     Continued          entities that perform certain  research on behalf of the
                        Company.

                        Concentration of Risk
                        The  market  for  ophthalmic  lasers is subject to rapid
                        technological  change,  including  advances in laser and
                        other  technologies  and the  potential  development  of
                        alternative  surgical  techniques or new  pharmaceutical
                        products.  Development  by  others  of new  or  improved
                        products,  processes or  technologies  may make products
                        developed by the Company obsolete or less competitive.

                        The Company's high technology  product line requires the
                        Company  to  deal  with  suppliers  and   subcontractors
                        supplying  highly  specialized  parts,  operating highly
                        sophisticated   and  narrow   tolerance   equipment  and
                        performing  highly  technical  calculations  and  tasks.
                        Although  there are a limited  number of  suppliers  and
                        manufacturers  that  meet the  standards  required  of a
                        regulated medical device, management believes that other
                        suppliers  and   manufacturers   could  provide  similar
                        components and services.

                        The nature of the Company's  business exposes it to risk
                        from product  liability  claims.  The Company  maintains
                        product liability  insurance providing coverage up to $1
                        million per claim with an  aggregate  policy limit of $2
                        million. Any losses that the Company may suffer from any
                        product  liability  litigation  could  have  a  material
                        adverse effect on the Company.

                        A significant  portion of the Company's product sales is
                        in  foreign   countries.   The  economic  and  political
                        instability  of some  foreign  countries  may affect the
                        ability of medical  personnel to purchase the  Company's
                        products and the ability of the customers to pay for the
                        procedures  for which the  Company's  products are used.
                        Such circumstances could cause a possible loss of sales,
                        which would affect operating results adversely.

                        During the years ended  December  31, 2004 and 2003,  no
                        single  customer  represented  more than 10  percent  of
                        total net sales.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-13



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1.   Organization       Concentration of Risk - Continued
     and Significant    Accounts  receivable are due from medical  distributors,
     Accounting         surgery    centers,    hospitals,    optometrists    and
     Policies           ophthalmologists  located  throughout  the  U.S.  and  a
     Continued          number  of  foreign   countries.   The  receivables  are
                        generally due within thirty days for domestic  customers
                        with  extended  terms  offered  for  some  international
                        customers.   The  Company  maintains  an  allowance  for
                        estimated potentially uncollectible amounts.

                        Warranty
                        The Company provides  product  warranties on the sale of
                        certain products that generally extend for one year from
                        the date of sale.  The  Company  maintains a reserve for
                        estimated warranty costs based on historical  experience
                        and management's best estimates.

                        Use  of  Estimates  in  the   Preparation  of  Financial
                        Statements
                        The  preparation  of financial  statements in conformity
                        with  accounting  principles  generally  accepted in the
                        United  States of America  requires  management  to make
                        estimates  and  assumptions  that  affect  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
                        revenues  and  expenses  during  the  reporting  period.
                        Actual results could differ from those estimates.

                        Reclassifications
                        Certain  amounts in the 2003 financial  statements  have
                        been  reclassified to conform to the presentation of the
                        current year financial statements.

                        Series G Preferred Stock Dividends

                        Under  the  terms of the  private  offering  of Series G
                        preferred  shares,  the  Company is  required  to file a
                        registration  statement with the Securities and Exchange
                        Commission to register the common shares issuable to the
                        Series G preferred stockholders upon conversion of their
                        Series  G  preferred   shares  and   exercise  of  their
                        warrants.  If the  registration  statement  has not been
                        declared  effective  within  120  days  of  the  initial
                        closing of such offering on August 29, 2003,  there is a
                        penalty  of  2%  per  month  payable  to  the  Series  G
                        preferred.  Stockholders  in common  shares  (or  39,631
                        common   shares  per  month)   until  the   registration
                        statement  is declared  effective.  As of  December  31,
                        2004,  the Company had  recorded a liability  of $54,000
                        related to the 356,682 common shares to be issued to the
                        Series G preferred  stockholders  because a registration


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-14



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



1.  Organization        Series G Preferred Stock Dividends - Continued
    and                 statement  had not been  declared  effective  as of that
    Significant         date.
    Accounting   
    Policies     
    Continued   

2.   Going              The accompanying financial statements have been prepared
     Concern            on  a  going  concern  basis,   which  contemplates  the
                        realization   of   assets   and  the   satisfaction   of
                        liabilities   in  the   normal   course   of   business.
                        Historically,  the  Company  has  not  demonstrated  the
                        ability   to   generate   sufficient   cash  flows  from
                        operations  to  satisfy  its   liabilities  and  sustain
                        operations,  and the  Company has  incurred  significant
                        losses from operations.  These factors raise substantial
                        doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going
                        concern.

                        The  Company's   continuation  as  a  going  concern  is
                        dependent on its ability to generate  sufficient  income
                        and cash flow to meet its  obligations on a timely basis
                        and/or obtain  additional  financing as may be required.
                        The  Company is  actively  seeking to obtain  additional
                        capital and financing.

                        In addition,  the Company has taken significant steps to
                        reduce  costs  and  increase   operating   efficiencies,
                        including the  consolidation  of several  manufacturing,
                        accounting   and   management   responsibilities.   Such
                        consolidation    resulted   in   significant   headcount
                        reductions as well as savings in other  overhead  costs.
                        The  Company has also  significantly  reduced the use of
                        consultants,  which has resulted in a large  decrease in
                        expenses, and reduced the direct sales force from six to
                        five   representatives,   which  has  resulted  in  less
                        payroll,  travel and other  selling  expenses.  Although
                        these  cost  savings  have  significantly   reduced  the
                        Company's  losses and ongoing  cash flow  needs,  if the
                        Company is unable to obtain equity or debt financing, it
                        may be unable to continue  development  of its  products
                        and may be  required to  substantially  curtail or cease
                        operations.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-15



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


3.   Detail of          Receivables
     Certain              Trade receivables                       $     758,000
     Balance              Allowance for doubtful accounts              (101,000)
     Sheet                                                        -------------
     Accounts
                                                                  $     657,000
                                                                  -------------

                        Inventories
                          Finished goods                          $     648,000
                          Raw materials                               1,490,000
                          Reserve for obsolescence                   (1,418,000)
                                                                  -------------
          
                                                                  $     720,000
                                                                  -------------

                        Accrued liabilities:
                          Consulting and litigation reserve       $     492,000
                          Payroll and employment benefits                84,000
                          Sales tax payable                              42,000
                          Customer deposits                              10,000
                          Accrued royalties                              13,000
                          Deferred revenue                                7,000
                          Warranty and return allowance                 149,000
                          Other accrued expenses                         61,000
                                                                  -------------
          
                                                                  $     858,000
                                                                  -------------


4.   Intangible         Intangible  assets  consist of the following at December
     Assets             31, 2004:

                        Goodwill, net of accumulated 
                        amortization of $120,000                  $     679,000
                                                                  -------------
                        Other intangible assets:
                           Product and technology rights                769,000
                           Engineering and design costs                 482,000
                           Patents                                       92,000
                                                                  -------------

                                                                      1,343,000
                        Accumulated amortization                     (1,343,000)
                                                                  -------------
                        Total other intangible asstes                         -
                                                                  -------------
                        Net intangible assets                     $     679,000
                                                                  -------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-16



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



4.   Intangible         Amortization  expense for the years ended  December  31,
     Assets             2004 and 2003 was $3,000 and $79,000, respectively.
     Continued 
                        During the year ended  December  31,  2003,  the Company
                        evaluated  the  carrying  value of its  unissued  patent
                        costs   and   product   and   technology    rights   for
                        recoverability.  This  analysis,  based on the estimated
                        future cash flows associated with such assets,  resulted
                        in an impairment  expense of $81,000  related to patents
                        and product and technology rights.

5.   Property and       Property and equipment consists of the following: 
     Equipment


                        Office equipment                          $     750,000
                        Computer equipment                              658,000
                        Furniture and fixtures                          252,000
                        Leasehold improvements                          166,000
                                                                  -------------
                                                                      1,826,000

                        Accumulated depreciation 
                           and amortization                          (1,717,000)
                                                                  -------------

                                                                  $     109,000
                                                                  -------------

6.   Lease              During the years ended  December 31, 2004 and 2003,  the
     Obligations        Company leased certain  equipment  under  noncancellable
                        capital  leases.  These  leases  provide the Company the
                        option to purchase  the leased  assets at the end of the
                        initial lease term. Assets under capital leases included
                        in fixed assets and are as follows:

                        Computer and other equipment              $     291,000

                        Less accumulated amortization                  (212,000)
                                                                  -------------

                                                                  $      79,000
                                                                  -------------

                        Amortization  expense  on assets  under  capital  leases
                        during the years  ended  December  31, 2004 and 2003 was
                        $39,000 and $56,000, respectively.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-17



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



6.   Lease              Capital lease obligations have imputed interest rates of
     Obligations        approximately  7% to 22%.  The  leases  are  secured  by
     Continued          equipment.  Future minimum payments on the capital lease
                        obligations are as follows:

                         2005                                     $      54,000
                         2006                                            14,000
                                                                  --------------

                                                                         68,000

                        Less amount representing interest                (7,200)
                                                                  -------------

                        Present value of future minimum 
                           lease payments                                61,000

                        Less current portion                            (47,000)
                                                                  -------------

                        Long-term portion                         $      14,000
                                                                  -------------

                        The Company  leases office and warehouse  space under an
                        operating   lease   agreement.   Future  minimum  rental
                        payments under the noncancellable  operating lease as of
                        December 31, 2004 are approximately as follows:

                            Year Ending December 31,                 Amount
                            ------------------------                 ------

                                   2005                           $     140,000
                                                                  -------------

                         Total future minimum rental payments     $     140,000
                                                                  -------------

                        Rent expense related to  noncancelable  operating leases
                        was  approximately  $137,000  and $159,000 for the years
                        ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-18



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


7.   Income             The provision for income taxes is different than amounts
     Taxes              which  would  be  provided  by  applying  the  statutory
                        federal  income tax rate to loss  before  provision  for
                        income taxes for the following reasons:

                                                    Years Ended
                                                   December 31,
                                        ------------------------------------
                                              2004              2003
                                        ------------------------------------

Income tax (provision) benefit at
  statutory rate                        $        (24,000)  $      1,170,000
Expiration of research and
  development tax credit
  carryforwards                                        -                  -
Meals and entertainment                           (3,000)            (7,000)
Other                                                  -              2,000
Change in valuation allowance                     27,000         (1,165,000)
                                        ------------------------------------

                                        $              -   $              -
                                        ------------------------------------
                                                                          
                        Deferred tax assets  (liabilities)  are comprised of the
                        following:

Net operating loss carryforward                            $     16,984,000
Depreciation, amortization, and impairment                          853,000
Allowance and reserves                                              828,000
Research and development tax credit
  carryforwards                                                      56,000
                                                           -----------------

                                                                 18,721,000

Valuation allowance                                             (18,721,000)
                                                           -----------------

                                                           $              -
                                                           -----------------

                        A valuation  allowance has been  established for the net
                        deferred  tax  asset  due  to  the  uncertainty  of  the
                        Company's ability to realize such asset.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-19



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


7.   Income             At December 31, 2004, the Company had net operating loss
     Taxes              carryforwards of approximately  $48 million and research
     Continued          and    development   tax   credit    carryforwards    of
                        approximately $56,000. These carryforwards are available
                        to  offset  future  taxable  income  and  expire in 2004
                        through 2021. The  utilization of the net operating loss
                        carryforwards  is dependent  upon the tax laws in effect
                        at the time the net operating loss  carryforwards can be
                        utilized.  The  Tax  Reform  Act of  1986  significantly
                        limits  the  annual  amount  that  can be  utilized  for
                        certain of these carryforwards as a result of the change
                        in ownership.

8.   Capital            The Company has  established a series of preferred stock
     Stock              with a total of  5,000,000  authorized  shares and a par
                        value of $.001,  and one  series of common  stock with a
                        par value of $.001 and a total of 80,000,000  authorized
                        shares.

                        Series A Preferred Stock
                        On September 1, 1993,  the Company  established a series
                        of  non-voting  preferred  shares  designated  as the 6%
                        Series A Preferred  Stock,  consisting of 500,000 shares
                        with $.001 par value.  The Series A Preferred  Stock has
                        the following rights and privileges:

                        1.   The holders of the shares are entitled to dividends
                             at the rate of  twenty-four  cents ($.24) per share
                             per  annum,  payable  in  cash  only  from  surplus
                             earnings of the Company or in additional  shares of
                             Series  A  Preferred   Stock.   The  dividends  are
                             non-cumulative   and  therefore   deficiencies   in
                             dividend  payments  from one  year are not  carried
                             forward to the next year.

                        2.   Upon the liquidation of the Company, the holders of
                             the  Series  A  Preferred  Stock  are  entitled  to
                             receive, prior to any distribution of any assets or
                             surplus  funds to the  holders  of shares of common
                             stock or any other stock,  an amount equal to $1.00
                             per share,  plus any accrued  and unpaid  dividends
                             related   to  the   fiscal   year  in  which   such
                             liquidation occurs. Total liquidation preference at
                             December 31, 2004 was $6,000.

                        3.   The  shares  are  convertible  at the option of the
                             holder at any time into common shares,  based on an
                             initial  conversion  rate of one  share of Series A
                             Preferred Stock for 1.2 common shares.

                        4.   The holders of the shares have no voting rights.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-20



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                     

8.   Capital            Series A Preferred Stock - Continued
     Stock              5.   The Company  may, at its option,  redeem all of the
     Continued               then  outstanding  shares of the Series A Preferred
                             Stock at a price of $4.50 per share,  plus  accrued
                             and unpaid dividends  related to the fiscal year in
                             which such redemption occurs.
                           
                        Series B Preferred Stock
                        On May 9,  1994,  the  Company  established  a series of
                        non-voting  preferred shares  designated as 12% Series B
                        Preferred Stock, consisting of 500,000 shares with $.001
                        par  value.   The  Series  B  Preferred  Stock  has  the
                        following rights and privileges:

                        1.   The holders of the shares are entitled to dividends
                             at the rate of  forty-eight  cents ($.48) per share
                             per  annum,  payable  in  cash  only  from  surplus
                             earnings of the Company or in additional  shares of
                             Series  B  Preferred   Stock.   The  dividends  are
                             non-cumulative   and  therefore   deficiencies   in
                             dividend  payments  from one  year are not  carried
                             forward to the next year.

