XML 35 R24.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.19.2

Commitments and Contingencies | 6 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2019
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Claims have been filed against the Company and certain of its affiliates in various jurisdictions across the United States by persons alleging bodily injury as a result of exposure to asbestos-containing products. Further information and detail on these claims is described in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018, in Note 21 therein, filed on February 27, 2019. During the first six months of 2019, there were no material changes to the information described in the Form 10-K related to claims arising from asbestos exposure. From time to time, the Company is involved in litigation related to claims arising out of the Company's operations in the ordinary course of business, including claims based on product liability, contracts, intellectual property, or other causes of action. Further information and detail on any potentially material litigation is as described in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018, in Note 21 therein, filed on February 27, 2019. Except as described below, there have been no material changes to the information described in the Form 10-K related to claims arising from Company's ordinary operations. On April 21, 2016, Siemens Industry, Inc. filed a lawsuit against the Company in federal district court in Delaware alleging that the Company has infringed seven patents owned by Siemens related to the Company's Positive Train Control (PTC) technology. On November 2, 2016, Siemens amended its complaint to add six additional patents they also claim are infringed by the Company's PTC Products or End of Train (EOT) Products (Siemen Patent Case). The Company has filed Answers, and asserted counterclaims, in response to Siemens’ complaints. Additionally, after filings by the Company, the US Patent & Trademark Office’s Patent Trail and Appeal Board (PTAB) has granted Inter-Parties Review (IPR) proceedings on eight (8) of the patents asserted by Siemens to contest their validity. Following pre-trial rulings that greatly reduced Siemens’ alleged damages, a jury trial was held in federal district court in Delaware in January 2019 on eight patents, two of which were still subject to an IPR decision on validity from the PTAB. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury awarded Siemens damages of $5.6 million related to PTC patents and $1.1 million related to EOT patents. Since the jury’s verdict was issued, one of the PTC patents found to be infringed was held to be invalid by the PTAB. All PTAB proceedings have been now been completed, pending appeals; five (5) of the (8) Siemens patents reviewed by the PTAB were found to be invalid. On February 26, 2019, the Court entered a Judgment on the verdict, subject to post-trial motions. On May 28, 2019, the Court held a hearing on both parties' post-trial motions, any of which, if granted, could potentially affect the final Judgment. After the Court's ruling on the post-trial motions, a final Judgment will be entered and either party may file appeals to the Federal Circuit. On March 20, 2019, Siemens filed a new action in federal district court in Delaware alleging violations of federal antitrust and state trade practices laws since before 2008, related to Wabtec’s PTC sales, including on-board, back-office, wayside and aftermarket support systems (Siemens originally raised these antitrust claims as counterclaims in a separate Delaware patent case filed by Wabtec alleging that Siemens has violated three (3) of Wabtec’s patents; the antitrust claims were ultimately severed from that case in January, 2019, resulting in Siemens re-filing them as another separate proceeding in Delaware.) Wabtec believes Siemens’ antitrust claims are without merit and will vigorously defend itself against these claims. Xorail, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company (“Xorail”), has received notices from Denver Transit Constructors (“DTC”) alleging breach of contract related to the operating of constant warning wireless crossings, and late delivery of the Train Management & Dispatch System (“TMDS”) for the Denver Eagle P3 Project, which is owned by the Denver Regional Transit District ("RTD"). No damages have been asserted for the alleged late delivery of the TMDS, and no formal claim has been filed. Xorail is in the final stages of successfully implementing a recovery plan concerning the TMDS issues. With regard to the wireless crossing issue, as of September 8, 2017, DTC alleged that total damages were $36.8 million through July 31, 2017 and are continuing to accumulate. The majority of the damages stems from a delay in approval of the wireless crossing system by the Federal Railway Administration ("FRA") and the Public Utility Commission ("PUC"), resulting in the use of flaggers at all of the crossings pending approval of the wireless crossing system and certification of the crossings. DTC has alleged that the delay is due to Xorail's failure to achieve constant warning times for the crossings in accordance with the approval requirements imposed by the FRA and PUC. Xorail has denied DTC's assertions, stating that its system satisfied the contractual requirements. Xorail has worked with DTC to modify its system and implement the FRA's and PUC's previously undefined approval requirements; the FRA and PUC have both approved modified wireless crossing system, and as of August 2018, DTC completed the process of certifying the crossings and eliminated the use of flaggers. On September 21, 2018, DTC filed a complaint against RTD in Colorado state court for breach of contract related to non-payments and the costs for the flaggers, asserting a change-in-law arising from the FRA/PUC’s new certification requirements; a jury trial is scheduled to begin in May 2020. DTC’s complaint generally supports Xorail’s position and does not name or implicate Xorail; DTC has not updated its notices against Xorail, nor have they filed any formal claim against Xorail.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration