Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2005

OR

For the transition period from                      to                     

AMERISOURCEBERGEN CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

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. Yes x    No ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Yes x    No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Yes ¨    No x

The aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant on March 31, 2005, based upon the closing price of such stock on the New York Stock Exchange on March 31, 2005, was $4,216,774,879.

The number of shares of common stock of AmerisourceBergen Corporation outstanding as of November 30, 2005 was 104,260,664.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Portions of the following document are incorporated by reference in the Part of this report indicated below:

Part III - Registrant’s Proxy Statement for the 2006 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

Table of Contents

PART I

AmerisourceBergen Corporation (“AmerisourceBergen” or the “Company”) is one of the largest pharmaceutical services companies in the United States. Serving both pharmaceutical manufacturers and healthcare providers in the pharmaceutical supply channel, the Company provides drug distribution and related services designed to reduce costs and improve patient outcomes. More specifically, we distribute a comprehensive offering of brand name and generic pharmaceuticals, over-the-counter healthcare products, and home healthcare supplies and equipment to a wide variety of healthcare providers located throughout the United States, including acute care hospitals and health systems, independent and chain retail pharmacies, mail order facilities, physicians, clinics and other alternate site facilities, and skilled nursing and assisted living centers. We also provide pharmaceuticals and pharmacy services to long-term care, workers’ compensation and specialty drug patients. Additionally, we furnish healthcare providers and pharmaceutical manufacturers with an assortment of related services, including pharmacy automation, supply management software, pharmaceutical packaging, inventory management, reimbursement and pharmaceutical consulting services, logistics services, and physician education, all of which are designed to reduce costs and improve patient outcomes.

Industry Overview

We have benefited from the significant growth of the pharmaceutical industry in the United States. According to IMS Healthcare, Inc., an independent third party provider of information to the pharmaceutical and healthcare industry, industry sales in the United States are expected to grow between 8% and 9% in 2006 and annually between 7% and 10% through 2009.

The factors contributing to the growth of the pharmaceutical industry in the United States, and other industry trends, include:

Aging Population. The number of individuals over age 55 in the United States grew from approximately 52 million in 1990 to approximately 59 million in 2000 and is projected to increase to more than 75 million by the year 2010. This age group suffers from chronic illnesses and disabilities more than the rest of the population and is estimated to account for approximately two-thirds of total healthcare expenditures in the United States.

Introduction of New Pharmaceuticals. Traditional research and development, as well as the advent of new research, production and delivery methods, such as biotechnology and gene research and therapy, continue to generate new compounds and delivery methods that are more effective in treating diseases. These compounds have been responsible for significant increases in pharmaceutical sales. We believe ongoing research and development expenditures by the leading pharmaceutical manufacturers will contribute to continued growth of the industry.

Increased Use of Drug Therapies. In response to rising healthcare costs, governmental and private payors have adopted cost containment measures that encourage the use of efficient drug therapies to prevent or treat diseases. While national attention has been focused on the overall increase in aggregate healthcare costs, we believe drug therapy has had a beneficial impact on overall healthcare costs by reducing expensive surgeries and prolonged hospital stays. Pharmaceuticals currently account for approximately 10% of overall healthcare costs. Pharmaceutical manufacturers’ continued emphasis on research and development is expected to result in the continuing introduction of cost-effective drug therapies.

Pharmaceutical Supply Channel Changes. Historically, we and our major pharmaceutical distribution competitors derived a significant portion of our pharmaceutical distribution gross margin from manufacturer price increases, which have historically equaled or exceeded the overall Consumer Price Index. We believe these increases were due in large part to the relatively inelastic demand for brand name drugs notwithstanding higher prices charged for patented drugs as pharmaceutical manufacturers attempted to recoup costs associated with the development, clinical testing and regulatory approval of new products. Recently, pharmaceutical manufacturers have been under significant pressure to reduce the rate of pharmaceutical price increases. While we expect such price increases to occur in the future, we cannot predict the rate at which such prices will increase or the frequency of increases.

Our industry is in a transition to a fee-for-service model whereby we and our major competitors are compensated for the services provided to manufacturers versus one that is dependent upon manufacturer price increases. There can be no assurance that the fee-for-service transition will be successful or that our profitability will not be significantly reduced by the transition (see further description of business model transition on page 6 under the section titled “Suppliers”).

3

Table of Contents

Medicare and Medicaid Legislative Developments. Medicare reimbursement rates for certain pharmaceuticals were impacted by implementation of the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (“Medicare Modernization Act”) by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), and further Medicare reimbursement reductions and policy changes are scheduled to be implemented in the future. In addition, the U.S. Congress is considering reductions in Medicaid reimbursement for certain prescription drugs. These policies may adversely affect our specialty distribution and our long-term care institutional pharmacy businesses directly and our wholesale drug distribution and specialty distribution businesses indirectly.

Expiration of Patents for Brand Name Pharmaceuticals. A significant number of patents for widely-used brand name pharmaceutical products will expire during the next several years. These products are expected to be marketed by generic pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributed by distributors like us. We consider this a favorable trend because generic products have historically provided a greater gross profit margin opportunity than brand name products.

The Company

The Company was formed by the merger of AmeriSource Health Corporation (“AmeriSource”) and Bergen Brunswig Corporation (“Bergen”) in August 2001. We currently serve our customers, including healthcare providers, pharmaceutical manufacturers, and patients throughout the United States and Puerto Rico and recently, Canada, through a geographically diverse network of distribution and service centers. We typically are the primary source of supply for pharmaceutical and related products to our healthcare provider customers and certain patients. We offer a broad range of services to our customers designed to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of their operations, thereby allowing them to improve the delivery of healthcare to patients and to lower overall costs in the pharmaceutical supply channel.

Strategy

Our business strategy is focused solely on the pharmaceutical supply channel where we provide value-added distribution and service solutions to healthcare providers and pharmaceutical manufacturers that increase channel efficiencies and improve patient outcomes. Implementing this disciplined, focused strategy has allowed us to significantly expand our business, and we believe we are well-positioned to continue to grow revenue and increase operating income through the execution of the following key elements of our business strategy:

4

Table of Contents

Operations

Operating Structure. We are organized based upon the products and services we provide to our customers, and substantially all of our operations are in the United States. The Company’s operations are comprised of two reportable segments: Pharmaceutical Distribution and PharMerica.