                        2.   Upon the liquidation of the Company, the holders of
                             the  Series  B  Preferred  Stock  are  entitled  to
                             receive, prior to any distribution of any assets or
                             surplus  funds to the  holders  of shares of common
                             stock or any other stock,  an amount equal to $4.00
                             per share,  plus any accrued  and unpaid  dividends
                             related   to  the   fiscal   year  in  which   such
                             liquidation   occurs.   Such  right,   however,  is
                             subordinate  to the rights of the holders of Series
                             A  Preferred  Stock to  receive a  distribution  of
                             $1.00 per share plus accrued and unpaid  dividends.
                             Total  liquidation  preference at December 31, 2004
                             was $36,000.

                        3.   The  shares  are  convertible  at the option of the
                             holder at any time into common shares,  based on an
                             initial  conversion  rate of one  share of Series B
                             Preferred Stock for 1.2 common shares.

                        4.   The holders of the shares have no voting rights.

                        5.   The Company  may, at its option,  redeem all of the
                             then  outstanding  share of the Series B  Preferred
                             Stock at a price of $4.50 per share,  plus  accrued
                             and unpaid dividends  related to the fiscal year in
                             which such redemption occurs.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-21



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




8.   Capital            Series C Preferred Stock
     Stock              In January 1998, the Company  authorized the issuance of
     Continued          a total of 30,000  shares of Series C  Preferred  Stock,
                        $.001 par value,  $100 stated value.  As of December 31,
                        2004 there were no Series C Preferred  Stock  issued and
                        outstanding.  The  Series  C  Preferred  Stock  have the
                        following rights and privileges:

                        1.  The holders of the shares are  entitled to dividends
                            at the  rate  of 12%  per  share  per  annum  of the
                            aggregate    stated   value.   The   dividends   are
                            non-cumulative  and,   therefore,   deficiencies  in
                            dividend  payments  from one  year  are not  carried
                            forward to the next year.

                        2.  Upon the liquidation of the Company,  the holders of
                            the Series C Preferred Stock are entitled to receive
                            an amount per share  equal to the greater of (a) the
                            amount   they  would  have   received  if  they  had
                            converted  the shares  into  shares of Common  Stock
                            immediately  prior to such liquidation plus declared
                            but  unpaid  dividends;  or (b)  the  stated  value,
                            subject to adjustment.

                        3.  Each  share was  convertible,  at the  option of the
                            holder  at any time  until  January  1,  2002,  into
                            approximately  57.14  shares of  common  stock at an
                            initial conversion price, subject to adjustments for
                            stock   splits,    stock   dividends   and   certain
                            combination or recapitalization of the common stock,
                            equal to $1.75 per share of common stock.

                        4.  The holders of the shares have no voting rights.

                        Series D Preferred Stock
                        In  January  1999,  the  Company's  Board  of  Directors
                        authorized  the issuance of a total of 1,140,000  shares
                        of  Series D  Preferred  Stock  $.001 par  value,  $1.75
                        stated  value.  The  Series D  Preferred  Stock  has the
                        following rights and privileges:

                        1.  The holders of the shares are  entitled to dividends
                            at the  rate  of 10%  per  share  per  annum  of the
                            aggregate    stated   value.   The   dividends   are
                            non-cumulative  and,   therefore,   deficiencies  in
                            dividend  payments  from one  year  are not  carried
                            forward to the next year.

                        2.  Upon the liquidation of the Company,  the holders of
                            the Series D Preferred Stock are entitled to receive


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-22



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




8.   Capital            Series D Preferred Stock - Continued
     Stock              an amount  per  share  equal to the  greater  of (a) the
     Continued          amount they would have  received had they  converted the
                        shares  into  Common  Stock  immediately  prior  to such
                        liquidation plus all declared but unpaid  dividends;  or
                        (b) the  stated  value,  subject  to  adjustment.  Total
                        liquidation preference at December 31, 2004 was $9,000.

                        3.  Each  share was  convertible,  at the  option of the
                            holder at any time until  January 1, 2002,  into one
                            share  of  Common  Stock  at an  initial  conversion
                            price, subject to adjustment. The Series D Preferred
                            Stock  shall  be  converted  into  one  share of the
                            Common Stock subject to adjustment (a) on January 1,
                            2002  or (b)  upon  30 days  written  notice  by the
                            Company to the  holders of the  Shares,  at any time
                            after (i) the 30-day anniversary of the registration
                            statement  on  which  the  shares  of  Common  Stock
                            issuable  upon  conversion of the Series D Preferred
                            Stock were  registered and (ii) the average  closing
                            price of the  Common  Stock  for the  20-day  period
                            immediately  prior to the date on  which  notice  of
                            redemption is given by the Company to the holders of
                            the Series D  Preferred  Stock is at least $3.50 per
                            share.  The Company in 1999  recorded  $872,000 as a
                            beneficial   conversion   feature   related  to  the
                            differences in the conversion price of the preferred
                            stock to common stock.

                        4.  The holders of the shares have no voting rights.

                        Series E Preferred Stock
                        In May 2001,  the Company  authorized  the issuance of a
                        total of 50,000 shares of Series E Preferred Stock $.001
                        par value,  $100  stated  value.  The Series E Preferred
                        Stock has the following rights and privileges:

                        1.  The holders of the shares are  entitled to dividends
                            at  the  rate  of 8%  per  share  per  annum  of the
                            aggregate    stated   value.   The   dividends   are
                            non-cumulative  and,   therefore,   deficiencies  in
                            dividend  payments  from one  year  are not  carried
                            forward to the next year.

                        2.  Upon the liquidation of the Company,  the holders of
                            the Series E Preferred Stock are entitled to receive
                            an amount per share  equal to the greater of (a) the
                            amount they would have  received had they  converted
                            the shares into Common  Stock  immediately  prior to
                            such   liquidation  plus  all  declared  but  unpaid


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-23



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



8.   Capital            Series E Preferred Stock - Continued
     Stock              dividends;   or  (b)  the  stated   value,   subject  to
     Continued          adjustment. Total liquidation preference at December 31,
                        2004 was $100,000.

                        3.  Each  share is  convertible,  at the  option  of the
                            holder  at any time  until  January  1,  2005,  into
                            approximately  53.33  shares of  Common  Stock at an
                            initial conversion price,  subject to adjustment for
                            stock   splits,    stock   dividends   and   certain
                            combination or recapitalization of the common stock,
                            equal to  $1.875  per  share of  common  stock.  The
                            Series E  Preferred  Stock shall be  converted  into
                            Common Stock subject to adjustment (a) on January 1,
                            2005  or (b)  upon  30 days  written  notice  by the
                            Company to the  holders of the  Shares,  at any time
                            after (i) the 30-day anniversary of the registration
                            statement  on  which  the  shares  of  Common  Stock
                            issuable  upon  conversion of the Series E Preferred
                            Stock were  registered and (ii) the average  closing
                            price of the  Common  Stock  for the  20-day  period
                            immediately  prior to the date on  which  notice  of
                            redemption is given by the Company to the holders of
                            the Series E  Preferred  Stock is at least $3.50 per
                            share. The Company in 2001 recorded  $1,482,000 as a
                            beneficial   conversion   feature   related  to  the
                            differences in the conversion price of the preferred
                            stock to common stock.

                        4.  The holders of the shares have no voting rights.

                        5.  The holders of the shares also were issued  warrants
                            to  purchase  shares of common  stock equal to 1,000
                            warrants  for  every  200  shares  purchased  at  an
                            exercise  price of $4.00 per share.  Each warrant is
                            exercisable until May 23, 2006.

                        Series F Preferred Stock
                        In August 2001, the Company authorized the issuance of a
                        total of 50,000 shares of Series F Preferred Stock $.001
                        par value,  $100  stated  value.  The Series F Preferred
                        Stock has the following rights and privileges:

                        1.  The holders of the shares are  entitled to dividends
                            at  the  rate  of 8%  per  share  per  annum  of the
                            aggregate    stated   value.   The   dividends   are
                            non-cumulative  and,   therefore,   deficiencies  in
                            dividend  payments  from one  year  are not  carried
                            forward to the next year.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-24



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



8.   Capital            Series F Preferred Stock - Continued
     Stock              2.  Upon the liquidation of the Company,  the holders of
     Continued              the Series F Preferred Stock are entitled to receive
                            an amount per share  equal to the greater of (a) the
                            amount they would have  received had they  converted
                            the shares into Common  Stock  immediately  prior to
                            such   liquidation  plus  all  declared  but  unpaid
                            dividends;  or (b)  the  stated  value,  subject  to
                            adjustment. Total liquidation preference at December
                            31, 2004 was $245,000.

                        3.  Each  share is  convertible,  at the  option  of the
                            holder  at any time  until  January  1,  2005,  into
                            approximately  53.33  shares of  Common  Stock at an
                            initial conversion price,  subject to adjustment for
                            stock   splits,    stock   dividends   and   certain
                            combination or recapitalization of the common stock,
                            equal to  $1.875  per  share of  common  stock.  The
                            Series F  Preferred  Stock shall be  converted  into
                            Common Stock subject to adjustment (a) on January 1,
                            2005  or (b)  upon  30 days  written  notice  by the
                            Company to the  holders of the  Shares,  at any time
                            after (i) the 30-day anniversary of the registration
                            statement  on  which  the  shares  of  Common  Stock
                            issuable  upon  conversion of the Series F Preferred
                            Stock were  registered and (ii) the average  closing
                            price of the  Common  Stock  for the  20-day  period
                            immediately  prior to the date on  which  notice  of
                            redemption is given by the Company to the holders of
                            the Series F  Preferred  Stock is at least $3.50 per
                            share. The Company in 2001 recorded  $1,105,000 as a
                            beneficial   conversion   feature   related  to  the
                            differences in the conversion price of the preferred
                            stock to common stock.

                        4.  The holders of the shares have no voting rights.

                        Series G Preferred Stock
                        In August 2003, the Company authorized the issuance of a
                        total of  2,000,000  shares of Series G Preferred  Stock
                        $.001  par  value,  $1.00  stated  value.  The  Series G
                        Preferred Stock has the following rights and privileges:

                        1.  The holders of the shares are  entitled to dividends
                            at  the  rate  of 7%  per  share  per  annum  of the
                            aggregate    stated   value.   The   dividends   are
                            non-cumulative  and,   therefore,   deficiencies  in
                            dividend  payments  from one  year  are not  carried
                            forward to the next year.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-25



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



8.   Capital  
     Stock              Series G Preferred Stock - Continued
     Continued          2.  Upon the liquidation of the Company,  the holders of
                            the Series G Preferred Stock are entitled to receive
                            an amount per share  equal to the greater of (a) the
                            amount they would have  received had they  converted
                            the shares into Common  Stock  immediately  prior to
                            such   liquidation  plus  all  declared  but  unpaid
                            dividends; or (b) the stated value of $.25 per share
                            plus   declared   but   unpaid   dividends.    Total
                            liquidation  preference  at  December  31,  2004 was
                            $432,000.

                        3.  Each  share is  convertible,  at the  option  of the
                            holder  at any time  until  August 1,  2005,  into 1
                            share  of  common  stock  at an  initial  conversion
                            price, subject to adjustment for dividends, equal to
                            one share of common stock for each share of Series G
                            Preferred  Stock. The Series G Preferred Stock shall
                            be converted into common stock subject to adjustment
                            (a) on August  1,  2005 or (b) upon 30 days  written
                            notice by the  Company to the holders of the shares,
                            at any time after (i) the 30-day  anniversary of the
                            registration statement on which the shares of common
                            stock  issuable  upon  conversion  of the  Series  G
                            Preferred Stock were registered and (ii) the average
                            closing  price of the  common  stock for the  15-day
                            period immediately prior to the date in which notice
                            of redemption is given by the Company to the holders
                            of the Series G Preferred Stock is at least $.50 per
                            share.  In 2003,  the Company  recorded a beneficial
                            conversion   feature  of  $217,000  related  to  the
                            differences in the conversion price of the preferred
                            stock to common stock.

                        4.  The holders of the shares have no voting rights.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-26



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



8.   Capital            The following table summarizes  preferred stock activity
     Stock              during the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003:
     Continued



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Series A         Series B         Series C        Series D        Series E        Series F             Series G
              Shares  Amount  Shares  Amount   Shares  Amount  Shares   Amount  Shares  Amount  Shares   Amount     Shares    Amount
                                                                                             
Balance at 
 January 1, 
 2003          5,627  $     -  8,986  $      -       -   $ -     5,000 $     -   1,500  $     -     6,272 $      -         - $     -

Issuance of 
 Series G 
 preferred 
 stock for 
 cash              -        -      -         -       -     -         -       -       -        -         -        - 1,764,706 $ 2,000
Issuance of 
 Series G 
 preferred 
 stock for 
 commissions       -        -      -         -       -     -         -       -       -        -         -        -   216,854 $     -
Conversion of 
 preferred 
 stock             -        -      -         -       -     -         -       -    (500)       -    (1,675)       -         -       -
             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Balance at 
 December 
 31, 2003      5,627        -  8,986         -       -     -     5,000       -   1,000        -     4,597        - 1,981,560   2,000

Issuance of 
 Series G
 preferred 
 stock for 
 cash              -        -      -         -       -     -         -       -       -        -         -        -         -       -

Conversion 
 of 
 preferred
 stock             -        -      -         -       -     -         -       -       -        -         -        -  (255,000)      -
             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Balance at 
 December 
 31, 2004      5,627  $     -  8,986  $      -       -   $ -     5,000 $     -   1,000 $      -     4,597 $      - 1,726,560 $ 2,000
             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authorized   500,000         500,000            30,000       1,140,000          50,000             50,000          2,000,000
             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liquidation 
 preference           $ 6,000         $ 36,000           $ -           $ 9,000         $ 100,000          $245,000          $432,000
             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-27



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


9.   Stock Option       The Company has a Stock  Option Plan (the Option  Plan),
     Plan and           which  reserves  shares of the Company's  authorized but
     Warrants           unissued common stock for the granting of stock options.
                        Amendments  to the Option Plan  increased  the number of
                        shares of common stock reserved for issuance  thereunder
                        to an aggregate of 3,700,000 shares.

                        The  Option  Plan  provides  for the grant of  incentive
                        stock  options  and   non-qualified   stock  options  to
                        employees and directors of the Company.  Incentive stock
                        options  may be granted  only to  employees.  The Option
                        Plan is  administered  by the  Board of  Directors  or a
                        Compensation  Committee,  which  determines the terms of
                        options granted including the exercise price, the number
                        of shares subject to the option,  and the exercisability
                        of the option.

                        The Company  granted the following  options and warrants
                        during the year ended December 31, 2004:

                            o     Options to officers and the board of directors
                                  to purchase  1,775,000  shares of common stock
                                  at an  exercise  price  ranging  from $0.10 to
                                  $0.14.

                        The Company  granted the following  options and warrants
                        to  non-employees  during  the year ended  December  31,
                        2003:

                            o     Warrants to purchase  200,000 shares of common
                                  stock at an exercise  price of $0.16 per share
                                  in return for consulting services.

                            o     Warrants  to  investors  to  purchase  422,633
                                  shares of common stock at an exercise price of
                                  $0.75.

                            o     In  connection  with the  Series  G  Preferred
                                  Stock offering, the Company issued warrants to
                                  purchase,   in  aggregate  382,353  shares  of
                                  common stock at exercise  prices  ranging from
                                  $0.25 to $0.50.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-28



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



9.   Stock Option       A schedule of the options and warrants is as follows: 
     Plan and
     Warrants 
     Continued


                                                                 
                                         Number of                 Exercise 
                              --------------------------------     Price Per
                                  Options          Warrants          Share
                              --------------------------------------------------

Outstanding at
   January 1, 2003                2,486,535         2,565,022 $    2.00 - 12.98
     Granted                      2,150,000         1,404,986       0.16 - 0.25
     Exercised                            -                 -                 -

     Expired                              -        (1,162,025)      5.06 - 8.12
     Forfeited                   (1,008,079)                -       0.21 - 6.00
                              --------------------------------------------------
Outstanding at
  December 31, 2003               3,628,456         2,807,983
     Granted                      1,775,000                 -       0.10 - 0.14

     Exercised                            -                 -                 -

     Expired                       (187,500)         (161,019)      2.38 - 4.00
     Forfeited                   (1,369,750)         (200,000)      0.16 - 5.00
                              --------------------------------------------------
Outstanding at
  December 31, 2004               3,846,206         2,446,964 $    0.10 - 12.98
                              --------------------------------------------------

                        The following table summarizes  information  about stock
                        options and warrants outstanding at December 31, 2004:

                             Outstanding                       Exercisable
                 ------------------------------------   -----------------------
                               Weighted
                                Average
                               Remaining  Weighted                  Weighted
    Range of                  Contractual  Average                   Average
    Exercise        Number       Life      Exercise       Number     Exercise
     Prices      Outstanding    (Years)     Price       Exercisable   Price
-----------------------------------------------------   -----------------------

  $  0.16 - 0.75    3,724,986        2.76 $     0.20      2,236,653  $    0.34
     2.00 - 5.00    2,267,301        2.27       3.62      2,350,676       3.73
     6.00 - 8.13      275,000        1.00       3.27        275,000       6.55
           12.98       25,883         N/A      12.98         25,883      12.98
-----------------------------------------------------   -----------------------

  $ 0.16 - 12.98    6,293,170        2.50 $     1.63      4,888,212  $    2.39
-----------------------------------------------------   -----------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-29



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



10.  Sale of            In  July  2004,  the  Company  sold  its  investment  in
     Investment         International Bioimmune Systems, Inc. (IBS) for $532,000
                        cash.   Because,   for  book  purposes,   the  Company's
                        investment in IBS had previously been reduced to $0, the
                        net sales price was recorded as a gain as follows.

                               Sale of IBS stock                       $532,000
                               Less commissions                          27,000
                                                                       --------
                               Net gain                                $505,000
                                                                       --------

11.  Gain on            Due to the  Company's  ongoing  cash flow  difficulties,
     Settlement of      during  2003 and 2004 most  vendors and  suppliers  were
     Liabilities        contacted with attempts to negotiate reduce payments and
                        settlements  of  settlements  of  outstanding   accounts
                        payable and accrued expenses. While some vendors refused
                        to negotiate and demanded  payment in full, some vendors
                        were  willing  to  settle  for  a  reduced  amount.  The
                        accounts  payable  forgiven by vendors and suppliers and
                        accrued  expenses settled resulted in a gain of $206,000
                        and $436,000 in 2004 and 2003, respectively.

12.  Related Party      A law  firm,  of  which  the  chairman  of the  board of
     Transactions       directors of the Company is a shareholder,  has rendered
                        legal  services to the  Company.  The Company  paid this
                        firm $100,000 and $97,000,  for the years ended December
                        31,  2004 and 2003,  respectively.  As of  December  31,
                        2004,  the  Company  owed this firm  $197,000,  which is
                        included in accounts payable.

                        During the year ended  December  31,  2004,  the Company
                        increased accrued liabilities and increased  accumulated
                        deficit  for  $54,000   for  accrued   preferred   stock
                        dividends related to registration rights on the Series G
                        preferred stock.

13.  Supplemental       During the year ended December 31, 2003, the Company: 
     Cash Flow
     Information            o      Granted   200,000   warrants  for  consulting
                                   services, which is recorded as an increase to
                                   general   and   administrative   expense  and
                                   additional paid-in capital of $35,000.

                            o      Issued  1,562,000  shares  of  common  stock,
                                   valued  at  $258,000  based  on  the  trading
                                   prices on the date of issuance, as settlement
                                   of  potential  litigation.   This  amount  is
                                   included   in  general   and   administrative
                                   expenses and additional paid-in capital.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-30



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


13.  Supplemental           o      Incurred  an  obligation   of   approximately
     Cash Flow                     $46,000   for  the   settlement   of  accrued
     Information                   liabilities  of  approximately   $83,000  and
     Continued                     recorded a corresponding gain of $37,000.

                            o      Reduced    subscription     receivable    and
                                   additional paid-in capital for $294,000.

                        Actual amounts paid for interest and income taxes are as
                        follows:

                                                    Years Ended
                                                    December 31,
                                         -----------------------------------
                                               2004             2003
                                         -----------------------------------

Interest                                 $         22,000 $          24,000
                                         -----------------------------------

Income taxes                             $              - $               -
                                         -----------------------------------


14. Export Sales        Total sales  include  export  sales by major  geographic
                        area as follows:

                                                    Years Ended
                                                    December 31,
                                         -----------------------------------
                         Geographic Area       2004              2003
                         --------------- -----------------------------------
                                        
                         Far East        $         529,000 $        272,000
                         South America              50,000            9,000
                         Middle East               233,000          228,000
                         Europe                    684,000          363,000
                         Canada                     68,000           62,000
                         Mexico                          -            9,000
                         Africa                      9,000                -
                                         -----------------------------------

                                         $       1,573,000 $        943,000
                                         -----------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-31



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



15.  Savings Plan       In  November  1996,  the  Company  established  a 401(k)
                        Retirement  Savings Plan for the Company's  officers and
                        employees. The Plan provisions include eligibility after
                        six months of service,  a three year  vesting  provision
                        and matching  contributions at the Company's discretion.
                        During the years ended  December 31, 2004 and 2003,  the
                        Company contributed approximately zero and $1,000 to the
                        Plan, respectively.

16.  Commitments and    Consulting Agreements
     Contingencies      On April 3, 2003, the Company  entered into a consulting
                        agreement with Kinexsys Corporation ("Kinexsys").  Under
                        the terms of the agreement,  Kinexsys through its Senior
                        Partner,  Timothy R.  Forstrom,  is to prepare a capital
                        markets   plan   and   a   corporate   positioning   and
                        communications plan for the Company,  for which Kinexsys
                        is to receive  warrants to purchase up to 200,000 shares
                        of the  Company's  common stock at an exercise  price of
                        $.16 per share. The capital markets plan is to include a
                        detailed   analysis  of  the  Company's  capital  market
                        structure  in  relation  to  current  investors,  market
                        trends   and    projected    equity    movements,    and
                        recommendations  on capital management  strategies.  The
                        corporate  positioning  and  communications  plan  is to
                        include a  corporate  positioning  matrix  for  markets,
                        analysts,  customers and partners,  and a communications
                        plan.  The  agreement is for a one-year  term but may be
                        renewed at the  option of both  parties.  The  Agreement
                        expired on April 3, 2004.

                        During  the year ended  December  31,  1999 the  Company
                        entered a consulting  agreement with a former officer of
                        the Company,  which expired in 2004 and requires  annual
                        payments  of  $25,000  through  2003  and a  payment  of
                        $12,500 in 2004.

                        During the year ended  December 31, 2000,  in connection
                        with the  acquisition  of OBF,  the  Company  entered  a
                        consulting agreement with the former owner of OBF, which
                        required  monthly  payments of $6,000 through June 2003.
                        As of December 31, 2003,  this  agreement was settled in
                        conjunction  with the  royalty  agreement  for the Blood
                        Flow Analyzer (see Royalty Agreements in Note 14).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-32



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Litigation                                              
     Contingencies      An action was brought  against the Company in March 2000
     Continued          by  George  Wiseman,  a former  employee,  in the  Third
                        District  Court of Salt Lake County,  State of Utah. The
                        complaint  alleges  that the  Company  owes Mr.  Wiseman
                        6,370 shares of its common stock plus costs,  attorney's
                        fees  and a wage  penalty  (equal  to  1,960  additional
                        shares of its common  stock)  pursuant to Utah law.  The
                        action  is  based  upon  an   extension   of  a  written
                        employment  agreement.  The Company  disputes the amount
                        allegedly owed and intends to vigorously  defend against
                        the action.                                             

                        An action was brought  against the Company on  September
                        11, 2000 by PhotoMed  International,  Inc. and Daniel M.
                        Eichenbaum,  M.D.  in the Third  District  Court of Salt
                        Lake  County,  State of Utah.  The  action  involves  an
                        amount of royalties  that are allegedly due and owing to
                        PhotoMed International,  Inc. and Dr. Eichenbaum under a
                        license  agreement  dated July 7, 1993,  with respect to
                        the sale of certain equipment, plus costs and attorneys'
                        fees.  Certain discovery has taken place and the Company
                        has  paid  royalties  of  $16,000,   which  the  Company
                        believes  brings all payments  current as of the date of
                        last  payment on January 7, 2005.  The  Company has been
                        working with PhotoMed and Dr.  Eichenbaum to ensure that
                        the  calculations   have  been  correctly  made  on  the
                        royalties   paid  as  well  as  the  proper   method  of
                        calculation for the future.

                        It is anticipated that once the parties can agree on the
                        correct calculations on the royalties,  the legal action
                        will be dismissed.  An issue in dispute  concerning  the
                        method of  calculating  royalties  is whether  royalties
                        should  be paid on  returned  equipment.  Since  July 1,
                        2001, only one Photon(TM) laser system has been sold and
                        no systems returned.  However, if the parties are unable
                        to agree on a method for calculating royalties, there is
                        a risk that  PhotoMed  and Dr.  Eichenbaum  might  amend
                        their  complaint to request  termination  of the license
                        agreement and, if successful, the Company would lose its
                        right  to  manufacture  and sell  the  Photon(TM)  laser
                        system.

                        On May 14,  2003,  a  complaint  was filed in the United
                        States  District  Court,  District  of  Utah,  captioned
                        Richard Meyer,  individually and on behalf of all others
                        similarly suited v. Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc.,
                        Thomas  Motter,  Mark Miehle and John  Hemmer,  Case No.
                        2:03 CV00448TC.  The complaint also indicates that it is
                        a "Class  Action  Complaint  for  Violations  of Federal


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-33



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      Securities Law and  Plaintiffs  Demand a Trial by Jury."
     Continued          The Company  has  retained  legal  counsel to review the
                        complaint,  which appears to be focused on alleged false
                        and misleading  statements  pertaining to the Blood Flow
                        Analyzer(TM)   and  concerning  a  purchase  order  from
                        Valdespino Associates Enterprises and Westland Financial
                        Corporation.

                        More  specifically,   the  complaint  alleges  that  the
                        Company  falsely  stated in its  Securities and Exchange
                        Commission  filings  and  press  releases  that  it  had
                        received authorization to use an insurance reimbursement
                        CPT  code  from the CPT Code  Research  and  Development
                        Division of the  American  Medical 16.  Commitments  and
                        Association for  reimbursement  to doctors in connection
                        with the Blood Flow Contingencies  Analyzer(TM),  adding
                        that  the  CPT  code  provides  for a  reimbursement  to
                        doctors  Continued  of $57.00 per patient for use of the
                        Blood Flow Analyzer(TM). According to the complaint, the
                        CPT code was  critical.  Without a  reimbursement  code,
                        physicians   would   not   purchase   the   Blood   Flow
                        Analyzer(TM) because they could not receive compensation
                        for performance of medical  procedures using the medical
                        device.  The complaint further contends that the Company
                        never  received the CPT code from the  American  Medical
                        Association  at any time.  Nevertheless,  it is  alleged
                        that the Company  continued to  misrepresent  in its SEC
                        filings and press  releases that it had received the CPT
                        code. It is also alleged that the Company has never made
                        a  full,  corrective  disclosure  with  respect  to this
                        alleged misstatement.

                        The  complaint  also alleges that on July 11, 2002,  the
                        Company issued a press release  falsely  announcing that
                        it  had  received  a  purchase  order  from   Valdespino
                        Associates    Enterprises    and   Westland    Financial
                        Corporation  for 200  sets of its  entire  portfolio  of
                        products,  with $70  million in systems to be  delivered
                        over a two-year  period,  then  another  $35  million of
                        orders to be completed in the third year.  The complaint
                        further  alleges  that the Company had never  received a
                        true  purchase  order for its  products.  As a result of
                        these alleged misstatements, the complaint contends that
                        the price of the  Company's  shares of common  stock was
                        artificially  inflated  during the period from April 25,
                        2001 through May 14, 2003, and the persons who purchased
                        or retained  the  Company's  common  shares  during that
                        period  suffered   substantial  damages.  The  complaint
                        requests judgment for unspecified damages, together with
                        interest and attorney's fees.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-34



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      The Company  disputes having issued false and misleading
     Continued          statements  concerning  the Blood Flow  AnalyzerTM and a
                        purchase order from Westland  Financial  Corporation and
                        Valdespino  Associates  Enterprises.  On April 25, 2001,
                        the Company  issued a press  release  that stated it had
                        received   authorization   to   use   common   procedure
                        terminology  or CPT code number 92120 for the Blood Flow
                        AnalyzerTM. This press release was based on a letter the
                        Company  received  from the CPT  Editorial  Research and
                        Development   Department   of   the   American   Medical
                        Association  stating  that CPT code number 92120 was the
                        appropriate  common  procedure  terminology  or CPT code
                        number  for  doctors  to  use  when  reporting   certain
                        procedures performed with the Blood Flow AnalyzerTM.

                        Currently, there is reimbursement by insurance payors to
                        doctors using the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM)  in 22 states
                        and  partial  reimbursement  in four other  states.  The
                        amount of  reimbursement to doctors using the Blood Flow
                        Analyzer(TM)  generally ranges from $56.00 to $76.00 per
                        patient,  depending upon the insurance payor.  Insurance
                        payors  providing   reimbursement  for  the  Blood  Flow
                        Analyzer(TM)  have the  discretion to increase or reduce
                        the amount of reimbursement.  The Company is endeavoring
                        to obtain  reimbursement  by  insurance  payors in other
                        states where there is currently no  reimbursement  being
                        made. The Company believes it has continued to correctly
                        represent  in its  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission
                        filings that the CPT Editorial  Research and Development
                        Department  of  the  American  Medical  Association  has
                        informed  the Company  that CPT code number 92120 is the
                        appropriate  code  for  doctors  to use  when  reporting
                        certain   procedures   performed  with  the  Blood  Flow
                        Analyzer(TM).

                        On July 11,  2002,  the Company  issued a press  release
                        that stated it received a purchase order from Valdespino
                        Associates    Enterprises    and   Westland    Financial
                        Corporation  for  200  complete  sets  of the  Company's
                        entire  product  portfolio  of  diagnostic  and surgical
                        equipment for Mexican  ophthalmic  practitioners,  to be
                        followed by a second order of 100 sets of equipment. The
                        press  release was based on a purchase  order dated July
                        10, 2002 that the  Company  entered  into with  Westland
                        Financial  Corporation for the sale of 200 complete sets
                        of the Company's  surgical and  diagnostic  equipment to
                        Mexican ophthalmic practitioners. The press release also
                        stated that the initial order was for $70 million of the
                        

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-35



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      Company's  equipment to be filled over a two-year period
     Continued          followed by the second order of $35 million in equipment
                        to be  completed  in the third year.  The press  release
                        further  stated that delivery would be made in traunches
                        of  25  complete  sets  of  the   Company's   equipment,
                        beginning  in 30 days  from  the  date  of the  purchase
                        order.

                        On September 13, 2002,  the board of directors  issued a
                        press  release  updating the status of its product sales
                        to the Mexican ophthalmic  practitioners.  In that press
                        release  the board  stated  that the Company had been in
                        discussions  for the prior  nine  months  with  Westland
                        Financial  Corporation,  aimed at supplying  its medical
                        device products to the Mexican market.  In the past, the
                        Company has had a business  relationship  with  Westland
                        Financial.  Upon  investigation,  the board of directors
                        had determined that the purchase order referenced in the
                        July 11, 2002 press  release was not of such a nature as
                        to be  enforceable  for the  purpose of sales or revenue
                        recognition.  In addition,  the Company had not sent any
                        shipment  of  medical  products  to  Mexican  ophthalmic
                        practitioners  nor received  payment for those  products
                        pursuant to those  discussions.  The  September 13, 2002
                        press   release  also  stated  that   discussions   were
                        continuing with Westland Financial Corporation regarding
                        sales and marketing activities for the Company's medical
                        device products in Mexico, but the Company could not, at
                        the time,  predict or  provide  any  assurance  that any
                        transactions would result.

                        On June 2,  2003,  a  complaint  was filed in the United
                        States  District  Court,  captioned  Michael  Marrone v.
                        Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc., Thomas Motter, Mark
                        Miehle and John  Hemmer,  Case No. 2:03  CV00513 PGC. On
                        July 11, 2003, a complaint  was filed in the same United
                        States  District   Court,   captioned  Lidia  Milian  v.
                        Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc., Thomas Motter, Mark
                        Miehle and John Hemmer,  Case No. 2:03 CV00617PGC.  Both
                        complaints  seek class  action  status.  These cases are
                        substantially  similar  in  nature  to the  Meyer  case,
                        including the  contention  that as a result of allegedly
                        false statements regarding the Blood Flow AnalyzerTM and
                        the purchase order from Westland  Financial  Corporation
                        and Valdespino Associates Enterprises,  the price of the
                        Company's common stock was artificially inflated and the
                        persons who purchased the Company's common shares during
                        the class  period  suffered  substantial  damages.  In a
                        press  release dated July 11, 2003,  captioned  "Milberg


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-36



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      Weiss  announces  the  filing  of a  class  action  suit
     Continued          against Paradigm Medical  Industries,  Inc. on behalf of
                        investors,"  the law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynen
                        &  Levach  LLP,  which  represents   purchasers  of  the
                        Company's  securities  in the class action suit filed on
                        July  11,   2003,   stated  that  the  Company   alleged
                        misrepresentations  caused the market price of the stock
                        to be artificially  inflated during the class period. As
                        a result, it is alleged that investors suffered millions
                        of  dollars  in  damages  from  the  Company's   alleged
                        misstatements.

                        The cases  request  judgment  for  unspecified  damages,
                        together with interest and attorney's  fees. These cases
                        have now been  consolidated  with the Meyer  case into a
                        single  action,   captioned  In  re:  Paradigm   Medical
                        Industries Securities Litigation,  Case No. 03-CV-448TC.
                        The law firm of Milberg  Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP is
                        representing  purchasers of the Company's  securities in
                        the  consolidated  class  action.  On June 28,  2004,  a
                        consolidated amended class action complaint was filed on
                        behalf of purchasers of the  Company's  securities.  The
                        consolidated  complaint  is similar  to the three  class
                        action  complaints  and alleges  that the  Company  made
                        false  representations  regarding  the CPT  code for the
                        Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM),  but it  includes  additional
                        allegations  that the  Company  failed to  disclose in a
                        timely   manner   that   doctors   were   being   denied
                        reimbursement  for  procedures  performed with the Blood
                        Flow  Analyzer(TM).   The  consolidated  complaint  also
                        alleges that the Company made false statements regarding
                        the purchase order from Westland  Financial  Corporation
                        and  Valdespino  Associates  Enterprises.   The  Company
                        believes the consolidated complaint is without merit and
                        intends to  vigorously  defend and protect its interests
                        in the case.

                        The  Company  was  issued  a  Directors   and   Officers
                        Liability  and  Company  Reimbursement  Policy by United
                        States Fire  Insurance  Company for the period from July
                        10,  2002 to July 10,  2003 that  contains a  $5,000,000
                        limit  of  liability,  which  is  excess  of a  $250,000
                        retention.  The  officers  and  directors  named  in the
                        consolidated  cases have  requested  coverage  under the
                        policy. U.S. Fire is currently  investigating whether it
                        may have a right to deny  coverage for the  consolidated
                        cases based upon policy terms, conditions and exclusions
                        or to rescind the policy  based upon  misrepresentations
                        contained in its application for insurance.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-37



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      The  Company  has  paid  $30,000  to  U.S.  Fire  toward
     Continued          satisfaction   of  the   $250,000   retention   that  is
                        applicable to the  consolidated  cases.  The Company has
                        advised  U.S.  Fire  that it  cannot  pay  the  $250,000
                        retention due to its current financial circumstances. As
                        a consequence,  on January 8, 2004, the Company  entered
                        into a non-waiver agreement with U.S. Fire in which U.S.
                        Fire agreed to fund and advance the Company's  retention
                        obligation  in  consideration  for which the Company has
                        agreed to reimburse U.S. Fire the sum of $5,000 a month,
                        for a  period  of six  months,  with  the  first of such
                        payments   due  on  February   15,   2004.   Thereafter,
                        commencing on August 15, 2004,  the Company is currently
                        required to reimburse  U.S.  Fire the sum of $10,000 per
                        month  until  the  entire  amount of  $250,000  has been
                        reimbursed to U.S.  Fire.  The Company has made payments
                        to U.S. Fire in the aggregate amount of $30,000 of which
                        its last  payment  of $10,000  was made on  October  11,
                        2004.   These  payments  were  for  the  $5,000  monthly
                        payments due during the six month  period from  February
                        15 to July  15,  2004,  leaving  a  remaining  retention
                        obligation to U.S. Fire of $220,000.

                        In the event U.S.  Fire  determines  that the Company or
                        the  former   officers  and   directors   named  in  the
                        consolidated  cases are not  entitled to coverage  under
                        the  policy,  or  that it is  entitled  to  rescind  the
                        policy,  or should the  Company be  declared  in default
                        under the non-waiver agreement on account of its failure
                        to make  the  monthly  payments  owed to U.S.  Fire  for
                        funding the  Company's  retention  obligation,  then the
                        Company  agrees to pay U.S.  Fire,  on demand,  the full
                        amount of all costs  advanced by U.S.  Fire,  except for
                        those  amounts that the Company may have  reimbursed  to
                        U.S. Fire pursuant to the monthly payments due under the
                        non-waiver  agreement.  Moreover,  if U.S.  Fire  denies
                        coverage  for the  consolidated  cases under the policy,
                        the  Company  would owe its  litigation  counsel  in the
                        class  action  lawsuits,  for any legal fees not paid by
                        U.S. Fire.  However,  U.S. Fire has currently  agreed to
                        pay  the  legal  fees   relating  to  the  class  action
                        lawsuits.

                        The  Company  will be in  default  under the  non-waiver
                        agreement  if it fails to make any  payment  due to U.S.
                        Fire  thereunder  when such payment is due, or institute
                        proceedings  to be adjudicated as bankrupt or insolvent.
                        U.S.  Fire's  obligation to advance  defense costs under
                        the  agreement  will  terminate  in the  event  that the
                        $5,000,000  policy limit of liability is  exhausted.  If



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-38



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      U.S.  Fire denies  coverage for the  consolidated  cases
     Continued          under the policy and the  Company is not  successful  in
                        defending  and  protecting  its  interests in the cases,
                        resulting   in  a  judgment   against  the  Company  for
                        substantial  damages,  the Company  would not be able to
                        pay such liability and, as a result,  would be forced to
                        seek bankruptcy protection.

                        On July 10,  2003,  an action  was  filed in the  United
                        States District  Court,  District of Utah, by Innovative
                        Optics,  Inc.  and  Barton  Dietrich  Investments,  L.P.
                        Defendants  include us, Thomas  Motter,  Mark Miehle and
                        John  Hemmer,   former  officers  of  the  company.  The
                        complaint claims that Innovative and Barton entered into
                        an asset purchase  agreement with the Company on January
                        31,  2002,  in which the Company  agreed to purchase all
                        the  assets  of  Innovative  in  consideration  for  the
                        issuance of  1,310,000  shares of the  Company's  common
                        stock to  Innovative.  The complaint  claims the Company
                        breached the asset  purchase  agreement.  The  complaint
                        also claims that the  Company  allegedly  made false and
                        misleading  statements  pertaining  to  the  Blood  Flow
                        Analyzer(TM)   and  concerning  a  purchase  order  from
                        Valdespino Associates Enterprises and Westland Financial
                        Corporation. The purpose of these statements,  according
                        to the complaint,  was to induce  Innovative to sell its
                        assets and purchase the shares of the  Company's  common
                        stock   at    artificially    inflated    prices   while
                        simultaneously  deceiving  Innovative  and  Barton  into
                        believing that the Company's shares were worth more than
                        they  actually  were.  The  complaint  contends that had
                        Innovative  and  Barton  known the truth  they would not
                        have sold Innovative to us, would not have purchased the
                        Company's  stock for the assets of Innovative,  or would
                        not have purchased the stock at the inflated prices that
                        were paid.  The  complaint  further  contends  that as a
                        result of the allegedly false statements, Innovative and
                        Barton suffered  substantial  damages in an amount to be
                        proven at trial.

                        The complaint  also claims that 491,250 of the shares to
                        be  issued   to   Innovative   in  the  asset   purchase
                        transaction  were not  issued on a timely  basis and the
                        Company also did not file a registration  statement with
                        the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  within  five
                        months  of  the  closing  date  of  the  asset  purchase
                        transaction. As a result, the complaint alleges that the
                        value of the shares of the Company's common stock issued
                        to  Innovative   in  the   transaction   declined,   and


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-39



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      Innovative and Barton  suffered  damages in an amount to
     Continued          be proven at trial.  The Company  filed an answer to the
                        complaint   and   also   filed   counterclaims   against
                        Innovative  and  Barton  for  breach  of  contract.  The
                        Company  believes  the  complaint  is without  merit and
                        intends to  vigorously  defend and protect its interests
                        in the  action.  If the  Company  is not  successful  in
                        defending and  protecting  its interests in this action,
                        resulting   in  a  judgment   against  the  Company  for
                        substantial  damages,  and U.S. Fire denies  coverage in
                        the   litigation   under  the   Directors  and  Officers
                        Liability and Company  Reimbursement Policy, the Company
                        would  not be  able  to pay  such  liability  and,  as a
                        result, would be forced to seek bankruptcy protection.

