For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2013

Commission File Number 0-22175

 EMCORE Corporation

Registrant's telephone number, including area code:  (505) 332-5000

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. x Yes ¨ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). x Yes ¨ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definition of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer”, and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. ¨ Large accelerated filer x Accelerated filer ¨ Non-accelerated filer ¨ Smaller reporting company

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). ¨ Yes x No

As of May 3, 2013, the number of shares outstanding of our no par value common stock totaled 26,713,466.

REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

For The Quarterly Period Ended March 31, 2013

For the Three and Six Months Ended March 31, 2013 and 2012

As of March 31, 2013 and September 30, 2012

For the Six Months Ended March 31, 2013 and 2012

EMCORE Corporation and its subsidiaries (the “Company”, “we”, “our”, or “EMCORE”) offers a broad portfolio of compound semiconductor-based products for the fiber optics and solar power markets. We were established in 1984 as a New Jersey corporation and we have two reporting segments: Fiber Optics and Photovoltaics. Our Fiber Optics business segment provides optical components, subsystems and systems for high-speed telecommunications, Cable Television (CATV) and Fiber-To-The-Premise (FTTP) networks, as well as products for satellite communications, video transport and specialty photonics technologies for defense and homeland security applications. EMCORE's Solar Photovoltaics business segment provides products for space power applications including high-efficiency multi-junction solar cells, Covered Interconnect Cells (CICs) and complete satellite solar panels, and terrestrial applications, including high-efficiency GaAs solar cells for concentration photovoltaic (CPV) power systems.

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP) for interim information, and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and notes required by U.S. GAAP for annual financial statements. In our opinion, the interim financial statements reflect all normal adjustments that are necessary to provide a fair presentation of the financial results for the interim periods presented. Operating results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of results that may be expected for an entire fiscal year. The condensed consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2012 has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements as of such date. For a more complete understanding of our business, financial position, operating results, cash flows, risk factors and other matters, please refer to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2012.

On March 27, 2012, we entered into a Master Purchase Agreement with a subsidiary of Sumitomo Electric Industries, LTD (SEI), pursuant to which we agreed to sell certain assets and transfer certain obligations associated with our Fiber Optics segment. On May 7, 2012, we completed the sale of these assets to SEI and recorded a gain of approximately $2.8 million. This transaction was recorded as a sale of assets since it did not meet the criteria to be considered a component of our business. Under the terms of the Master Purchase Agreement, we have agreed to indemnify SEI for up to $3.4 million of potential claims and expenses for the two-year period following the sale and we have recorded this amount as a deferred gain on our balance sheet as of March 31, 2013 as a result of these contingencies. SEI paid $13.1 million in cash and deposited approximately $2.6 million into escrow as security for indemnification obligations and any purchase price adjustments. Payment of escrow amounts occurs over a two-year period and is subject to claim adjustments. In total, we deferred approximately $4.9 million of the total paid by SEI as a gain on sale until the indemnification obligation of $3.4 million and $1.5 million of purchase price adjustment contingencies are resolved. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, we resolved the purchase price contingencies resulting in the reduction of the purchase price by $1.1 million. The reduced purchase price is recorded as an offset to the escrow receivable of $2.6 million while an additional $0.4 million of gain on sale of assets was recognized during the three months ended March 31, 2013. There remains a deferred gain of $3.4 million related to our indemnification obligation at March 31, 2013.

In May 2012, we also entered into a separate facility lease and transition services agreement (TSA) with SEI related to financial services, supply chain, facility, and information infrastructure support functions to be provided by us. We believe the values assigned to the facility lease and TSA approximate fair value. During the three and six months period ended March 31, 2013, we recognized $0.6 million and $1.2 million, respectively, related to TSA fees and facility rental income which was recorded as a benefit against operating expenses incurred for such services.

The TSA included a $0.5 million credit to be applied against fees incurred over a twelve-month period through May 2013. We also incurred $0.6 million in expenses directly associated with this transaction. The TSA credit and transaction-related expenses incurred were applied against the proceeds received in determination of the gain recognized during the fiscal year ended September 30, 2012.