The Pharmaceutical Distribution segment includes the operations of AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation (“ABDC”) and the AmerisourceBergen Specialty and Packaging groups. The operations of the former AmerisourceBergen Technology Group became a part of the overall ABDC operations in fiscal 2005. The Pharmaceutical Distribution segment’s operations provide drug distribution and related services throughout the United States, Puerto Rico and Canada (as a result of the Trent acquisition). ABDC distributes a comprehensive offering of brand name and generic pharmaceuticals, over-the-counter healthcare products, and home healthcare supplies and equipment to a wide variety of healthcare providers, including acute care hospitals and health systems, independent and chain retail pharmacies, mail order facilities, physicians, clinics and other alternate site facilities. ABDC also provides scalable automated pharmacy dispensing equipment, medication and supply dispensing cabinets and supply management software to a variety of retail and institutional healthcare providers. AmerisourceBergen Specialty Group (“ABSG”), through a number of individual operating businesses, provides distribution and other services, including group purchasing services to physicians and alternate care providers who specialize in a variety of disease states, including oncology, nephrology, and rheumatology. ABSG also distributes vaccines, other injectables, plasma and other blood products. In addition, through its manufacturer services and physician and patient services businesses, ABSG provides a number of commercialization, third party logistics and other services for biotech and other pharmaceutical manufacturers, reimbursement consulting, practice management, and physician education. The AmerisourceBergen Packaging Group consists of American Health Packaging and Anderson Packaging (“Anderson”). American Health Packaging delivers unit dose, punch card, unit-of-use and other packaging solutions to institutional and retail healthcare providers. Anderson is a leading provider of contracted packaging services for pharmaceutical manufacturers. The drug distribution operations of ABDC and ABSG comprised over 90% of the segment’s operating revenue and over 80% of the segment’s operating income in the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005.

The PharMerica segment includes the operations of the PharMerica long-term care business (“Long-Term Care”) and a workers’ compensation-related business (“Workers’ Compensation”). Long-Term Care is a leading national provider of pharmacy products and services to patients in long-term care and alternate site settings, including skilled nursing facilities,

5

Table of Contents

assisted living facilities and residential living communities. Long-Term Care’s institutional pharmacy business involves the purchase of bulk quantities of prescription and nonprescription pharmaceuticals, principally from our Pharmaceutical Distribution segment, and the dispensing of those products to residents in long-term care and alternate site facilities. Unlike hospitals, most long-term and alternate care facilities do not have onsite pharmacies to dispense prescription drugs, but depend instead on institutional pharmacies, such as Long-Term Care, to provide the necessary pharmacy products and services and to play an integral role in monitoring patient medication. Long-Term Care pharmacies dispense pharmaceuticals in patient specific packaging in accordance with physician orders. In addition, Long-Term Care provides infusion therapy services and Medicare Part B products, as well as formulary management and other pharmacy consulting services. Workers’ Compensation provides mail order and on-line pharmacy services to chronically and catastrophically ill patients under workers’ compensation programs, and provides pharmaceutical claims administration services for payors. Workers’ Compensation services include home delivery of prescription drugs, medical supplies and equipment, and an array of computer software solutions to reduce the payors’ administrative costs.

Sales and Marketing. ABDC has a sales force organized regionally and specialized by healthcare provider type. Customer service representatives are located in distribution facilities in order to respond to customer needs in a timely and effective manner. ABDC also has support professionals focused on its various technologies and service offerings. Our Specialty and Packaging groups and the PharMerica businesses each have independent sales forces that specialize in its respective product and service offerings. Our corporate marketing department designs and develops an array of AmerisourceBergen value-added healthcare provider solutions and marketing materials. Tailored to specific groups, these programs and materials can be further customized at the distribution facility level to adapt to local market conditions. Corporate sales and marketing also serves national account customers through close coordination with local distribution centers and with the management of the Specialty and Packaging groups. Corporate sales and marketing ensures that our customers are receiving the mix of service offerings that meet their needs.

Customers. We have a diverse customer base that includes institutional and retail healthcare providers as well as pharmaceutical manufacturers. Institutional healthcare providers include acute care hospitals, health systems, mail order pharmacies, long-term and alternate care facilities, and physician offices. Retail healthcare providers include national and regional retail drugstore chains, independent community pharmacies and pharmacy departments of supermarkets and mass merchandisers. We are typically the primary source of supply for our customers. In addition, we offer a broad range of value-added solutions designed to enhance the operating efficiencies and competitive positions of our customers, thereby allowing them to improve the delivery of healthcare to patients and consumers. During fiscal 2005, operating revenue for our Pharmaceutical Distribution segment was comprised of 57% institutional and 43% retail.

Our top ten customers represented approximately 31% of fiscal 2005 operating revenue. Our largest non-bulk customer represented 7.5% of our operating revenue in fiscal 2005. Revenues generated from sales to Medco Health Solutions, Inc. (“Medco”) accounted for approximately 93% of bulk deliveries to customer warehouses and approximately 6% of operating revenue in fiscal 2005. Other than our largest non-bulk customer and Medco, no individual customer accounted for more than 5% of our fiscal 2005 operating revenue. In addition, we have contracts with group purchasing organizations (“GPOs”), each of which functions as a purchasing agent on behalf of its members, who are healthcare providers. Approximately 13% of our operating revenue in fiscal 2005 was derived from our three largest GPO relationships (Novation, LLC, United Drugs and Premier Purchasing Partners, L.P.). The loss of any major customer or GPO relationship could adversely affect future operating revenue. In October 2005, ABDC received notice of termination of its GPO contract with United Drugs effective mid-December 2005. United Drugs is a GPO for independent retail pharmacies. We expect that a substantial majority of the members of United Drugs will terminate their affiliation with United Drugs and elect to continue to do business with us. Among other things, the majority of the members of United Drugs are participants in one or more of our retail programs, including Good Neighbor Pharmacy^®, Performance Plus Network^® and Diabetes Shoppe^®, and a number of them also have separate contracts directly with us. However, there can be no assurance that we will retain a substantial majority of the members of United Drugs as customers following the termination of our contract with United Drugs. Purchases by the members of United Drugs represented approximately 4% of the Company’s operating revenues for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005.