                        On October  14,  2003,  an action was filed in the Third
                        Judicial  District  Court,  Salt Lake  County,  State of
                        Utah, captioned Albert Kinzinger,  Jr., individually and
                        on behalf of all others similarly  situated vs. Paradigm
                        Medical  Industries,  Inc., Thomas Motter,  Mark Miehle,
                        Randall A. Mackey, and John Hemmer,  Case No. 030922608.
                        The complaint  also indicates that it is a "Class Action
                        Complaint  for  Violations of Utah  Securities  Laws and
                        Plaintiffs  Demand a Trial by  Jury."  The  Company  has
                        retained  legal counsel to review the  complaint,  which
                        appears to be focused  on  alleged  false or  misleading
                        statements  pertaining  to the Blood Flow  Analyzer(TM).
                        More  specifically,   the  complaint  alleges  that  the
                        Company   falsely  stated  in  Securities  and  Exchange
                        Commission  filings  and  press  releases  that  it  had
                        received authorization to use an insurance reimbursement
                        CPT  code  from the CPT Code  Research  and  Development
                        Division  of  the  American   Medical   Association   in
                        connection with the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM), adding that
                        the CPT code provides for a reimbursement  to doctors of
                        $57.00 per patient for the Blood Flow Analyzer(TM).

                        The  purpose  of  these  statements,  according  to  the
                        complaint, was to induce investors to purchase shares of
                        the  Company's  Series E  preferred  stock in a  private
                        placement  transaction at artificially  inflated prices.
                        The  complaint  contends  that  as  a  result  of  these
                        statements,  the investors that purchased  shares of its
                        Series  E  preferred  stock  in  the  private   offering
                        suffered  substantial damages to be proven at trial. The
                        complaint  also  alleges  that the Company sold Series E
                        preferred  shares without  registering  the sale of such
                        shares or obtaining an exemption from registration.  The
                        complaint requests rescission,  compensatory damages and
                        treble damages,  including interest and attorneys' fees.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-40



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      The  Company  filed  an  answer  to the  complaint.  The
     Continued          Company  believes  the  complaint  is without  merit and
                        intends  to  vigorously  defend  its  interests  in  the
                        action.  If the Company is not  successful  in defending
                        and protecting its interests in the action, resulting in
                        a judgment against it for substantial  damages, and U.S.
                        Fire  denies  coverage  in  the  litigation   under  the
                        Directors    and   Officers    Liability   and   Company
                        Reimbursement  Policy,  the Company would not be able to
                        pay such liability and, as a result,  would be forced to
                        seek bankruptcy protection.

                        On January 26,  2005,  the  Company  completed a written
                        settlement   agreement   to  settle  the  lawsuit   that
                        Innovative Optics, Inc. and Barton Dietrich Investments,
                        L.P.   brought   against  the  Company  and  its  former
                        executive  officers.  Under the terms of the settlement,
                        U.S.  Fire agreed to pay  Innovative  Optics,  Inc.  and
                        Barton Dietrich Investments, L.P. the sum of $367,500 in
                        cash.  Payment of this  amount is  contingent,  however,
                        upon the courts in the federal  and state  class  action
                        lawsuits  granting  final  approval  of the  settlements
                        reached in those  respective  actions,  and such  orders
                        becoming final and non-appealable.

                        On  February  23,  2005,  the Company  executed  written
                        settlement  agreements  to settle the  federal and state
                        court class action  lawsuits that were filed against the
                        Company  and its former  executive  officers.  Under the
                        terms of  settlement  of the federal  court class action
                        lawsuit,  U.S.  Fire agreed to pay the sum of $1,507,500
                        in  cash  to  the  class  members  that   purchased  the
                        Company's securities during the period between April 17,
                        2002 and November 4, 2002. Under the terms of settlement
                        of the state  court  class  action  lawsuit,  U.S.  Fire
                        agreed to pay the sum of  $625,000  in cash to the class
                        members that  purchased  shares of Series E  Convertible
                        preferred stock on or about July 11, 2001.

                        As a condition to the  settlement  agreements  to settle
                        the federal and state court class action  lawsuits,  the
                        courts  in  such  lawsuits  must  have  entered   orders
                        granting  final approval of the  settlements  reached in
                        those  respective  actions,  and such  orders  must have
                        become final and  non-appealable.  On March 3, 2005, the
                        federal  court  entered  an order  granting  preliminary
                        approval of the  settlement  in the federal  court class
                        action  lawsuit and  providing  for notice to be sent to
                        potential  class  members.  On April 18, 2005, a hearing
                        was held in the  state  court  and the  court  entered a


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-41



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      minute  entry  granting  preliminary  approval  of   the
     Continued          settlement in the state court class action lawsuit.

                        As a further  condition to the settlement  agreements to
                        settle  the  federal   and  state  court  class   action
                        lawsuits,  both settlement  agreements provide that U.S.
                        Fire must not have exercised its option to terminate the
                        settlement  agreements.  U.S.  Fire  has the  option  to
                        terminate the  settlement  agreements if the  cumulative
                        dollar  value  of the  claims  held  by  individuals  or
                        entities  that "opt out" of the  federal and state class
                        action  lawsuits  exceeds  $250,000.  If such "opt outs"
                        exceed $250,000,  however, plaintiffs in the federal and
                        state court class action lawsuits will have five days to
                        cure by  reducing  the amount of "opt outs" to less than
                        $250,000.

                        If U.S.  Fire  exercises  its  option to  terminate  the
                        settlement   agreements,   then  all   parties   to  the
                        settlement   agreements   will  be   restored  to  their
                        respective  positions  in the various  actions as of the
                        date of the  settlement  agreements.  In  addition,  the
                        terms and provisions of the settlement  agreements  will
                        have no further force and effect on the various  parties
                        and will be deemed null and void in their entirety.

                        Under the terms of the settlement  agreements  regarding
                        the federal and state court class  action  lawsuits  and
                        the lawsuit  that  Innovative  Optics,  Inc.  and Barton
                        Dietrich Investors, L.P. brought against the Company and
                        its former executive  officers,  U.S. Fire has agreed to
                        pay a total of  $2,500,000 in cash to the classes in the
                        class action lawsuits and to Innovative Optics, Inc. and
                        Barton Dietrich Investments, L.P. in settlement of these
                        lawsuits.  Under  the  terms  of  settlement,   Paradigm
                        Medical  is  to  pay  U.S.  Fire  the  sum  of  $220,000
                        representing   the  remaining  amount  owing  under  the
                        $250,000  retention  obligation in the insurance policy,
                        and to execute a policy release in favor of U.S. Fire as
                        to coverage under the insurance policy.

                        An  action  was  filed on June 20,  2003,  in the  Third
                        Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, State of Utah
                        (Civil No. 030914195) by CitiCorp Vendor Finance,  Inc.,
                        formerly  known as Copelco  Capital,  Inc. The complaint
                        claims that $50,000 plus interest is due for the leasing
                        of  three  copy  machines  that  were  delivered  to the
                        Company's Salt Lake City facilities on or about April of



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-42



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      2000. The action also seeks an award of attorney's  fees
     Continued          and  costs  incurred  in  the  collection.  The  Company
                        disputes the amounts allegedly owed,  asserting that two
                        of the  machines  were  returned to the leasing  company
                        because  they  did  not  work  properly.   A  responsive
                        pleading  has been  filed.  The  Company  was engaged in
                        settlement  discussions  with CitiCorp until counsel for
                        CitiCorp   withdrew  from  the  case.  New  counsel  for
                        CitiCorp has been appointed and it is  anticipated  that
                        settlement discussions will resume.

                        An action was filed in June,  2003 in the Third Judicial
                        District Court,  Salt Lake County,  State of Utah (Civil
                        No.  030914719)  by Franklin  Funding,  Inc. in which it
                        alleges  that  the  Company  had  entered  into a  lease
                        agreement  for the lease of certain  equipment for which
                        payment  is due.  It is  claimed  that  there is due and
                        owing  approximately  $89,988 after  accruing late fees,
                        interest,   repossession  costs,  collection  costs  and
                        attorneys'  fees. On August 28, 2003, the Company agreed
                        to a  settlement  of the case with  Franklin  Funding by
                        agreeing  to make  24  monthly  payments  of  $2,000  to
                        Franklin Funding,  with the first monthly payment due on
                        August 29, 2003.  As of March 31, 2005,  the Company has
                        made 19  monthly  payments  of $2,000  each to  Franklin
                        Funding.

                        The Company received demand letters dated July 18, 2003,
                        September  26, 2003 and  November  10, 2003 from counsel
                        for  Douglas A.  MacLeod,  M.D.,  a  shareholder  of the
                        company.  In the  July  18,  2003  letter,  Dr.  MacLeod
                        demands  that he and certain  entities  with which he is
                        involved or  controls,  namely the  Douglas A.  MacLeod,
                        M.D. Profit Sharing Trust,  St. Marks' Eye Institute and
                        Milan  Holdings,  Ltd.,  be issued a total of  2,296,667
                        shares of the  Company's  common  stock and  warrants to
                        purchase  1,192,500  shares  of its  common  stock at an
                        exercise  price of $.25 per share.  Dr.  MacLeod  claims
                        that these  common  shares and warrants are owing to him
                        and the  related  entities  under  the terms of a mutual
                        release dated January 16, 2003, which he and the related
                        entities  entered into with us. Dr. MacLeod  renewed his
                        request for these additional  common shares and warrants
                        in the  September  26, 2003 and November 10, 2003 demand
                        letters.  The Company believes that Dr. MacLeod's claims
                        and assertions are without merit and that neither he nor
                        the related  entities  are  entitled  to any  additional
                        shares of its common  stock or any  additional  warrants
                        under  the  terms of the  mutual  release.  The  Company



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-43



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      intends to  vigorously  defend  against any legal action
     Continued          that Dr. MacLeod may bring.

                        On August 3, 2003,  a  complaint  was filed  against the
                        Company by Corinne  Powell,  a former  employee,  in the
                        Third Judicial District Court,  Salt Lake County,  State
                        of Utah (Civil No. 030918364). Defendants consist of the
                        Company and Randall A.  Mackey,  Dr. David M. Silver and
                        Keith D. Ignotz, directors of the Company. The complaint
                        alleges that at the time the Company laid off Ms. Powell
                        on March 25,  2003,  she was owed  $2,000  for  business
                        expenses, $11,000 for accrued vacation days, $13,000 for
                        unpaid  commissions,  the fair  market  value of  50,000
                        stock  options  exercisable  at $5.00 per share that she
                        claims she was  prevented  from  exercising,  attorney's
                        fees and a continuing  wage  penalty  under Utah law. On
                        March 29, 2005, the Company agreed to a settlement  with
                        Ms. Powell of her claims for unpaid  business  expenses,
                        accrued   vacation  days,  and  unpaid   commissions  by
                        agreeing  to pay her  $13,000.  The  Company has not yet
                        made   payment  to  Ms.   Powell  for  the  agreed  upon
                        settlement amount.

                        On September  10, 2003,  an action was filed against the
                        Company by Larry  Hicks in the Third  Judicial  District
                        Court,  Salt  Lake  County,  State of Utah,  (Civil  No.
                        030922220),   for   payments   due  under  a  consulting
                        agreement  with us. The  complaint  claims that  monthly
                        payments  of $3,083  are due for the  months of  October
                        2002 to October 2003 under a consulting  agreement  and,
                        if the agreement is terminated,  for the sum of $110,000
                        minus  whatever  the Company has paid Mr. Hicks prior to
                        such termination, plus costs, attorney's fees and a wage
                        penalty  pursuant to Utah law.  The Company has filed an
                        answer in which it denies any  liability  to Mr.  Hicks.
                        Formal  discovery  in  the  matter  has  commenced.  The
                        Company  disputes the amount  allegedly owed and intends
                        to vigorously defend against such action.

                        On November 7, 2003, a complaint  was filed  against the
                        Company by Todd Smith, a former  employee,  in the Third
                        Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, State of Utah
                        (Civil  No.  030924951  CN).  Defendants  consist of the
                        Company and Randall  Mackey,  a director of the Company.
                        The  complaint  alleges  that while an  employee  of the
                        Company, Mr. Smith was granted stock options to purchase
                        16,800 shares of common stock  exercisable  at $5.00 per
                        share.  Mr. Smith  claims  unpaid wages in the amount of


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-44



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      the fair market value of the stock  options he claims he
     Continued          was prevented from  exercising,  attorney's  fees, and a
                        continuing  wage  penalty  under Utah law.  The  Company
                        believes  the claims are  without  merit and  intends to
                        vigorously defend against such action.

                        On May 25,  2004,  an action  was  brought  against  the
                        Company by Jeffrey F. Poore,  former President and Chief
                        Executive Officer of the Company,  in the Third Judicial
                        District Court of Salt Lake County, State of Utah (Civil
                        No.  040910875).  The complaint alleges that the Company
                        unlawfully  terminated the written employment  agreement
                        between  Mr.  Poore and the  Company.  As a result,  Mr.
                        Poore demands judgment against the Company for $350,000,
                        representing  his annual  salary  for the two  remaining
                        years under the employment agreement, for money judgment
                        based on the value of his benefits for the two remaining
                        years under the employment  agreement,  including profit
                        sharing  plans,  401(k)  and  cafeteria  plans,  health,
                        hospitalization,  dental, disability and other insurance
                        plans  canceled by the Company,  and for money  judgment
                        equal to the value of the stock  options  granted to him
                        under the employment agreement. The Company disputes the
                        amounts  allegedly  owed in the  complaint  and believes
                        that  there  was a  sufficient  basis to  terminate  Mr.
                        Poore's  employment  for  cause  under  the terms of the
                        employment agreement.  Accordingly,  the Company intends
                        to vigorously defend against the action.

                        On August 9, 2004, a third party  complaint  was brought
                        against  the  Company  by  Wakefield  Eye Center and Dr.
                        Kenneth C.  Westfield  (collectively  "Westfield").  The
                        original action was brought by American Express Business
                        Finance Corporation against Westfield on May 27, 2004 in
                        the District Court, Clark County, State of Nevada (Civil
                        No. A486307,  Dept. No. XXI) concerning the financing of
                        the  purchase  of a Blood  Flow  Analyzer(TM)  involving
                        Westfield Eye Center.  The transaction took place during
                        the latter half of 2001.  Westfield  takes the  position
                        that if there is  liability  of  Westfield  to  American
                        Express this liability is ultimately  ours and the other
                        third-party defendants.  The amount being sought against
                        Westfield  by American  Express in the  original  action
                        includes the sum of $30,000,  together with interest and
                        attorney's fees.  Westfield's alleged claims against the
                        Company  include fraud,  breach of contract,  promissory
                        estoppel,  declaratory  relief,  negligence,   negligent
                        supervision, damages for injuries resulting from actions


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-45



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Litigation - Continued
     Contingencies      of  employee/contractor,  wilful and wanton  misconduct,
     Continued          conspiracy,  and  breach  of  fiduciary  duty as well as
                        costs and attorney's fees. Westfield also seeks punitive
                        damages.  The  Company  has filed an answer to the third
                        party  complaint in which the Company denies  liability.
                        Formal   discovery  in  the  matter   involving  us  has
                        commenced.  The case has been  referred to  arbitration.
                        The Company intends to vigorously defend the action.