As of March 31, 2013, cash and cash equivalents totaled $5.9 million and net working capital totaled approximately $28.7 million. Working capital, calculated as current assets minus current liabilities, is a financial metric we use which represents available operating liquidity. For the three and six months ended March 31, 2013, we had net income of $11.7 million and $14.5 million, repectively. Net cash used in operating activities for the six months ended March 31, 2013 totaled $10.2 million.

Our credit facility contains customary representations and warranties, and affirmative and negative covenants, including, among other things, cash balance and excess availability requirements, minimum tangible net worth and EBITDA covenants, and limitations on liens and certain additional indebtedness and guarantees. The covenants are written such that as long as we maintain the minimum cash balance and excess availability requirement, the other covenants are not required to be met. As of March 31, 2013, we were in compliance with all of the financial covenants contained in the credit facility including the cash on deposit and excess availability that exceeded the $3.5 million financial covenant.

On December 21, 2011, we entered into a First Amendment to the credit facility which increased our eligible borrowing base by up to $10.0 million by adding to the borrowing base formula 85% of the appraised value of the Company's equipment and 50% of the appraised value of the Company's real estate. In addition, Wells Fargo reduced our restrictions under the excess availability financial covenant requirement from $7.5 million to $3.5 million through December 2012. The interest rate on outstanding borrowings was increased to LIBOR rate plus four percent. The credit facility was to return to its previous agreement terms on the earlier of (i) December 31, 2012, or (ii) the date that we received insurance proceeds of not less than $30.0 million in the aggregate applicable to the flooding of our primary contract manufacturer in Thailand.

On June 14, 2012, we entered into a Second Amendment to the credit facility, which amended among other things, the borrowing base increase under the First Amendment, which was subject to automatic reductions to (i) $8.1 million on July 1, 2012; and to (ii) $3.1 million on January 1, 2013. The Second Amendment automatically reduced the $8.1 million and $3.1 million thresholds referenced above to $5.0 million and $0, respectively, if the sale of certain assets did not occur. The Second Amendment no longer included certain assets in the potential borrowing base including certain machinery and equipment and real estate.

On December 28, 2012, we entered into a Third Amendment to the credit facility, which amended among other things, the maturity date of the facility to November 11, 2015. The Third Amendment also amends the Credit Facility by adjusting the borrowing availability provided by machinery and equipment, which amount is currently set at approximately $7.6 million and which was reduced monthly by approximately $101,000 through March 31, 2013, at which time the borrowing availability was reduced to $5.0 million and thereafter will be further reduced monthly by approximately $91,000.

The Third Amendment also maintains the Company's minimum cash balance and excess liquidity requirement at $3.5 million through June 30, 2013, which had been scheduled to increase to $7.5 million on December 31, 2012, below which certain financial covenants are triggered which relate to minimum tangible net worth, minimum EBITDA amounts and limitations on capital expenditures. The amounts of these financial covenants have been amended from those previously introduced in the First Amendment. At June 30, 2013 the liquidity requirement will be increased by $1.0 million, and will be further increased, quarterly, until such amount reaches $7.5 million at March 31, 2014.

As of March 31, 2013, we had a $20.8 million LIBOR rate loan outstanding under our credit facility, with an interest rate of 3.4%. As of May 3, 2013, the outstanding balance under this credit facility totaled approximately $14.6 million. As of March 31, 2013, the credit facility also had $2.4 million reserved for six outstanding stand-by letters of credit, leaving a remaining $2.0 million borrowing availability balance under this credit facility. We now expect at least 70% of the $35.0 million credit facility to be available for use over the remainder of fiscal year 2013.

ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, establishes a valuation hierarchy for disclosure of the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. This standard describes a fair value hierarchy based on three levels of inputs, of which the first two are considered observable and the last unobservable, that may be used to measure fair value:

As of March 31, 2013 and September 30, 2012, warrants representing the right to purchase 400,001 and 750,011 shares, respectively, of our common stock were outstanding. All of our warrants meet the classification requirements for liability accounting pursuant to ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. Each quarter, we expect an impact on our statement of operations and comprehensive income (loss) when we record the change in fair value of our outstanding warrants using the Monte Carlo option valuation model. The Monte Carlo option valuation model is used since it allows the valuation of each warrant to factor in the value associated with our right to effect a mandatory exercise of each warrant. The valuation model requires the input of highly subjective assumptions, including the warrant's expected life and the price volatility of the underlying stock. The change in the fair value of our warrants has been primarily due to the change in the closing price of our common stock.