Suppliers. We obtain pharmaceutical and other products from manufacturers, none of which accounted for more than approximately 7% of our purchases in fiscal 2005. The loss of a supplier could adversely affect our business if alternate sources of supply are unavailable. We believe that our relationships with our suppliers are generally good. The ten largest suppliers in fiscal 2005 accounted for approximately 42% of our purchases. Effective October 1, 2005, the Company voluntarily made a decision to purchase all pharmaceuticals directly from manufacturers in an effort to further protect the integrity of the supply channel.

ABDC is in a business model transition with respect to how manufacturers compensate us for our services. Historically, supplier arrangements allowed us to generate gross profit in several ways, including cash discounts for prompt payments,

6

Table of Contents

inventory buying opportunities, rebates, inventory management and other agreements, vendor program arrangements, negotiated deals and other promotional opportunities. A significant portion of ABDC’s gross margin had been derived from our ability to purchase merchandise inventories in advance of pharmaceutical manufacturer price increases and to hold these inventories until pharmaceutical prices increase, thereby generating a larger gross margin upon sale of the inventories. Over the last two years, pharmaceutical manufacturers have been increasing their control over the pharmaceutical supply channel by using product allocation methods, including the imposition of inventory management agreements (“IMAs”). Under a typical IMA arrangement, the Company is compensated based on specific contract defined formulas for maintaining a certain level of inventory for a pre-defined period prior to, as of, or subsequent to the date of a manufacturer price increase. The payment from the manufacturer to us is triggered upon the manufacturer price increase. Because the payment trigger is the date of the manufacturer price increase and the size of the payment is typically dependent on the percentage price increase, changes in manufacturers’ pricing patterns can cause significant volatility to the Company’s periodic earnings. Additionally, pharmaceutical manufacturers have been imposing restrictions on our ability to purchase their products from alternate sources and have been requesting more product and distribution sales data from us.

All of the above has led to significant volatility in ABDC’s gross margin and, therefore, we are continuing our efforts to shift our pharmaceutical distribution business to a fee-for-service model where we are compensated for the services we provide manufacturers rather than one that is dependent upon manufacturer price increases (as is the case with the IMA model). We continue to work with our pharmaceutical manufacturer partners to define fee-for-service terms that will adequately compensate us for our services, such as our distribution services, inventory management, service level management, and other services. Under a typical fee-for-service agreement, the Company is compensated for its services based on a percentage of purchases over a defined time period, with payment of fees being made directly or through a combination of direct payments and price increase entitlements. As of September 30, 2005, we have signed agreements with a number of the large branded pharmaceutical manufacturers that we consider fee-for-service arrangements as well as some that we consider hybrid agreements with some attributes of IMAs and some attributes of fee-for-service arrangements. We believe the transition to a fee-for-service model will improve the efficiency of the supply channel and may establish a more predictable earnings pattern for ABDC, while expanding our service relationship with pharmaceutical manufacturers. The fee-for-service arrangements may establish a more predictable earnings pattern because under many of the agreements the Company earns a fee for its services performed on a monthly basis in contrast to the IMA model where earnings are largely predicated upon the timing and amount of pharmaceutical price increases. We continue to have discussions with pharmaceutical manufacturers regarding fee-for-service arrangements and expect to have agreements in place with a substantial majority of the large branded manufacturers by the end of calendar 2005. During fiscal 2006, we expect that more than 75% of ABDC’s brand name manufacturer gross margin will not be contingent on manufacturer price increases. However, there can be no assurance that this business model transition will provide all of the desired benefits or that the Company will be able to retain those benefits.

Information Systems. ABDC’s information systems provide for, among other things, electronic order entry by customers, invoice preparation and purchasing, and inventory tracking. As a result of electronic order entry, the cost of receiving and processing orders has not increased as rapidly as sales volume. ABDC’s customized systems strengthen customer relationships by allowing the customer to lower its operating costs and by providing a platform for a number of the value-added services offered to our customers, including marketing, product demand data, inventory replenishment, single-source billing, computer price updates and price labels.

ABDC operates its full-service wholesale pharmaceutical distribution facilities on two different centralized information systems, while continuing to migrate to one system and maintaining our customers’ access through either order-entry system. ABDC plans to complete its migration to one system in the first quarter of fiscal 2006.

ABDC plans to continue to make system investments to further improve its information capabilities and meet its customer and operational needs. ABDC continues to expand its electronic interface with its suppliers and currently processes a substantial portion of its purchase orders, invoices and payments electronically. ABDC is implementing a new warehouse operating system that is expected to improve its productivity and operating leverage. ABDC will continue to invest in advanced information systems and automated warehouse technology. As of September 30, 2005, approximately one-third of our distribution facilities have successfully implemented the new warehouse operating system.

In an effort to maintain and improve its information technology infrastructure, the Company decided to outsource a significant portion of its corporate and ABDC information technology activities and entered into a ten-year commitment, effective July 1, 2005, with IBM Global Services (“IBM”), which will assume responsibility for performing the outsourced information technology activities following the completion of certain transition matters. The Company estimates that it will incur approximately $20 million to $25 million of transition costs in connection with this plan. These transition costs will include employee severance and other contract expenses. The Company incurred approximately one-half of these costs in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2005. The minimum commitment under the outsourcing arrangement is approximately $200 million (excluding

7

Table of Contents

the above-mentioned transition costs) over a ten-year period; however, the Company believes it will likely spend between $300 million and $400 million under the outsourcing arrangement to maintain and improve its information technology infrastructure during that period.

ABSG operates its specialty distribution business on a common, centralized ERP platform resulting in operating efficiencies as well as the ability to rapidly deploy new capabilities. The convenience of ordering via the Internet is very important to ABSG’s customers. Over the last three years, we have introduced and enhanced our web capabilities such that currently more than 30% of orders are initiated on the web.

PharMerica’s Long-Term Care business operates a proprietary information technology infrastructure that automates order entry of medications, dispensing of medications, invoicing, and payment processing. These systems provide medical records, consulting drug review, and regulatory compliance information to help ensure patient safety. PharMerica’s Workers’ Compensation business provides proprietary information technology for workers’ compensation solutions. These systems provide eligibility authorization and reimbursement payments to participating pharmacies. They also provide order taking, shipment and collection of service fees for medications and specialty services. The systems also provide billing and reimbursement for other services rendered. PharMerica continues to invest in technologies that help improve data integrity, critical information access and system availability.

Competition

We face a highly competitive environment in the distribution of pharmaceuticals and related healthcare solutions. ABDC competes with both national and regional distributors within pharmaceutical distribution. Our national competitors include Cardinal Health, Inc. and McKesson Corporation. In addition, we compete with regional and local distributors, direct-selling manufacturers, warehousing chain drugstores, specialty distributors, and packaging and healthcare technology companies. The provider and alternate site product distribution channels serviced by ABSG are also highly competitive. Specialty distribution channel competitors include Oncology Therapeutics Network, FFF Enterprises, Henry Schein, Inc., Med-Path, and Priority Healthcare Corporation, among others. Competitors in the business of providing specialty pharmaceutical services to manufacturers include US Oncology, Inc., Covance Inc., and UPS Logistics, among others. In all areas, competitive factors include price, value-added service programs, product offerings, service and delivery, credit terms, and customer support.

PharMerica’s competitors principally include Omnicare, Inc., a national competitor, which is significantly larger than PharMerica, as well as regional and local pharmacies that specialize in long-term care. We believe that the competitive factors most important in PharMerica’s lines of business are quality and range of service offered, pricing, reputation with referral sources, ease of doing business with the provider, and the ability to develop and maintain relationships with referral sources. In addition, there are relatively few barriers to entry in the local markets served by PharMerica and it may encounter substantial competition from local market entrants. PharMerica also competes with numerous billing companies in connection with the portion of its business that electronically adjudicates workers’ compensation claims for payors.

Intellectual Property

We use a number of trademarks and service marks. All of the principal trademarks and service marks used in the course of our business have been registered in the United States or are the subject of pending applications for registration.

We have developed or acquired various proprietary products, processes, software and other intellectual property that are used either to facilitate the conduct of our business or that are made available as products or services to customers. We generally seek to protect such intellectual property through a combination of trade secret, patent and copyright laws and through confidentiality and other contractually imposed protections.

We hold patents and have patent applications pending that relate to certain of our products, particularly our automated pharmacy dispensing equipment and our medication and supply dispensing equipment. We seek patent protection for our proprietary intellectual property from time to time as appropriate.

Although we believe that our patents or other proprietary products and processes do not infringe upon the intellectual property rights of any third parties, third parties may assert infringement claims against us from time to time.

8

Table of Contents

Employees

As of September 30, 2005, we employed approximately 13,400 persons, of which approximately 12,300 were full-time employees. Approximately 5% of full and part-time employees are covered by collective bargaining agreements. The Company believes that its relationship with its employees is good.

Government Regulation

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) and various state regulatory authorities regulate the distribution of pharmaceutical products and controlled substances. Wholesale distributors of these substances are required to register for permits, meet various security and operating standards, and comply with regulations governing their sale, marketing, packaging, holding and distribution. The FDA, DEA and state regulatory authorities have broad enforcement powers, including the ability to seize or recall products and impose significant criminal, civil and administrative sanctions for violations of these laws and regulations. As a wholesale distributor of pharmaceuticals and certain related products, we are subject to these regulations. We have received all necessary regulatory approvals and believe that we are in substantial compliance with all applicable pharmaceutical wholesale distribution requirements.

We and our customers are subject to fraud and abuse laws which prohibit, among other things, (a) persons from soliciting, offering, receiving or paying any remuneration in order to induce the referral of a patient for treatment or for inducing the ordering or purchasing of items or services that are in any way paid for by Medicare, Medicaid, or other government healthcare programs and (b) physicians from making referrals to certain entities with whom they have a financial relationship. The fraud and abuse laws and regulations are broad in scope and are subject to frequent modification and varied interpretation. The operations of PharMerica and the Specialty Group are particularly subject to these laws and regulations, as are certain aspects of our Pharmaceutical Distribution operations.

Under the Prospective Payment System (“PPS”) for Medicare patients in skilled nursing facilities, Medicare pays a federal daily rate for virtually all covered skilled nursing facility services. Under PPS, PharMerica’s Long-Term Care skilled nursing facility customers are not able to pass through to Medicare their costs for certain products and services provided by PharMerica. Instead, Medicare provides such customers a federal daily rate to cover the costs of all covered goods and services provided to Medicare patients, which may include certain pharmaceutical and other goods and services provided by PharMerica. Because this Medicare reimbursement is limited by PPS, facility customers have an increased incentive to negotiate with PharMerica to minimize the costs of providing goods and services to patients covered under Medicare. PharMerica bills skilled nursing facilities based on a negotiated fee schedule.

The Medicare Modernization Act reduced Medicare payments for most Part B drugs from 95 percent to 85 percent of average wholesale price (“AWP”) for 2004, and instituted an “average sales price” or “ASP” methodology beginning in 2005. Beginning on July 1, 2006, physicians will have the option of continuing to obtain Part B reimbursed drugs under the traditional “buy and bill” approach or acquiring drugs through a new competitive acquisition program or CAP. It is currently anticipated that physicians who participate in CAP will bill the Medicare program only for the drug administration, while the CAP vendor will bill Medicare for the actual CAP drug and also will collect applicable beneficiary copayments.