                        On March 31,  2005,  an action  was  filed  against  the
                        Company  by Joseph W.  Spadafora  in the  United  States
                        District Court,  District of Utah (Civil No. 2:05CV00278
                        TS).  The  complaint  alleges that Dr.  Spadafora  was a
                        clinical investigator in the study for the FDA involving
                        the Company's Photon(TM) laser system where he performed
                        numerous  surgeries using the Photon(TM).  Dr. Spadafora
                        contends  that in meetings  with  Company  personnel  he
                        suggested  ways in which the handpiece on the Photon(TM)
                        could be improved.  Dr. Spadafora  further contends that
                        on  August  5,  1999,   the   Company   filed  a  patent
                        application  for an improved  handpiece  with the United
                        States Patent and Trademark  Office but he was not named
                        as one of the inventors or a  co-inventor  on the patent
                        application.

                        On September  24, 2004,  the Company was issued a patent
                        entitled,  "Laser Surgival  Handpiece with Photon Trap."
                        Because the Company did not list Dr. Spadafora as one of
                        the  inventors  or a  co-inventor  on  the  patent,  Dr.
                        Spadafora is requesting  in his  complaint  that a court
                        order be entered  declaring  that he is the  inventor or
                        co-inventor of the patent and, as a result,  is entitled
                        to all or part of the  royalties  and  profits  that the
                        Company earned or will earn from the sale of any product
                        incorporating  or using  the  improved  handpiece,  plus
                        interest and attorney's  fees. The Company  disputes the
                        claims made by Dr.  Spadafora  and intends to vigorously
                        defend against such action.

                        The Company is not a party to any other  material  legal
                        proceedings  outside the ordinary course of its business
                        or to any other legal  proceedings,  which, if adversely
                        determined,  would have a material adverse effect on its
                        financial condition or results of operations.

                        Royalty Agreements
                        The Company had a royalty  agreement  with the president
                        of OBF.  The  agreement  provided for the payment of 10%
                        royalty  of the net  sales  related  to the  Blood  Flow
                        Analyzer.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-46



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


16.  Commitments and    Royalty Agreements - Continued
     Contingencies      During 2003, a settlement was reached with the president
     Continued          of OBF whereby the royalty  payments were  forfeited and
                        no  longer  are  an  obligation  of  the  Company.   The
                        over-accrued amount of $147,000 was reversed during 2003
                        to reflect the settlement agreement.

                        The  Company  has an amended  exclusive  patent  license
                        agreement  with a company  which owns the patent for the
                        laser-probe  used on the Photon  machine.  The agreement
                        provides  for the  payment  of a 1% royalty on all sales
                        proceeds related  directly or indirectly,  to the Photon
                        machine.  The  agreement  expires when the United States
                        patent rights expire in September 2004. Through December
                        31, 2003, no significant  royalties have been paid under
                        this agreement.

                        The Company has a royalty agreement with another company
                        that developed a promotional CD for the Company. Through
                        the  promotion of the CD, the Company  hopes to increase
                        sales in the  Autoperimiter and assist doctors currently
                        using the unit with the interpretation of visual fields.
                        The royalty base is 50% each until the  Company's  share
                        equals the  production  costs related to  development of
                        the disk. Thereafter, the developer will receive 70% and
                        the  Company  will  receive  30%  of the  royalty  base.
                        Royalties   paid  during  the  year   relating  to  this
                        agreement were not significant.

17.  Fair Value         The  Company's  financial  instruments  consist of cash,
     of Financial       receivables,  payables,  and notes payable. The carrying
     Instruments        amount of cash,  receivables  and payables  approximates
                        fair  value  because of the  short-term  nature of these
                        items.   The  carrying   amount  of  the  notes  payable
                        approximates  fair  value as the  individual  borrowings
                        bear interest at market interest rates.

18.  Recent             In December 2003, the FASB issued  Interpretation No. 46
     Accounting         ("FIN 46R") (revised  December 2003),  Consolidation  of
     Pronounce-         Variable   Interest   Entities,   an  Interpretation  of
     ments              Accounting  Research  Bulletin No. 51 ("ARB 51"),  which
                        addresses  how a  business  enterprise  should  evaluate
                        whether  it  has a  controlling  interest  in an  entity
                        though  means other than voting  rights and  accordingly
                        should  consolidate  the entity.  FIN 46R replaces  FASB
                        Interpretation  No.  46 (FIN 46),  which  was  issued in
                        January 2003.  Before  concluding that it is appropriate
                        to apply ARB 51 voting interest  consolidation  model to
                        an entity,  an enterprise  must first determine that the
                        entity is not a variable  interest  entity (VIE).  As of
                        the effective date of FIN 46R, an enterprise must


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-47



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


18.  Recent             evaluate  its  involvement  with all  entities  or legal
     Accounting         structures created before February 1, 2003, to determine
     Pronounce-         whether  consolidation  requirements of FIN 46R apply to
     ments              those entities.  There is no  grandfathering of existing
                        entities.  Public  companies must apply either FIN 46 or
                        FIN 46R immediately to entities  Continued created after
                        January  31, 2003 and no later than the end of the first
                        reporting  period that ends after December 15, 2004. The
                        adoption  of  FIN  46 had  no  effect  on the  Company's
                        consolidated  financial position,  results of operations
                        or cash flows.

                        In December  2004,  FASB issued SFAS 153  "Exchanges  of
                        Nonmonetary Assets--an amendment of APB Opinion No. 29".
                        The  guidance  in APB  Opinion  No. 29,  Accounting  for
                        Nonmonetary Transactions, is based on the principle that
                        exchanges of nonmonetary assets should be measured based
                        on the fair value of the assets exchanged.  The guidance
                        in that Opinion, however, included certain exceptions to
                        that  principle.  This  Statement  amends  Opinion 29 to
                        eliminate  the exception  for  nonmonetary  exchanges of
                        similar productive assets and replaces it with a general
                        exception  for exchanges of  nonmonetary  assets that do
                        not have commercial  substance.  A nonmonetary  exchange
                        has commercial substance if the future cash flows of the
                        entity are expected to change  significantly as a result
                        of the exchange.  The Company does not believe  adoption
                        of SFAS  153  will  have  any  impact  on the  Company's
                        consolidated financial statements.

                        In November  2004,  the FASB issued SFAS 151  "Inventory
                        Costs--an  amendment  of ARB  No.  43".  This  Statement
                        amends the guidance in ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, "Inventory
                        Pricing," to clarify the accounting for abnormal amounts
                        of idle facility expense,  freight,  handling costs, and
                        wasted  material  (spoilage).  Paragraph  5 of  ARB  43,
                        Chapter  4,  previously  stated  that ". . . under  some
                        circumstances,  items  such  as idle  facility  expense,
                        excessive  spoilage,  double  freight,  and  re-handling
                        costs may be so  abnormal  as to  require  treatment  as
                        current period charges.  . . ." This Statement  requires
                        that those items be recognized as current-period charges
                        regardless  of whether  they meet the  criterion  of "so
                        abnormal."  In addition,  this  Statement  requires that
                        allocation of fixed production overheads to the costs of
                        conversion  be  based  on  the  normal  capacity  of the
                        production facilities.  The provisions of this Statement
                        shall be effective for inventory  costs incurred  during
                        fiscal years  beginning after June 15, 2005. The Company
                        does not  believe  adoption  of SFAS  151 will  have any
                        impact   on   the   Company's   consolidated   financial
                        statements.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-48



                                               PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
                                                   Notes to Financial Statements
                                                                       Continued
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



18.  Recent             In December 2004, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 123
     Accounting         (revised 2004), "Shared-Based Payment." Statement 123(R)
     Pronounce-         addresses  the   accounting  for   share-based   payment
     ments              transactions  in which an enterprise  receives  employee
     Continued          services in exchange for (a) equity  instruments  of the
                        enterprise or (b) liabilities that are based on the fair
                        value of the enterprise's equity instruments or that may
                        be settled by the  issuance of such equity  instruments.
                        Statement  123(R)  requires an entity to  recognize  the
                        grant-date   fair-value   of  stock  options  and  other
                        equity-based  compensation  issued to  employees  in the
                        income  statement.   The  revised  Statement   generally
                        requires that an entity  account for those  transactions
                        using the  fair-value-based  method,  and eliminates the
                        intrinsic  value method of accounting in APB Opinion No.
                        25,  "Accounting  for Stock Issued to Employees",  which
                        was permitted under Statement 123, as originally issued.
                        The  revised  Statement  requires  entities  to disclose
                        information about the nature of the share-based  payment
                        transactions  and the effects of those  transactions  on
                        the financial statements.  Statement 123(R) is effective
                        for public  companies that do not file as small business
                        issuers  as of the  beginning  of the first  interim  or
                        annual reporting period that begins after June 15, 2005.
                        For  public   companies  that  file  as  small  business
                        issuers,   Statement  123(R)  is  effective  as  of  the
                        beginning  of the  first  interim  or  annual  reporting
                        period that begins after December 15, 2005 (i.e.,  first
                        quarter 2006 for the Company). All public companies must
                        use  either the  modified  prospective  or the  modified
                        retrospective  transition method. Early adoption of this
                        Statement  for  interim  or  annual  periods  for  which
                        financial  statements  or interim  reports have not been
                        issued is  encouraged.  The  Company  believes  that the
                        adoption  of  this  pronouncement  may  have a  material
                        impact on the Company's financial statements.







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            F-49

                                       


No dealer,  salesperson  or other person
is authorized to give any information or
to represent  anything not  contained in
this  prospectus.  This prospectus is an       9,471,437 Shares of Common Stock 
offer to sell  only the  shares  offered                                        
hereby, but only under circumstances and                                        
in  jurisdictions  where it is lawful to                                        
do so. The information contained in this       PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
prospectus  is  current  only  as of its                                        
date.                                                                           
                                                                                
                                                        -----------------       
                                                                                
                                                           PROSPECTUS           
        ---------------------                                                   
         TABLE OF CONTENTS                              -----------------       
                                   Page                                         
Prospectus Summary...................                                           
Risk Factors  .......................                                           
Use of Proceeds......................                     June 24, 2005         
Dividend Policy......................                                           
Capitalization.......................           
Market for Common Equity and
   Related Shareholder Matters.......
Selected Financial Data..............
Management's Discussion and Analysis
   or Plan of Operation..............
Business ............................
Management ..........................
Security Ownership of Certain
   Beneficial Owners and Management .
Certain Transactions.................
Selling Securityholders..............
Description of Securities............
Plan of Distribution.................
Experts..............................
Legal Matters........................
Where You Can Find More Information..




                                     PART II

                     INFORMATION NOT REQUIRED IN PROSPECTUS

Item 24. Indemnification of Directors and Officers

         Section  145 of the  General  Corporation  Law of the State of Delaware
(the "Delaware Law") empowers a Delaware corporation to indemnify any person who
is, or is threatened to be made, a party to any threatened, pending or completed
legal action, suit or proceedings,  whether civil,  criminal,  administrative or
investigative  (other  than action by or in the right of such  corporation),  by
reason  of the  fact  that  such  person  was an  officer  or  director  of such
corporation,  or is or was  serving  at the  request  of such  corporation  as a
director,  officer, employee or agent of another corporation or enterprise.  The
indemnity may include expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and
amounts paid in settlement  actually and  reasonably  incurred by such person in
connection with such action,  suit or proceeding,  provided that such officer or
director acted in good faith and in a manner he or she reasonably believed to be
in or not  opposed  to the  corporation's  best  interests,  and,  for  criminal
proceedings,  had no reasonable cause to believe his or her conduct was illegal.
A Delaware  corporation may indemnify  officers and directors in an action by or
in the  right of the  corporation  under  the same  conditions,  except  that no
indemnification  is  permitted  without  judicial  approval  if the  officer  or
director is adjudged to be liable to the  corporation in the  performance of his
or her duty.  Where an  officer  or  director  is  successful  on the  merits or
otherwise in the defense of any action referred to above,  the corporation  must
indemnify  him or her  against  the  expenses  which such  officer  or  director
actually and reasonably incurred.

         In accordance with the Delaware Law, the  Certificate of  Incorporation
of the  Company  contains a provision  to limit the  personal  liability  of the
directors of the Company for violations of their  fiduciary duty. This provision
eliminates each director's  liability to the Registrant or its  stockholders for
monetary  damages except (i) for any breach of the director's duty of loyalty to
the Company or its stockholders, (ii) for acts or omissions not in good faith or
which involve intentional  misconduct or a knowing violation of law, (iii) under
Section 174 of the  Delaware  Law  providing  for  liability  of  directors  for
unlawful  payment of dividends or unlawful stock  purchases or  redemptions,  or
(iv) for any  transaction  from which a director  derived an  improper  personal
benefit.  The effect of this provision is to eliminate the personal liability of
directors for monetary damages for actions involving a breach of their fiduciary
duty of care, including any such actions involving gross negligence.