As of March 31, 2013 and September 30, 2012, we had $9.3 million and $6.3 million, respectively, of accounts receivable recorded using the percentage of completion method. Of these amounts, $0.6 million was invoiced and $8.7 million was unbilled as of March 31, 2013 and $1.9 million was invoiced and $4.4 million was unbilled as of September 30, 2012.

Included in accounts receivable, net at March 31, 2013 and September 30, 2012 is $3.6 million and $2.3 million, respectively, from sales to Suncore. See Note 15 - Suncore Joint Venture for additional disclosures related to Suncore.

During the three and six months ended March 31, 2012, we recorded flood-related losses associated with damaged inventory of approximately $0.1 million and $4.0 million, respectively. See Note 9- Impact from Thailand Flood for additional disclosures related to the impact of the Thailand flood on our operations.

During the three months ended December 31, 2011, we recorded flood-related losses associated with damaged equipment of approximately $1.8 million. In addition, equipment under capital lease totaling $1.9 million was also damaged by the Thailand flood and was written off against our outstanding capital lease obligation during the three month period ended December 31, 2011. We have entered into agreements with our contract manufacturer in Thailand whereby our contract manufacturer agreed to purchase equipment to rebuild certain manufacturing lines damaged by flood waters and we agreed to reimburse our contract manufacturer for the cost of the equipment out of insurance proceeds that we expect to receive. As of September 30, 2012, we capitalized the cost of our new manufacturing lines of approximately $5.2 million and recorded an equipment capital lease obligation of $4.4 million, net of equipment deposits. In addition, during the three and six months ended March 31, 2013, we capitalized an additional $0.9 million and $1.2 million, respectively, of new manufacturing lines and recorded a corresponding amount of capital lease obligation. In December 2012, we received flood-related insurance proceeds of $4.2 million in the form of forgiveness of $2.2 million of outstanding capital lease obligations and $2.0 million of outstanding payables. In March 2013 we recorded the final flood-related insurance proceeds of $14.8 million in the form of a receivable of $8.2 million, forgiveness of $3.4 million of outstanding capital lease obligations and $3.2 million of outstanding payables. The receivable balance of $8.2 million was paid in April 2013. See Note 9 - Impact from Thailand Flood for additional disclosures related to the impact of the Thailand flood on our operations.

As of March 31, 2013 and September 30, 2012, accumulated depreciation was approximately $76.1 million and $74.5 million, respectively.

Amortization expense related to intangible assets is included in sales, general, and administrative expense on our statement of operations and comprehensive income (loss). Based on the carrying amount of our intangible assets as of March 31, 2013, the estimated future amortization expense is as follows:

Customer deposits: We signed agreements with certain customers related to our Fiber Optics segment pursuant to which they have received an allocation of our finished goods inventory that was not damaged by the Thailand flood and have started to receive a percentage of output from our new production lines placed into service. As consideration, we received $6.8 million as partial prepayments for future product shipments, of which none is outstanding as of March 31, 2013.

Capital lease obligations: As of September 30, 2012, we capitalized the cost of our new manufacturing lines of approximately $5.2 million and recorded an equipment capital lease obligation of $4.4 million, net of equipment deposits. In addition, during the three and six months ended March 31,2013, we capitalized an additional $0.9 million and $1.2 million, respectively, of manufacturing lines and recorded a corresponding amount of capital lease obligations. See Note 9 - Impact from Thailand Flood for additional disclosures related to the impact of the Thailand flood on our operations.

Severance and restructuring accruals: In August 2012, Mr. Reuben Richards, Jr. proposed to the Board to step-down from his position as the Company's Executive Chairman and all other positions he held as an officer or employee of the Company and its affiliates, effective as of September 30, 2012. Mr. Richards will remain as Chairman of the Board and a member of the Board.

The Company and Mr. Richards entered into a separation agreement and general release, dated August 6, 2012 (Separation Agreement), which includes mutual releases by Mr. Richards and the Company of all claims related to Mr. Richards' employment and service relationship with, and termination of employment and service from, the Company. Under the terms of the Separation Agreement, Mr. Richards acknowledged and agreed that the restrictive covenants contained in his employment agreement would remain in full force and effect. The separation agreement provides for among other things, the continuation of his base salary for 88 weeks, benefits for 18 months, and immediate vesting of all his outstanding non-vested equity awards. These payments are not contingent upon any future service by Mr. Richards. In fiscal year 2012, we recorded a charge of $1.1 million related to Mr. Richards' separation agreement.

During the six months ended March 31, 2012, we recorded estimated flood-related losses associated with damaged inventory and equipment of approximately $4.0 million and $1.8 million, respectively. Equipment under capital lease totaling $1.9 million as of September 30, 2011 was also damaged by the Thailand flood and written off against our outstanding capital lease obligation.

Instead of completely rebuilding all flood-damaged manufacturing lines in Thailand, management decided to realign the Company's fiber optics product portfolio and focus on business areas with strong technology differentiation and growth opportunities. Management identified certain inventory on order related to manufacturing product lines that were destroyed by the Thailand flood and will not be replaced. This expense, which totaled $0.4 million and $1.3 million, respectively, for the three and six months ended March 31, 2012, was recorded within cost of revenue on our statement of operations and comprehensive loss.

In November 2011, we entered into an agreement with our contract manufacturer in Thailand whereby our contract manufacturer agreed to purchase equipment to rebuild certain manufacturing lines damaged by flood waters and we agreed to reimburse our contract manufacturer for the cost of the equipment out of insurance proceeds that we expect to receive. We were not a named beneficiary of our contract manufacturer's insurance policy. As of September 30, 2012, we capitalized the cost of our new manufacturing lines of approximately $5.2 million and recorded an equipment capital lease obligation of $4.4 million, net of equipment deposits. In addition, during the three and six months ended March 31, 2013, we capitalized an additional $0.9 million and $1.2 million, respectively, of new manufacturing lines and recorded a corresponding amount to capital lease obligation. Additionally, we restructured our outstanding payables owed to our contract manufacturer, which delayed payments to future dates to coincide with expected timing of insurance proceeds. Flood-related insurance proceeds related to inventory and equipment destroyed by the Thailand flood will be recognized when they become realized. In September 2012 we received cash flood-related insurance proceeds of $4.0 million. In December 2012, we received flood-related insurance proceeds of $4.2 million in the form of forgiveness of $2.2 million of outstanding capital lease obligations and $2.0 million of outstanding payables. In March 2013, we received the final flood-related insurance proceeds of $14.8 million in the form of a receivable of $8.2 million, forgiveness of $3.4 million of outstanding capital lease obligations and $3.2 million of outstanding payables. The receivable balance of $8.2 million was paid in April 2013. No additional flood-related insurance proceeds associated with this event are anticipated. Additionally, we also claimed damages and received proceeds of $5.0 million under our own comprehensive insurance policy relating to business interruption and we recorded this amount as flood-related insurance proceeds during the fiscal year ended September 30, 2012. No additional business interruption insurance proceeds associated with this event are anticipated.

During the six months ended March 31, 2013, there were no material increases or decreases in unrecognized tax benefits and we do not anticipate any material increases or decreases in the amounts of unrecognized tax benefits for the remaining fiscal year 2013. As of March 31, 2013, we had approximately $215,000 of interest and penalties accrued as tax liabilities on our balance sheet.

During the three and six months ended March 31, 2013, we incurred $0.0 million and $0.1 million, respectively, of income tax expense primarily due to federal alternative minimum tax and state income tax. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, we have considered certain tax planning strategies available to the Company that resulted in a decrease in our estimated annual effective tax rate for the year ending September 30, 2013.

During the three months ended December 31, 2011, as part of an equity recapitalization at our Suncore joint venture we received a deemed capital distribution of $14.8 million. The deemed capital distribution was subject to a 10% foreign withholding tax. As a result, we were subject to a $1.6 million foreign tax expense and Suncore made a cash dividend for an equal amount. The foreign tax expense was treated as a tax credit for U.S. tax purposes. No tax expense was incurred during the three months ended March 31, 2012. See Note 15 - Suncore Joint Venture for additional disclosures related to this foreign income tax expense.