The Medicare Modernization Act also significantly expanded Medicare coverage for outpatient prescription drugs. Specifically, on January 1, 2006, the new, voluntary Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit will go into effect. Beneficiaries who choose to participate in Part D will select from a range of stand-alone prescription drug plans or Medicare Advantage managed care plans that include prescription drug coverage along with other Medicare services (“Part D Plans”). The Part D Plans will be required to make available certain drugs on their formularies. Reimbursement for Part D drugs will be negotiated by each Part D Plan.

PharMerica’s Long-Term Care business also receives reimbursement directly for dispensed pharmaceuticals in some cases under state Medicaid programs. Over the last several years, state Medicaid programs have lowered reimbursement through a variety of mechanisms, principally reductions in Average Wholesale Price (AWP) levels, expansion of Federal Upper Limit (FUL) pricing, and general reductions in contract payment methodology to pharmacies. Congress also is considering budget reconciliation legislation that would further reduce Medicaid reimbursement for pharmaceuticals, although to date Congress has not adopted a final budget package. Moreover, Medicaid drug coverage will be affected by the new Medicare Part D drug benefit to be implemented in 2006, since Medicare Part D, not Medicaid, will cover most outpatient drug expenses for beneficiaries who qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid coverage (so-called “dual eligibles”), including dual eligibles residing in nursing homes.

9

Table of Contents

In recent years, some states have passed or have proposed laws and regulations that are intended to protect the integrity of the supply channel. For example, Florida and other states are implementing pedigree requirements that require drugs to be accompanied by paperwork tracing drugs back to the manufacturers. These and other requirements are expected to increase the Company’s cost of operations. Effective October 1, 2005, the Company voluntarily made a decision to purchase all pharmaceuticals only from manufacturers in an effort to further protect the integrity of the supply channel.

As a result of political, economic and regulatory influences, the healthcare delivery industry in the United States is under intense scrutiny and subject to fundamental changes. We cannot predict which reform proposals will be adopted, when they may be adopted, or what impact they may have on us.

The costs associated with complying with federal and state regulations could be significant and the failure to comply with any such legal requirements could have a significant impact on the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.

See “Certain Risk Factors” for a discussion of additional regulatory developments that may affect the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.

Health Information Practices

The Health Information Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) and the regulations promulgated thereunder by HHS set forth health information standards in order to protect security and privacy in the exchange of individually identifiable health information. Significant criminal and civil penalties may be imposed for violation of these standards. We have a HIPAA compliance program to facilitate our ongoing effort to comply with the HIPAA regulations.

Certain Risk Factors

The following discussion describes certain risk factors that we believe could affect our business and prospects. These risk factors are in addition to those set forth elsewhere in this report.

Intense competition may erode our profit margins.

The distribution of pharmaceuticals and related healthcare solutions is highly competitive. We compete with national wholesale distributors of pharmaceuticals such as Cardinal Health, Inc. and McKesson Corporation; regional and local distributors of pharmaceuticals; chain drugstores that warehouse their own pharmaceuticals; manufacturers who distribute their products directly to customers; specialty distributors; and other healthcare providers. The Long-Term Care and Workers’ Compensation businesses in which PharMerica operates also are highly competitive.

Competitive pressures have contributed to a decline in our gross profit margins on operating revenue from 5.42% in fiscal 2001 to 3.96% in fiscal 2005. This trend may continue and our business could be adversely affected as a result.

Our operating revenue and profitability may suffer upon the loss of a significant customer.

Our top ten customers represented approximately 31% of operating revenue for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005. Our largest individual customer accounted for approximately 7.5% of our operating revenue for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005. We also have contracts with group purchasing organizations (“GPOs”), each of which functions as a purchasing agent on behalf of its members, who are hospitals, pharmacies or other healthcare providers. Approximately 13% of our operating revenue for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005 was derived from our three largest GPO relationships (Novation, LLC, United Drugs and Premier Purchasing Partners, L.P.). We may lose a significant customer or GPO relationship if any existing contract with such customer or GPO expires without being extended, renewed, renegotiated or replaced or is terminated by the customer or GPO prior to expiration, to the extent such early termination is permitted by the contract. A number of our contracts with significant customers or GPOs are typically subject to expiration each year and we may lose any of these customers or GPO relationships if we are unable to extend, renew, renegotiate or replace the contracts. The loss of any significant customer or GPO relationship could adversely affect future operating revenue and profitability. In October 2005, ABDC received notice of termination of its GPO contract with United Drugs effective mid-December 2005. United Drugs is a GPO for independent retail pharmacies. We expect that a substantial majority of the members of United Drugs will terminate their affiliation with United Drugs and elect to continue to do business with us. Among other things, the majority of the members of United Drugs are participants in one or more of our retail programs, including Good Neighbor Pharmacy^®, Performance Plus Network^® and Diabetes Shoppe^®, and a number of them also have separate contracts directly with us. However, there can be no

10

Table of Contents

assurance that we will retain a substantial majority of the members of United Drugs as customers following the termination of our contract with United Drugs. Purchases by the members of United Drugs represented approximately 4% of the Company’s operating revenues for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005.

Approximately 11% of PharMerica’s operating revenue in the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005 was derived from Long-Term Care’s contract with Beverly Enterprises, Inc. The initial term of this contract is scheduled to expire in the middle part of fiscal 2006 and the contract is expected to be renewed at or before the expiration of the initial term. A termination of this contract or a renewal of this contract on significantly less favorable economic terms would adversely affect PharMerica’s operating revenue and results of operations.

Our operating revenue and profitability may suffer upon the bankruptcy, insolvency or other credit failure of a significant customer.

Most of our customers buy pharmaceuticals and other products and services from us on credit. Credit is made available to customers based on our assessment and analysis of creditworthiness. Although we often try to obtain a security interest in assets and other arrangements intended to protect our credit exposure, we generally are either subordinated to the position of the primary lenders to our customers or substantially unsecured. The bankruptcy, insolvency or other credit failure of any customer at a time when the customer has a substantial account payable balance due to us could have a material adverse affect on our results of operations. At September 30, 2005, the largest trade receivable due from a single customer represented approximately 13% of accounts receivable, net.