         The Company may not indemnify an  individual  unless  authorized  and a
determination  is  made  in  the  specific  case  that  indemnification  of  the
individual is permissible in the circumstances because his or her conduct was in
good faith, he or she reasonably believed that his or her conduct was in, or not
opposed  to, the  Company's  best  interests  and,  in the case of any  criminal
proceeding,  he or she had no reasonable cause to believe his or her conduct was
unlawful.  The  Company may not advance  expenses to an  individual  to whom the
Company may ultimately be responsible for  indemnification  unless authorized in
the specific case after the individual furnishes the following to the Company: a
written  affirmation of his or her good faith belief that his or her conduct was
in good faith,  that he or she  reasonably  believed that his or her conduct was
in, or not  opposed to, the  Company's  best  interests  and, in the case of any
criminal  proceeding,  he or she had no  reasonable  cause to believe his or her
conduct was unlawful and (2) the  individual  furnishes to the Company a written
undertaking,  executed  personally or on his or her behalf, to repay the advance
if it is  ultimately  determined  that he or she did not  meet the  standard  of
conduct  referenced in part (1) of this sentence.  In addition to the individual
furnishing the aforementioned written affirmation and undertaking,  in order for
the  Company to advance  expenses,  a  determination  must also be made that the
facts  then-  known  to  those  making  the  determination  would  not  preclude
indemnification.

         All determinations relative to indemnification must be made as follows:
(1) by the Board of Directors of the Company by a majority vote of those present
at a meeting at which a quorum is present,  and only those directors not parties
to the proceeding shall be counted in satisfying the quorum requirement;  or (2)
if a quorum cannot be obtained as contemplated in part (1) of this sentence,  by
a majority vote of a committee of the Board of Directors designated by the Board
of  Directors  of the  Company,  which  committee  shall  consist of two or more
directors not parties to the  proceeding,  except that directors who are parties
to the  proceeding  may  participate  in the  designation  of directors  for the
committee; or (3) by special legal counsel selected by the Board of Directors or
its committee in the manner  prescribed in part (1) or part (2) of this sentence
(however,  if a quorum of the Board of Directors  cannot be obtained  under part
(1) of this sentence and a committee cannot be designated under part (2) of this
sentence,  then a special  legal counsel shall be selected by a majority vote of
the full board of directors, in which selection directors who are parties to the
proceeding may participate);  or (4) by the  shareholders,  by a majority of the
votes entitled to be cast by holders of qualified shares present in person or by
proxy at a meeting.

         The Company has also entered into  Indemnification  Agreements with its
executive  officers  and  directors.   These   Indemnification   Agreements  are
substantially  similar  in  effect  to the  Bylaws  and  the  provisions  of our
Certificate  of  Incorporation  relative  to  providing  indemnification  to the
maximum extent and in the manner permitted by the Delaware  General  Corporation




                                      II-1


Law.  Additionally,  such  Indemnification  Agreements  contractually  bind  the
Company  with  respect to  indemnification  and contain  certain  exceptions  to
indemnification,  but do not limit the indemnification available pursuant to our
Bylaws,  our Certificate of Incorporation  or the Delaware  General  Corporation
Law.

Item 25.  Other Expenses of Issuance and Distribution

         The following  table sets forth the expenses  payable by the Company in
connection with the issuance and distribution of the securities being registered
(all  amounts  except the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  filing fee are
estimated):


Filing fee -- Securities and Exchange Commission...................$       0
Printing and engraving expenses....................................      250
Legal fees and disbursements.......................................    5,000
Accounting fees and disbursements..................................    2,000
Blue Sky fees and expenses (including legal fees)..................        0
Transfer agent and registrar fees and expenses.....................      250
Miscellaneous......................................................      500
                                                                    --------
Total expenses...................................................  $   8,000

Item 26.  Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

         The following  information is furnished with regard to all issuances of
unregistered  shares of our common  stock  during the past  three  years.  These
shares were issued, unless otherwise indicated, without registration in reliance
upon the exemption  provided by Section 4(2) of the  Securities  Act of 1933, as
amended or, in the case of the exercise of warrants,  the shares were registered
pursuant  to a  registration  statement  in  effect  at the time of the  warrant
exercise.

I.    Common Stock

         On January 31,  2002,  the Company  issued  1,272,825  shares of common
stock and warrants to purchase  250,000 shares of the Company's  Common Stock at
$5.00 per share to  Innovative  Optics,  Inc. as  consideration  pursuant to the
completion  of a  transaction  involving  the  purchase  of all of the assets of
Innovative Optics, Inc. One-half of these common shares, or 636,412 shares, were
delivered  to  Innovative  Optics at  closing,  and the other  half were held in
escrow  pending  completion of the blade cost  reduction  project.  On August 2,
2002,  477,309 of the shares held in escrow were delivered to Innovative Optics.
The remainder of the shares, or 159,103 shares,  remains in escrow because phase
2 of the  blade  cost  reduction  project  has not been  completed.  The  assets
purchased  from  Innovative  Optics  included  raw  materials,  work in process,
finished goods inventories, equipment, patents, rights, trade name and goodwill,
which were recorded as $2,209,000 on the financial statements of the Company.

         On January 31, 2002,  the Company  issued 50,000 shares of common stock
to  Dr.  Scott  S.  Bair  as  consideration  pursuant  to  the  completion  of a
transaction involving the purchase of all the assets of Innovative Optics, Inc.

         On June 19, 2002,  the Company  issued 17,007 shares of common stock to
John  Charles  Casebeer,  M.D.  for  services  rendered to the  Company  under a
consulting  agreement.  The shares  represent  the  payment of $50,000 in common
stock in  consideration  for  assisting  the  Company to develop and promote its
Innovatome(TM)  microkeratome  during the period  from April 1, 2002 to June 30,
2002.

         On July 9, 2002,  the Company  issued  35,000 shares of common stock to
Michael W. Stelzer  pursuant to the  Severance  Agreement  and General  Release,
which the Company entered into with Mr. Stelzer on January 21, 2000.

         On July 29, 2002,  the Company  issued 26,677 shares of common stock to
John  Charles  Casebeer,  M.D.  for  services  rendered to the  Company  under a
consulting  agreement.  The shares  represent  the  payment of $50,000 in common
stock in  consideration  for  assisting  the  Company to develop and promote the
Innovatome(TM)  microkeratome  during the period from July 1, 2002 to  September
30, 2002.

         On July 30, 2002,  the Company  issued 50,000 shares of common stock to
each of Peter  Kristensen  and F. Briton  McConkie for services  rendered to the
Company under a Major Account Facilitator Contract in which Messrs. McConkie and
Kristensen  served as  intermediaries  between the Company and an  international
agent in an effort to sell 150 Photon(TM) laser systems in Asia.

                                      II-2



         On August 2, 2002,  the Company issued 48,000 shares of common stock to
Michael B. Lindberg,  M.D. for services  rendered  under a consulting  agreement
(24,000  shares for  services  rendered in 2001 and 24,000  shares for  services
rendered in 2002).  The shares issued to Dr. Lindberg  represent the payment for
assisting the Company in evaluating new technologies and instruments  during the
period from December 1, 2000 to November 30, 2002.

         On September 26, 2002,  the Company issued a total of 736,945 shares of
its on stock to 34 shareholders of  International  Bio- Immune Systems,  Inc. or
IBS  in  connection  with  a  transaction  with  IBS  to  acquire  19.9%  of the
outstanding  shares of IBS common stock through the exchange and issuance of the
736,945 shares of its common stock for 2,663,254  shares of common stock of IBS.
In addition, as part of the transaction,  the Company lent 300,000 shares of its
common stock to IBS and, as consideration for the payment of certain expenses of
IBS in the  transaction,  issued  44,000  shares of its common  stock to IBS and
50,000  shares of its common  stock to Joseph S. Anile,  II.  These  shares were
issued without  registration in reliance upon Section 4(2) of the Securities Act
of 1933 and Rule 506 of Regulation D thereunder.

         On September 30, 2002, the Company issued 40,000 shares of common stock
to Michael W. Stelzer  pursuant to a Severance  Agreement  and General  Release,
which the Company entered into with Mr. Stelzer on September 27, 2002.

         On January 22, 2003, the Company issued a total of 2,524,000  shares of
common stock to six  accredited  investors,  as defined in Section  2(15) of the
Securities  Act of 1933 and Rule  501 of  Regulation  D  thereunder,  through  a
private  placement under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506
of Regulation D thereunder at a price of $.25 per share.  The Company received a
total of $631,000 in cash in the private placement  transaction and paid $69,410
in  commissions  and  expenses.  In  addition,  the Company  issued  warrants to
purchase  157,750  shares of common stock at an exercise price of $.25 per share
for commissions and expenses. The accredited investors also received warrants to
purchase a total of 631,000  shares of common stock at an exercise price of $.25
per share.

         On March 26, 2003, the Company issued 695,991 shares of common stock to
Triton West Group, Inc., an accredited investor,  as defined in Section 2(15) of
the Securities  Act of 1933 and Rule 501 of Regulation D thereunder,  for a cash
investment in the amount of $85,746,  or at a purchase  price of $.12 per share.
These shares were issued without  registration  in reliance upon Section 4(2) of
the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506 of Regulation D thereunder.

         On June 13, 2003,  the Company  issued 50,000 shares of common stock to
Frank G. Mauro for a cash  investment  of $12,500  pursuant  to the  exercise of
warrants at an exercise price of $.25 per share.

         On June 13,  2003,  the Company  issued 7,888 shares of common stock to
Delbert G. Reichardt for a cash  investment in the amount of $1,972  pursuant to
the exercise of warrants at an exercise price of $.25 per share.

         On June 13,  2003,  the Company  issued 7,887 shares of common stock to
John H. Banzhaf for a cash investment in the amount of $1,971.25 pursuant to the
exercise of warrants at an exercise price of $.25 per share.

         On June 26, 2003,  the Company  issued 51,000 shares of common stock to
Paul L. Archambeau, M.D. for a cash investment in the amount of $12,750 pursuant
to the exercise of warrants at an exercise price of $.25 per share.

         On June 30, 2003,  the Company  completed the sale of 845,266 shares of
common  stock to 14  accredited  investors,  as defined in Section  2(15) of the
Securities  Act of 1933 and Rule  501 of  Regulation  D  thereunder,  through  a
private  placement under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506
of Regulation D thereunder at a price of $.375 per share. The Company received a
total of $316,975 in cash in the private placement transaction and issued 82,526
shares of common stock in commissions  and expenses.  The  accredited  investors
also received warrants to purchase 422,634 shares of common stock at an exercise
price of $.75 per share.

         On October 9, 2003,  the Company  issued 300,000 shares of common stock
to John Charles  Casebeer,  M.D. in  settlement  of a lawsuit that Dr.  Casebeer
brought  against the Company for services  performed  under a personal  services
contract.

         On January 14,  2005,  the Company  issued  2,000,000  shares of common
stock to Dr. Endre Bodnar, an accredited  investor,  as defined in Section 2(15)
of the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 501 of Regulation D thereunder, through a
private  placement under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506
of Regulation D thereunder at a price of $.075 per share. The Company received a
total of $150,000 in cash from the private placement transaction and issued as a
commission  warrants to purchase 200,000 shares of the Company's common stock at
$.15 per share.

                                      II-3



         On February 1, 2005,  the Company  issued a total of 515,206  shares of
common stock to Crescent  International,  Ltd. and Otape Investments,  Ltd. that
had purchased a total of 1,981,560  shares of the Company's Series G convertible
preferred stock in a private placement  transaction,  which was initially closed
on September 29, 2003. Under the terms of the private offering,  the Company was
required to file a  registration  statement  with the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  to  register  the common  shares  issuable to the Series G preferred
stockholders  upon conversion of their Series G preferred shares and exercise of
their  warrants.  The 515,206  shares  represented a penalty for the Company not
having  a  registration  statement  declared  effective  within  120 days of the
initial closing of the offering.

         On April 7, 2005,  the Company issued 250,000 shares of common stock to
the law firm of Mackey Price  Thompson & Ostler for legal  services  rendered in
the amount of $22,500 pursuant to the terms of a stock purchase  agreement dated
April 7, 2005,  between Mackey Price Thompson & Ostler and the Company.  Randall
A. Mackey,  Chairman of the Company,  is President and a  shareholder  of Mackey
Price Thompson & Ostler.

II.   Series G Preferred Stock

         During the period from  August 24,  2003 to  September  15,  2003,  the
Company sold a total of 1,981,560 shares of Series G convertible preferred stock
to two accredited  investors,  as defined in Section 2(15) of the Securities Act
of 1933 and Rule 501 of  Regulation D  thereunder,  through a private  placement
under  Regulation D promulgated  under the  Securities Act of 1933 at a price of
$.17 per share. The Company received $300,000 in cash as a result of the private
placement transaction and paid $30,000 in commissions and expenses. In addition,
the Company issued  warrants to purchase 88,236 shares of its common stock at an
exercise  price of $.50 per share for  commissions  and  expenses.  The Series G
convertible  preferred  stock is  convertible  into shares of common  stock at a
conversion  price equal to one share of common  stock for each share of Series G
preferred stock. The accredited  investors also received  warrants to purchase a
total of 382,353 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $.50 per share.

         These shares were issued without  registration in reliance upon Section
4(2) of the  Securities  Act of 1933 and Rule 506 of  Regulation  D  promulgated
thereunder.  Moreover, the Company issued an additional 515,206 shares of common
stock to the investors. Under the terms of the private offering, the Company was
required to file a  registration  statement  with the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  to  register  the common  shares  issuable to the Series G preferred
stockholders  upon conversion of their Series G preferred shares and exercise of
their warrants. If the registration  statement was not declared effective within
120 days of the initial closing of the offering on August 29, 2003,  there was a
penalty of 2% per month  payable to the  investors  in common  shares (or 39,631
common  shares  per  month)  until  the  registration   statement  was  declared
effective.  The  registration  statement was declared  effective on February 10,
2005.

III.  Callable Secured Convertible Notes

         During the period  from April 27,  2005 to June 30,  2005,  the Company
sold a total  of  $1,650,000  in  callable  secured  convertible  notes  to four
accredited investors,  as defined in Section 2(15) of the Securities Act of 1933
and Rule 501 of  Regulation  D  thereunder,  through a private  placement  under
Regulation D promulgated  under the  Securities  Act of 1933.  In addition,  the
Company issued warrants to purchase  10,912,699 shares of its common stock at an
exercise price of $.20 per share,  of which  5,621,684  warrants are exercisable
through April 27, 2010 and 5,291,005  warrants are exercisable  through June 23,
2010.