Included in our operating income for the three and six months ended March 31, 2013 were $1.4 million of New Mexico incentive tax credits received. The amount received was allocated to cost of goods sold, selling, general and administrative and research and development expense primarily based on the number of employees allocated to the related departments. These credits will result in cash refunds and reduction of future payroll and compensation taxes. There were no incentive tax credits received during the three and six months ended March 31, 2012.

Operating Lease Obligations: We lease certain land, facilities, and equipment under non-cancelable operating leases. Operating lease amounts above exclude renewal option periods, property taxes, insurance, and maintenance expenses on leased properties. Our facility leases typically provide for rental adjustments for increases in base rent (up to specific limits), property taxes, insurance, and general property maintenance that would be recorded as rent expense. Rent expense was approximately $0.8 million and $0.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively and approximately $1.5 million and $1.4 million for the six months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.  There are no off-balance sheet arrangements other than our operating leases.

Capital Lease Obligations: Equipment under capital lease as of September 30, 2011 was damaged by the Thailand flood and was written off against our outstanding capital lease obligation. During fiscal year 2012, we entered into agreements with our contract manufacturer in Thailand whereby our contract manufacturer agreed to purchase equipment to rebuild certain manufacturing lines damaged by flood waters and we agreed to reimburse our contract manufacturer for the cost of the equipment out of insurance proceeds that we expect to receive. As of September 30, 2012, we capitalized the cost of our new manufacturing lines of approximately $5.2 million and recorded an equipment capital lease obligation of $4.4 million, net of equipment deposits. In December 2012, we received flood-related insurance proceeds of $4.2 million in the form of forgiveness of $2.2 million of outstanding capital lease obligations and $2.0 million of outstanding payables. In March 2013, we received the final flood-related insurance proceeds of $14.8 million in the form of a receivable of $8.2 million, forgiveness of $3.4 million of outstanding capital lease obligations and $3.2 million of outstanding payables. The receivable balance of $8.2 million was paid in April 2013. See Note 9 - Impact from Thailand Flood for additional disclosures related to the impact of the Thailand flood on our operations.

Asset Retirement Obligations: We have known conditional asset retirement conditions, such as certain asset decommissioning and restoration of rented facilities to be performed in the future. Our asset retirement obligations include assumptions related to renewal option periods for those facilities where we expect to extend lease terms. In future periods, the asset retirement obligation is accreted for the change in its present value and capitalized costs are depreciated over the useful life of the related assets. If the fair value of the estimated asset retirement obligation changes, an adjustment will be recorded to both the asset retirement obligation and the asset retirement capitalized cost. Revisions in estimated liabilities can result from revisions of estimated inflation rates, escalating retirement costs, and changes in the estimated timing of settling asset retirement obligations. The fair value of our asset retirement obligations were estimated by discounting projected cash flows over the estimated life of the related assets using credit adjusted risk-free rates which ranged from 3.25% to 5.78%. There were no liabilities associated with asset retirements that were settled during the six months ended March 31, 2013. Accretion expense of $0.1 million was recorded during the three and six months ended March 31, 2013.

Warranty: We generally provide a product and other warranties on our CPV-related solar cells, components, power systems, and fiber optic products. Certain parts and labor warranties from our vendors can be assigned to our customers. Our reported financial position or results of operations may be materially different under changed conditions or when using different estimates and assumptions. In the event that estimates or assumptions prove to differ from actual results, adjustments are made in subsequent periods to reflect more current information.

Indemnifications: We have agreed to indemnify certain customers against claims of infringement of the intellectual property rights of others in our sales contracts with these customers. Historically, we have not paid any claims under these indemnification obligations, and we do not have any pending indemnification claims as of March 31, 2013. In March 2012, we entered into a Master Purchase Agreement with SEI, pursuant to which we agreed to sell certain assets and transfer certain obligations associated with our Fiber Optics segment. Under the terms of the Master Purchase Agreement, we have agreed to indemnify SEI for up to $3.4 million of potential claims and expenses for the two-year period following the sale and we have recorded this amount as a deferred gain on our balance sheet as of March 31, 2013 and September 30, 2012 as a result of these contingencies. In April and May 2013, we received letters from SEI asserting indemnification claims under the Master Purchase Agreement up to $1.5 million. As of May 9, 2013, there has been no resolution to these claims. See Note 1 - Description of Business in the notes to the consolidated financial statements for additional disclosures related to this asset sale.

Legal Proceedings: We are subject to various legal proceedings, claims, and litigation, either asserted or unasserted that arise in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of these matters is currently not determinable, we do not expect the resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. However, the results of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty. Professional legal fees are expensed when incurred. We accrue for contingent losses when such losses are probable and reasonably estimable. In the event that estimates or assumptions prove to differ from actual results, adjustments are made in subsequent periods to reflect more current information. Should we fail to prevail in any legal matter or should several legal matters be resolved against the Company in the same reporting period, then the financial results of that particular reporting period could be materially affected.

On December 23, 2008, Plaintiffs Maurice Prissert and Claude Prissert filed a purported stockholder class action (the “Prissert Class Action”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 allegedly on behalf of a class of Company shareholders against the Company and certain of its present and former directors and officers (the “Individual Defendants”) in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico captioned, Maurice Prissert and Claude Prissert v. EMCORE Corporation, Adam Gushard, Hong Q. Hou, Reuben F. Richards, Jr., David Danzilio and Thomas Werthan, Case No. 1:08cv1190 (D.N.M.). The Complaint alleges that the Company and the Individual Defendants violated certain provisions of the federal securities laws, including Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, arising out of the Company's disclosure regarding its customer Green and Gold Energy (“GGE”) and the associated backlog of GGE orders with the Company's Photovoltaics business segment. The Complaint in the Prissert Class Action seeks, among other things, an unspecified amount of compensatory damages and other costs and expenses associated with the maintenance of the action. On or about February 12, 2009, a second purported stockholder class action (Mueller v. EMCORE Corporation et al., Case No. 1:09cv 133 (D.N.M.)) (the “Mueller Class Action”), together with the Prissert Class Action, the “Class Actions”) was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico against the same defendants named in the Prissert Class Action, based on substantially the same facts and circumstances, containing substantially the same allegations and seeking substantially the same relief.

On January 23, 2009, Plaintiff James E. Stearns filed a purported stockholder derivative action (the “Stearns Derivative Action”) on behalf of the Company against the Individual Defendants, as well as the Company as nominal defendant in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Atlantic County, Chancery Division (James E. Stearns, derivatively on behalf of EMCORE Corporation v. Thomas J. Russell, Robert Bogomolny, Charles Scott, John Gillen, Reuben F. Richards, Jr., Hong Q. Hou, Adam Gushard, David Danzilio and Thomas Werthan, Case No. Atl-C-10-09). This action is based on essentially the same factual contentions as the Prissert Class Action, and alleges that the Individual Defendants engaged in improprieties and violations of law in connection with the reporting of the GGE backlog. The Stearns Derivative Action seeks several forms of relief, allegedly on behalf of the Company, including, among other things, damages, equitable relief, corporate governance reforms, an accounting of, rescission of, restitution of, and costs and disbursements of the lawsuit.

On March 11, 2009, Plaintiff Gary Thomas filed a second purported shareholder derivative action (the “Thomas Derivative Action”; together with the Stearns Derivative Action, the “Derivative Actions”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico against the Company and certain of the Individual Defendants (Gary Thomas, derivatively on behalf of EMCORE Corporation v. Thomas J. Russell, Robert Bogomolny, Charles Scott, John Gillen, Reuben F. Richards, Jr., Hong Q. Hou, and EMCORE Corporation, Case No. 1.09-cv-00236, (D.N.M.)). The Thomas Derivative Action makes substantially the same allegations as the Stearns Derivative Action and seeks essentially the same relief.

On November 11, 2010, we entered into a Credit and Security Agreement (credit facility) with Wells Fargo Bank (Wells Fargo). The initial credit facility provided us with a three-year revolving credit of up to $35 million that can be used for working capital requirements, letters of credit, and other general corporate purposes. The credit facility was initially secured by the Company's accounts receivables and inventory assets and was subject to a borrowing base formula based on the Company's eligible accounts receivable and inventory accounts.