Our results of operations may suffer upon the bankruptcy, insolvency or other credit failure of a significant supplier.

Our relationships with pharmaceutical suppliers give rise to substantial amounts that are due to us from the suppliers, including amounts due to us for returned goods or defective goods and amounts due to us for services provided to the suppliers. The bankruptcy, insolvency or other credit failure of any supplier at a time when the supplier has a substantial account payable balance due to us could have a material adverse affect on our results of operations.

The Company’s Pharmaceutical Distribution segment is transitioning its business model.

The Company’s Pharmaceutical Distribution segment is in a business model transition with respect to how it is compensated for services it provides to pharmaceutical manufacturers. Historically, supplier arrangements allowed us to generate gross profit in several ways, including cash discounts for prompt payments, inventory buying opportunities, rebates, inventory management and other agreements, vendor program arrangements, negotiated deals and other promotional opportunities.

A significant portion of the gross margin for our pharmaceutical business had been derived from our ability to purchase merchandise inventories in advance of pharmaceutical price increases and then hold these inventories until pharmaceutical prices increase, thereby generating a larger gross margin upon sale of the inventories. Over the last two years, however, pharmaceutical manufacturers have been increasing their control over the pharmaceutical supply channel by using product allocation methods, including imposition of inventory management agreements (“IMAs”). Under most IMAs we are paid for not speculating with respect to pharmaceutical price increases. However, in most cases our compensation under IMAs continues to be predicated upon pharmaceutical price increases. Additionally, pharmaceutical manufacturers have imposed restrictions on our ability to purchase their products from alternate sources. Effective October 1, 2005, the Company voluntarily made a decision to purchase all pharmaceuticals only from manufacturers in an effort to further protect the integrity of the supply channel.

All of the above has resulted in significant volatility in the gross margin for our pharmaceutical distribution business and, therefore, we are in an effort to shift our business to a fee-for-service model where we are compensated for the services we provide manufacturers rather than one that is dependent upon manufacturer price increases (as is the case with the IMA model). We have been and are continuing to work with our pharmaceutical manufacturer partners to define fee-for-service terms that will adequately compensate us for our services. We expect to have agreements—either fee-for-service agreements or hybrid agreements that have some attributes of IMAs and some attributes of fee-for-service agreements—in place with a substantial majority of the large branded manufacturers by the end of calendar 2005. During fiscal 2006, we expect that more than 75% of ABDC’s brand name manufacturer gross margin will not be contingent on manufacturer price increases. There can be no assurance that this business model transition will be successful or that the timing of that transition will occur as anticipated by the Company. If the transition does not proceed successfully, the Company may not be adequately compensated and its profitability may be significantly reduced.

11

Table of Contents

The supply channel business model transition may reduce our profitability.

The supply channel business model transition described above has the potential to affect the profitability of customer contracts that were developed under a business model that was predicated on price increases and high inventory levels. Many of our contracts with healthcare providers are multi-year contracts that cannot be terminated or amended in the event of such changes in our relationships with manufacturers. Accordingly, the advent of such changes may have the effect of reducing, or even eliminating, our profitability on such contracts through the end of the applicable contract periods.

Increasing governmental efforts to regulate the pharmaceutical supply channel may increase our costs and reduce our profitability.

The healthcare industry is highly regulated at the federal and state level. Consequently, we are subject to the risk of changes in various federal and state laws, which include operating and security standards of the DEA, the FDA, various state boards of pharmacy and comparable agencies. In recent years, some states have passed or have proposed laws and regulations, including pedigree tracking requirements, that are intended to protect the integrity of the supply channel but that also may substantially increase the costs and burden of pharmaceutical distribution.

Legal and regulatory changes affecting rates of reimbursement for pharmaceuticals and/or medical treatments or services may reduce our profitability.

Both our own profit margins and the profit margins of our customers may be adversely affected by laws and regulations reducing reimbursement rates for pharmaceuticals and/or medical treatments or services or changing the methodology by which reimbursement levels are determined. Many of our contracts with healthcare providers are multi-year contracts from which we derive profit based upon reimbursement rates and methodology. Many of these contracts cannot be terminated or amended in the event of such legal and regulatory changes. Accordingly, such changes may have the effect of reducing, or even eliminating, our profitability on such contracts until the end of the applicable contract periods.

ABSG’s business may be adversely affected in the future by recent and proposed changes in the Medicare reimbursement rates for certain pharmaceuticals, including oncology drugs. The reimbursement changes that have been implemented by HHS starting in January 2004 and continuing in 2005 pursuant to the Medicare Modernization Act, along with additional reforms scheduled to go into effect in 2006, may have the effect of reducing the amount of and/or margins on medications purchased by physicians for administration in their offices and may force patients to other healthcare providers. In particular, under the upcoming competitive acquisition program or CAP, physicians may choose to forgo purchasing drugs for Medicare patients and instead opt to obtain products from a CAP vendor that bills Medicare directly. Since ABSG provides a number of services to or through physicians, patient shifts from physicians to other healthcare providers may result in slower growth or lower revenues for ABSG. Although ABSG has contingency plans to enable it to retain and grow the business it conducts with and through physicians, there can be no assurance that it will retain or replace all of the revenue currently going through the physician channel or that such revenue will be as profitable.

The Medicare Modernization Act also includes a major expansion of the Medicare prescription drug benefit under the new Medicare Part D. Beginning in 2006, Medicare beneficiaries will be eligible to enroll in prescription drug plans that will be offered by private entities and will be eligible for varying levels of coverage for outpatient prescription drugs. Medicare beneficiaries who will have all or a substantial portion of their prescription drug costs covered by the new Medicare drug benefit include those nursing home residents served by the Long-Term Care business whose drug costs are currently covered by state Medicaid programs. In January 2005, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) of HHS published final rules for the new voluntary prescription drug benefit program. While these rules established a framework for the new benefit, further information and guidance continues to be provided by CMS. The rules permit long-term care pharmacies to provide covered Medicare Part D drugs to enrollees of the new Medicare Part D plans. Under the rules, long-term care pharmacies will be able to participate on an in-network basis by contracting directly with the plan sponsor. The changes contemplated by the rules are expected to take full effect in 2006. At this time, we cannot determine the future impact of Medicare Part D on the Long-Term Care business, but the implementation of Medicare Part D could have an adverse effect on the Long-Term Care business.