         The callable secured  convertible  notes bear interest at 8% per annum,
payable  quarterly in cash,  with six months of interest  payable up front.  The
interest  rate resets to zero  percent for any month in which the stock price is
greater than 125% of the initial market price, or $.0945,  for each trading date
during that month. The callable secured  convertible notes mature in three years
from the  date of  issuance,  and are  convertible  into  common  stock,  at the
noteholder's  option, at the lower of (i) $.09 or (ii) 60% of the average of the
three lowest  intraday  trading  prices for the common stock on the OTC Bulletin
Board for the 20 days before but not including the conversion date.

         The callable  secured  convertible  notes are secured by the  Company's
assets, including its inventory,  accounts receivable and intellectual property.
Moreover,  the Company has a call option under the terms of the notes.  The call
option  provides  the  Company  with the right to repay  all of the  outstanding
callable secured  convertible  notes at any time,  provided there is no event of
default  by the  Company  and the  common  stock is trading at or below $.09 per
share.  Prepayment of the callable  secured  convertible  notes is to be made in
cash equal to either (i) 125% of the outstanding  principal and accrued interest
for prepayments  occurring within 30 days following the issue date of the notes;
(ii) 130% of the  outstanding  principal  and accrued  interest for  prepayments
occurring  between 31 and 60 days  following  the issue  date of the notes;  and
(iii) 145% of the  outstanding  principal and accrued  interest for  prepayments
occurring after the 60th day following the issue date of the notes.

                                      II-4





Item 27.  Exhibits

     (a) Exhibits
         --------

         The  following  Exhibits  are filed  herewith  pursuant  to Rule 601 of
Regulation S-B or are incorporated by reference to previous filings.

Exhibit
  No.                      Document Description
-------                    --------------------

2.1           Amended  Agreement  and Plan of Merger  between  Paradigm  Medical
              Industries,  Inc., a California  corporation and Paradigm  Medical
              Industries, Inc., a Delaware corporation(1)
3.1           Certificate of Incorporation(1)
3.2           Amended Certificate of Incorporation(10)
3.3           Bylaws(1)
4.1           Warrant Agency Agreement with  Continental  Stock Transfer & Trust
              Company(3)
4.2           Specimen Common Stock Certificate(2)
4.3           Specimen Class A Warrant Certificate(2)
4.4           Form of Class A Warrant Agreement(2)
4.5           Underwriter's Warrant with Kenneth Jerome & Co., Inc.(3)
4.6           Warrant  to  Purchase  Common  Stock  with Note  Holders re bridge
              financing (1)
4.7           Specimen Series C Convertible Preferred Stock Certificate(4)
4.8           Certificate of the Designations, Powers, Preferences and Rights of
              the Series C Convertible Preferred Stock(4)
4.9           Specimen Series D Convertible Preferred Stock Certificate (6)
4.10          Certificate of the Designations, Powers, Preferences and Rights of
              the Series D Convertible Preferred Stock (7)
4.11          Warrant to Purchase Common Stock with Cyndel & Co. (6)
4.12          Warrant to Purchase  Common Stock with R.F.  Lafferty & Co.,  Inc.
              (6)
4.13          Warrant to Purchase Common Stock with Dr. Michael B. Limberg (7)
4.14          Warrant to Purchase Common Stock with John W. Hemmer (7)
4.15          Stock Purchase Warrant with Triton West Group, Inc.(9)
4.16          Warrant  to  Purchase  Common  Stock  with KSH  Investment  Group,
              Inc.(9)
4.17          Warrant to Purchase  Common Stock with  Consulting  for  Strategic
              Growth, Ltd.(9)
4.18          Certificate of Designations, Powers, Preferences and Rights of the
              Series G Convertible Preferred Stock (14)
5.1           Opinion of Mackey Price & Thompson
10.1          Exclusive Patent License Agreement with PhotoMed(1)
10.2          Consulting Agreement with Dr. Daniel M. Eichenbaum(1)
10.3          1995 Stock Option Plan (1)
10.4          Employment Agreement with Thomas F. Motter (5)
10.5          Stock Purchase  Agreement with Ocular Blood Flow, Ltd. and Malcolm
              Redman (7)
10.6          Consulting Agreement with Malcolm Redman (7)
10.7          Royalty Agreement with Malcolm Redman (7)
10.8          Registration Rights with Malcolm Redman (7)
10.9          Employment Agreement with Mark R. Miehle (8)
10.10         Agreements with Steven J. Bayern and Patrick M. Kolenik (8)
10.11         Private  Equity Line of Credit  Agreement  with Triton West Group,
              Inc. (9)
10.12         Asset Purchase Agreement with Innovative  Optics,  Inc. and Barton
              Dietrich Investments, L.P.(10)
10.13         Escrow  Agreement with Innovative  Optics,  Inc.,  Barton Dietrich
              Investments, L.P. (10)
10.14         Assignment  and  Assumption   Agreement  with  Innovative  Optics,
              Inc.(10)
10.15         General  Assignment  and  Bill of  Sale  with  Innovative  Optics,
              Inc.(10)
10.16         Non-Competition  and  Confidentiality   Agreement  with  Mario  F.
              Barton(10)
10.17         Termination of Employment Agreement with Mark R. Miehle(12)
10.18         Consulting Agreement with Mark R. Miehle(12)
10.19         Employment Agreement with Jeffrey F. Poore (13)
10.20         License Agreement with Sunnybrook Health Science Center(15)
10.21         Major Account Facilitator Contract(15)
10.22         Mutual Release with Douglas A. MacLeod, M.D. and others(15)
10.23         Purchase Agreement with American Optisurgical, Inc.(15)
10.24         Purchase Order with Westland Financial Corporation(16)
10.25         Non-Waiver Agreement with United States Fire Insurance Company(16)
10.26         Employment Agreement with John Y. Yoon(17)
10.27         Consulting Agreement with Dr. John Charles Casebeer (18)
10.28         Stock Purchase and Sale Agreement with William Ungar (19)

                                      II-5



10.29         Employment Agreement with Aziz A. Mohabbat (20)
10.30         Investment  Banking Agreement with Alpha Advisory  Services,  Inc.
              (21)
10.31         Manufacturing and Distribution Agreement with E-Technologies, Inc.
              (21)
10.32         Settlement Agreement with Innovative Optics, Inc., Barton Dietrich
              Investments, L.P. and United States Fire Insurance Company(22)
10.33         Securities   Purchase  Agreement  with  AJW  Partners,   LLC,  AJW
              Offshore,  Ltd.,  AJW Qualified  Partners,  LLC and New Millennium
              Capital Partners II, LLP (the "Purchasers")(23)
10.34         Form of Callable Secured Convertible Note with each purchaser(23)
10.35         Form of Stock Purchase Warrant with each purchaser(23)
10.36         Security Agreement with Purchasers(23)
10.37         Intellectual Property Security Agreement with Purchasers(23)
10.38         Registration Statement with the Purchasers(23)
10.39         Stock Purchase Agreement with Mackey Price Thompson & Ostler(24)
23.1          Consent of Mackey Price Thompson & Ostler
23.2          Consent of Tanner LC
23.3          Consent of Chisholm, Bierwolf & Nilson, LLC

-----------------

(1)           Incorporated  by  reference  from  Registration  Statement on Form
              SB-2, as filed on March 19, 1996.
(2)           Incorporated  by reference  from  Amendment No. 1 to  Registration
              Statement on Form SB-2, as filed on May 14, 1996.
(3)           Incorporated  by reference  from  Amendment No. 2 to  Registration
              Statement on Form SB-2, as filed on June 13, 1996.
(4)           Incorporated  by reference  from Annual Report on Form 10-KSB,  as
              filed on April 16, 1998.
(5)           Incorporated by reference from Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB, as
              filed on November 12, 1998.
(6)           Incorporated  by  reference  from  Registration  Statement on Form
              SB-2, as filed on April 29, 1999.
(7)           Incorporated by reference from Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB, as
              filed on August 16, 2000.
(8)           Incorporated by reference from Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB, as
              filed on November 1, 2000.
(9)           Incorporated by reference from Quarterly Report on Form 10-KSB, as
              filed on April 16, 2001.
(10)          Incorporated  by  reference  from  Current  Report on Form 8-K, as
              filed on March 5, 2002.
(11)          Incorporated  by reference  from  Amendment No. 1 to  Registration
              Statement on Form S-3, as filed on March 20, 2002.
(12)          Incorporated by reference from Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB, as
              filed on November 18, 2002.
(13)          Incorporated  by  reference  from  Registration  Statement on Form
              SB-2, as filed on July 7, 2003.
(14)          Incorporated by reference from Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB, as
              filed on November 14, 2003.
(15)          Incorporated  by reference  from  Amendment No. 2 to  Registration
              Statement on Form SB-2, as filed on December 15, 2003.
(16)          Incorporated  by reference  from  Amendment No. 3 to  Registration
              Statement on Form SB-2, as filed on February 27, 2004.
(17)          Incorporated  by  reference  from  Current  Report on Form 8-K, as
              filed on March 23, 2004.
(18)          Incorporated  by reference  from Annual Report on Form 10-KSB,  as
              filed on April 14, 2004.
(19)          Incorporated by reference from Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB, as
              filed on August 16, 2004.
(20)          Incorporated  by reference  from  Amendment No. 6 to  Registration
              Statement on Form SB-2, as filed on October 20, 2004.
(21)          Incorporated by reference from Report on Form 10-QSB,  as filed on
              November 15, 2004.
(22)          Incorporated  by  reference  from  Current  Report on Form 8-K, as
              filed on January 26, 2005.
(23)          Incorporated  by  reference  from  Current  Report on Form 8-K, as
              filed on May 18, 2005.
(24)          Incorporated  by  reference  from  Registration  Statement on Form
              SB-2, as filed on June 22, 2005.


     (b)  Reports on Form 8-K
          -------------------      

      Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed on January 27, 2005. 
      Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed on February 24, 2005. 
      Current Report on Form 8-K, as filed on May 18, 2005.


                                      II-6



Item 28. Undertakings

      (a) The undersigned registrant hereby undertakes:

              (1) To  file,  during  any  period  in which  it  offers  or sells
securities, a post -effective amendment to this registration statement:

                     (i) To include any prospectus  required by Section 10(a)(3)
of the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act");

                     (ii) To  reflect  in the  prospectus  any  facts or  events
which,  individually  or  together,   represent  a  fundamental  change  in  the
information in the registration  statement.  Notwithstanding the foregoing,  any
increase or decrease in volume of securities  offered (if the total dollar value
of  securities  offered  would not  exceed  that which was  registered)  and any
deviation from the low or high end of the estimated  maximum  offering range may
be reflected in the form of  prospectus  filed with the  Commission  pursuant to
Rule 424(b) if, in the aggregate,  the changes in volume and price  represent no
more than 20% change in the maximum  aggregate  offering  price set forth in the
"Calculation of Registration Fee" table in the effective registration statement;
and

                     (iii)  To  include  any  additional  or  changed   material
information on the plan of distribution.

              (2) That, for  determining  liability  under the  Securities  Act,
treat each  post-effective  amendment  as a new  registration  statement  of the
securities  offered,  and the offering of the  securities at that time to be the
initial bona fide offering.

              (3) To file a post-effective amendment to remove from registration
any of the securities that remain unsold at the end of the offering.

         (b)  Insofar  as  indemnification  for  liabilities  arising  under the
Securities Act may be permitted to directors,  officers and controlling  persons
of the  registrant  pursuant to the  foregoing  provisions,  or  otherwise,  the
registrant  has been advised that in the opinion of the  Securities and Exchange
Commission  such  indemnification  is against  public policy as expressed in the
Securities Act and is, therefore,  unenforceable.  In the event that a claim for
indemnification  against  such  liabilities  (other  than  the  payment  by  the
registrant of expenses  incurred or paid by a director,  officer or  controlling
person of the  registrant  in the  successful  defense  of any  action,  suit or
preceding)  is  asserted  by such  director,  officer or  controlling  person in
connection with the securities being registered,  the registrant will, unless in
the opinion of its counsel the matter has been settled by controlling precedent,
submit  to a  court  of  appropriate  jurisdiction  the  question  whether  such
indemnification  by it is against  policy as expressed in the Securities Act and
will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.

         The undersigned registrant also undertakes that:

              (1) For purposes of determining any liability under the Securities
Act, treat the information  omitted from the form of prospectus filed as part of
this  registration  statement in reliance upon Rule 430A and contained in a form
of prospectus filed by the registrant pursuant to Rule 424(b)(1), or (4) or Rule
497(h) under the Securities Act shall be deemed to be part of this  registration
statement as of the time it was declared effective.

              (2) For the  purposes  of  determining  any  liability  under  the
Securities  Act,  treat each  post-effective  amendment  that contains a form of
prospectus as a new  registration  statement for the  securities  offered in the
registration  statement,  and the offering of the securities at that time as the
initial bona fide offering of those securities.

                                      II-7



                                   SIGNATURES

         In accordance with the  requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, the
Registrant certifies that it has reasonable grounds to believe that it meets all
of the requirements of filing on Form SB-2 and has duly caused this registration
statement  to be signed on its  behalf by the  undersigned,  in Salt Lake  City,
State of Utah, this 22nd day of June, 2005.

                                   PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.



                                   By:/s/ John Y. Yoon   
                                      ----------------
                                      John Y. Yoon
                                   Its: President and Chief Executive Officer

         Pursuant  to the  requirements  of the  Securities  Act of  1933,  this
registration  statement has been signed below by the following persons on behalf
of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated:

     Signature                          Title                         Date

 /s/ John Y. Yoon          President and Chief Executive Officer   June 22, 2005
----------------------     (Principal Executive Officer)
John Y. Yoon                                       



 /s/ Randall A. Mackey     Chairman of the Board and Secretary     June 22, 2005
----------------------
Randall A. Mackey



 /s/ David M. Silver       Director                                June 22, 2005
----------------------
David M. Silver



 /s/ Keith D. Ignotz       Director                                June 22, 2005
----------------------
Keith D. Ignotz



 /s/ John C. Pingree       Director                                June 22, 2005
----------------------
John C. Pingree



 /s/ Luis A. Mostacero     Controller, Treasurer and Secretary     June 22, 2005
----------------------     (Principal Financial and Accounting
Luis A. Mostacero          Officer)


                                      II-8