The credit facility contains customary representations and warranties, and affirmative and negative covenants, including, among other things, cash balance and excess availability requirements, minimum tangible net worth and EBITDA covenants and limitations on liens and certain additional indebtedness and guarantees. The covenants are written such that as long as we maintain the minimum cash balance and excess availability requirement of $7.5 million prior to the amendment, and $3.5 million following the amendments discussed below, the other covenants are not required to be met. As of March 31, 2013, we were in compliance with the financial covenants contained in the credit facility since cash on deposit and excess availability exceeded the $3.5 million financial covenant requirement.

On December 21, 2011, we signed an amendment to our credit facility that increased our eligible borrowing base by up to $10 million by adding to the borrowing base formula 85% of the appraised value of the Company's equipment and 50% of the appraised value of the Company's real estate. In addition, Wells Fargo reduced our restrictions under the excess availability financial covenant requirement from $7.5 million to $3.5 million through December 2012. The interest rate on outstanding borrowings was increased to LIBOR rate plus 4%. The credit facility was to return to its full previous terms on the earlier of (i) December 31, 2012, or (ii) the date that we received insurance proceeds of not less than $30.0 million in the aggregate applicable to the flooding of our primary contract manufacturer in Thailand.

On June 14, 2012, we entered into a Second Amendment to the credit facility, which amended among other things, the borrowing base increase under the First Amendment, which was subject to automatic reductions to (i) $8.1 million on July 1, 2012; and to (ii) $3.1 million on January 1, 2013. The Second Amendment automatically reduced the $8.1 million and $3.1 million thresholds referenced above to $5.0 million and $0, respectively, if the sale of certain assets did not occur. The Second Amendment credit facility no longer included certain assets in the potential borrowing base including certain machinery and equipment and real estate.

On December 28, 2012, we entered into a Third Amendment to the credit facility, which amended among other things, the maturity date of the facility to November 11, 2015. The Third Amendment also amends the credit facility by adjusting the borrowing availability provided by machinery and equipment, which amount was then currently set at approximately $7.6 million and which was reduced monthly by approximately $101,000 through March 31, 2013, at which time the borrowing availability was reduced to $5.0 million and thereafter will be further reduced monthly by approximately $91,000.

The Third Amendment also maintains the Company's minimum cash balance and excess liquidity requirement at $3.5 million through June 30, 2013, which had been scheduled to increase to $7.5 million on December 31, 2012, below which certain financial covenants are triggered which relate to minimum tangible net worth, minimum EBITDA amounts and limitations on capital expenditures. The amounts of these financial covenants have been amended from those previously introduced in the First Amendment. At June 30, 2013 the liquidity requirement will be increased by $1.0 million, and will be further increased, quarterly, until such amount reaches $7.5 million at March 31, 2014.

As of March 31, 2013, we had a $20.8 million LIBOR rate loan outstanding, with an interest rate of 3.4%, and approximately $2.4 million reserved for six outstanding stand-by letters of credit under the credit facility. We now expect at least 70% of the $35.0 million credit facility to be available for use over the remainder of fiscal year 2013.

During August 2012, we filed a shelf registration statement on Form S-3 with the SEC pursuant to which we may, from time to time, sell up to an aggregate of $50 million of our common or preferred stock, warrants or debt securities. On August 23, 2012, the registration statement was declared effective by the SEC, which will allow us to access the capital markets for the three year period following this effective date. On September 28, 2012, we entered into an Underwriting Agreement with B. Riley & Co., LLC (the “Underwriter”) pursuant to which we agreed to sell and the Underwriter agreed to purchase 1,593,400 shares of our common stock at a price per share of $5.19. We also granted the Underwriter a 30-day option to purchase up to 239,010 additional shares of common stock at the same price per share. On October 3, 2012 we sold 1,832,410 shares of common stock for net proceeds of $9.5 million.

We provide long-term incentives to eligible officers, directors, and employees in the form of equity-based awards.  We maintain three equity incentive compensation plans, collectively described below as our Equity Plans:

Most of our stock options vest and become exercisable over a four to five year period and have a contractual life of 10 years. Certain stock options awarded are intended to qualify as incentive stock options pursuant to Section 422A of the Internal Revenue Code.