Long-Term Care receives rebates from pharmaceutical manufacturers for undertaking certain activities that the manufacturers believe may increase the likelihood that their respective products will be dispensed. In answer to a frequently asked question (“FAQ”), CMS recently indicated that it is examining whether long-term care pharmacies should be permitted to receive “access/performance” rebates from pharmaceutical manufacturers with respect to prescriptions covered under the Medicare Part D benefit. CMS defined these as rebates that manufacturers provide to long-term pharmacies that are designed to “prefer, protect or maintain” that manufacturers’ product selection by the long-term care pharmacy or to increase the volume of the manufacturers’ products that are dispensed by

12

Table of Contents

the pharmacy under its formulary. CMS subsequently withdrew the FAQ and, to date, has not provided any additional guidance on this issue. The elimination of manufacturer rebates could have an adverse effect on the Long-Term Care business. Long-Term Care’s business could be adversely affected if CMS should take any action that has the effect of eliminating or significantly reducing the rebates that Long-Term Care receives from manufacturers.

The changing United States healthcare environment may negatively impact our revenue and income.

Our products and services are intended to function within the structure of the healthcare financing and reimbursement system currently existing in the United States. In recent years, the healthcare industry has undergone significant changes in an effort to reduce costs and government spending. These changes include an increased reliance on managed care; cuts in Medicare funding affecting our healthcare provider customer base; consolidation of competitors, suppliers and customers; and the development of large, sophisticated purchasing groups. We expect the healthcare industry to continue to change significantly in the future. Some of these potential changes, such as a reduction in governmental support of healthcare services or adverse changes in legislation or regulations governing prescription drug pricing, healthcare services or mandated benefits, may cause healthcare industry participants to reduce the amount of our products and services they purchase or the price they are willing to pay for our products and services. Changes in pharmaceutical manufacturers’ pricing or distribution policies could also significantly reduce our income.

If we fail to comply with laws and regulations in respect of healthcare fraud, we could suffer penalties or be required to make significant changes to our operations.

We are subject to extensive and frequently changing federal and state laws and regulations relating to healthcare fraud. The federal government continues to strengthen its position and scrutiny over practices involving healthcare fraud affecting the Medicare, Medicaid and other government healthcare programs. Our relationships with pharmaceutical manufacturers and healthcare providers subject our business to laws and regulations on fraud and abuse which, among other things, (i) prohibit persons from soliciting, offering, receiving or paying any remuneration in order to induce the referral of a patient for treatment or for inducing the ordering or purchasing of items or services that are in any way paid for by Medicare, Medicaid or other government-sponsored healthcare programs and (ii) impose a number of restrictions upon referring physicians and providers of designated health services under Medicare and Medicaid programs. Legislative provisions relating to healthcare fraud and abuse give federal enforcement personnel substantially increased funding, powers and remedies to pursue suspected fraud and abuse. While we believe that we are in substantial compliance with all applicable laws, many of the regulations applicable to us, including those relating to marketing incentives offered by pharmaceutical suppliers, are vague or indefinite and have not been interpreted by the courts. They may be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that could require us to make changes in our operations. If we fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations, we could suffer civil and criminal penalties, including the loss of licenses or our ability to participate in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal and state healthcare programs.

We may not realize all of the anticipated benefits of our integration plan to consolidate our distribution network and eliminate duplicative administrative functions.

We are proceeding with an integration plan to consolidate our ABDC distribution facilities from 51 to a distribution facility network numbering in the mid-20’s within the next two years; implement new warehouse information technology systems and eliminate duplicative administrative functions. The program is designed to focus capacity on growing markets, significantly increase warehouse efficiencies and streamline our transportation activities. The plan includes building six new facilities (four of which were operational as of September 30, 2005), closing facilities (twenty-three of which have been closed as of September 30, 2005) and implementing a new warehouse operating system. The fifth new facility opened in October 2005 and the sixth facility is scheduled to open during fiscal 2006. We closed a total of six facilities during fiscal 2005 and we expect to close an additional six facilities during fiscal 2006, thereby reducing the total number of distribution facilities to 28 by the end of fiscal 2006. We believe our enhanced distribution network will result in the lowest costs in pharmaceutical distribution and the highest accuracy and speed of customer order fulfillment. We may not realize all of the anticipated benefits of enhancing our distribution network if we experience delays in building the new facilities or closing existing facilities, we incur significant cost overruns associated with the program, or the new warehouse information technology systems do not function as planned.

Effective July 1, 2005, we outsourced a significant portion of our information technology activities to IBM as part of the integration plan. There can be no assurance that our business operations will not be affected adversely by the outsourcing of such activities or that IBM will perform satisfactorily.

13

Table of Contents

Our operating results and/or financial condition may be adversely affected if we undertake acquisitions of businesses that do not perform as we expect or that are difficult for us to integrate.

We expect to continue to implement our growth strategy, in part, by acquiring companies. At any particular time, we may be in various stages of assessment, discussion and negotiation with regard to one or more potential acquisitions, not all of which will be consummated. We make public disclosure of pending and completed acquisitions when appropriate and required by applicable securities laws and regulations.

Acquisitions involve numerous risks and uncertainties. If we complete one or more acquisitions, our results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected by a number of factors, including: the failure of the acquired businesses to achieve the results we have projected in either the near or long term; the assumption of unknown liabilities; the difficulties of imposing adequate financial and operating controls on the acquired companies and their management and the potential liabilities that might arise pending the imposition of adequate controls; the difficulties in the integration of the operations, technologies, services and products of the acquired companies; and the failure to achieve the strategic objectives of these acquisitions.

Our operating results and our financial condition may be adversely affected by foreign operations.

We recently acquired a pharmaceutical distributor based in Canada and expect to consider additional foreign acquisitions in the future. Our existing foreign operations and any operations we may acquire in the future carry risks in addition to the risks of acquisition, as described above. At any particular time, foreign operations may encounter risks and uncertainties regarding the governmental, political, economic, business and competitive environment within the countries in which those operations are based. Additionally, foreign operations expose us to foreign currency fluctuations that could impact our results of operations and financial condition based on the movements of the applicable foreign currency exchange rates in relation to the U.S. Dollar.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results, our management may not be able to provide its report on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006 as required pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and our independent registered public accounting firm may not be able to provide an unqualified attestation, or any attestation, on management’s assessment of the operating effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting.

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, our management will be required to deliver a report in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, similar to the one delivered herein, that assesses the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. We also will be required to deliver an attestation report, similar to the one delivered herein, of our independent registered public accounting firm on our management’s assessment of, and operating effectiveness of, internal controls. We have undertaken substantial effort to assess, enhance and document our internal control systems, financial processes and information systems and expect to continue to do so during fiscal 2006 in preparation for the required annual evaluation process. Significant use of resources, both internal and external, will be required to make the requisite evaluation of the annual effectiveness of the Company’s internal controls. While the Company believes it has adequate internal controls and will meet its obligations, there can be no assurance that the Company will be able to complete the work necessary for the Company’s management to issue its report in a timely manner or that management or the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm will conclude that the Company’s internal controls are effective.

Risks generally associated with the Company’s sophisticated information systems may adversely affect the Company’s operating results.

The Company relies on sophisticated information systems in its business to obtain, rapidly process, analyze, and manage data to facilitate the purchase and distribution of thousands of inventory items from numerous distribution centers; receive, to process, and ship orders on a timely basis; to manage the accurate billing and collections for thousands of customers; and to process payments to suppliers. The Company’s business and results of operations may be adversely affected if these systems are interrupted or damaged by unforeseen events or if they fail for any extended period of time, including due to the actions of third parties. A third party service provider is responsible for managing a significant portion of the Company’s information systems. The Company’s business and results of operations may be adversely affected if the third party service provider does not perform satisfactorily.

14

Table of Contents

Available Information

For more information about us, visit our website at www.amerisourcebergen.com. The contents of the website are not part of this Form 10-K. Our electronic filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (including all Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K, and any amendments to these reports) may be viewed using their website at www.sec.gov and are available free of charge through the “Investors” section of our website immediately after we electronically file with or furnish them to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

As of September 30, 2005, we conducted our business from office and operating facilities at owned and leased locations throughout the United States and Puerto Rico. In the aggregate, our facilities occupy approximately 8.1 million square feet of office and warehouse space, which is either owned or leased under agreements that expire from time to time through 2018.

Our 32 full-service ABDC wholesale pharmaceutical distribution facilities range in size from approximately 39,000 square feet to 314,000 square feet, with an aggregate of approximately 5.0 million square feet. Our six new distribution facilities, including office space, will each have approximately 300,000 square feet. Leased facilities are located in Puerto Rico plus the following states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, New Jersey, Utah, and Washington. Owned facilities are located in the following states: Alabama, California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. We consider our operating properties to be in satisfactory condition. The current leases expire through 2018. See Optimize and Grow Our Distribution Business on Page 4 for a discussion of our facility consolidation and expansion plan.

As of September 30, 2005, the other business units within the Pharmaceutical Distribution segment (including the Specialty and Packaging Groups and our other operations) were located in fifty-two leased locations and four owned locations. The locations range in size from approximately 300 square feet to 310,000 square feet and have a combined area of approximately 1.8 million square feet, of which the Packaging Group, due to the nature of its operations, occupies approximately 0.9 million square feet. The leases expire through 2015.

As of September 30, 2005, our PharMerica operations were located in 96 leased locations (92 of which are pharmacies) ranging in size from approximately 100 square feet to 111,000 square feet and had a combined area of approximately 1.0 million square feet. The leases expire through 2010.

We lease approximately 134,000 square feet of general and executive offices in Chesterbrook, Pennsylvania and own and lease approximately 186,000 square feet of administrative and data processing offices in Orange, California and Montgomery, Alabama. The leases expire through 2010.

15

Table of Contents

In the ordinary course of its business, the Company becomes involved in lawsuits, administrative proceedings and governmental investigations, including antitrust, environmental, product liability, regulatory and other matters. Significant damages or penalties may be sought from the Company in some matters, and some matters may require years for the Company to resolve. The Company establishes reserves based on its periodic assessment of estimates of probable losses. There can be no assurance that an adverse resolution of one or more matters during any subsequent reporting period will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations for that period. However, on the basis of information furnished by counsel and others and taking into consideration the reserves established for pending matters, the Company does not believe that the resolution of currently pending matters (including those matters specifically described below), individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition. (See Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

Stockholder Derivative Lawsuit

The Company has been named as a nominal defendant in a stockholder derivative action on behalf of the Company under Delaware law that was filed in March 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Also named as defendants in the action are all of the individuals who were serving as directors of the Company prior to the date of filing of the action and certain current and former officers of the Company and its predecessors. The derivative action alleged, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control and gross mismanagement against all the individual defendants. It further alleged, among other things, waste of corporate assets, unjust enrichment and usurpation of corporate opportunity against certain of the individual defendants. The derivative action sought compensatory and punitive damages in favor of the Company, attorneys’ fees and costs, and further relief as may be determined by the court. The defendants believe that this derivative action is wholly without merit. In May 2004, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the action on both procedural and substantive grounds. In February 2005, the District Court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the entire action. Following the dismissal of the action, the derivative plaintiff made demand upon the Company to inspect the Company’s books and records. The Company believes that the demand is improper under Delaware law and has refused to allow the inspection. The derivative plaintiff obtained the right from the District Court to file an amended complaint within 30 days after resolution of the inspection demand and, thereafter, filed a complaint in the Delaware Chancery Court seeking to compel inspection of certain of the Company’s books and records. On November 30, 2005, the Delaware Ch