11. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Funding Agreement

In March 2010, we entered into a funding agreement with the Oklahoma City Economic Development Trust (the “Trust”) and the city of Oklahoma City. The Trust provided $2.0 million as an up-front job creation payment for the construction of certain public infrastructure improvements related to our new principal executive offices in northwest Oklahoma City. In exchange for the funding, we agreed to create at least 492 jobs over a five year period, with an average first year salary in excess of $37 thousand and make a minimum capital investment in the project of at least $15.0 million. We further agreed that we would be responsible for repayment of any amount that was not offset by earned job creation payments. As of June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, we had earned $1.8 million and $1.5 million of job creation payments, respectively. We believe that we will fulfill the obligations under this agreement within the time frame specified.

Legal Proceedings

In July 2013, Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam filed a complaint against Paycom Payroll, LLC (“Paycom”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware alleging that Paycom infringes on U.S. Patent No. 8,244,833 assigned to her. Paycom denied all claims made against it by Dr. Arunachalam in her complaint, asserted various defenses and counterclaims for non-infringement and challenged the validity and enforceability of U.S. Patent No. 8,244,833. The initial lawsuit was dismissed and a complaint was filed by Pi-Net International, Inc. on April 18, 2014, along with the claims of infringement of two additional patents, U.S. Patent No. 5,987,500 and U.S. Patent No. 8,108,492.

On July 1, 2014, Paycom, Webexchange, Inc., Dr. Arunachalam, and Pi-Net International, Inc. entered into a confidential settlement agreement. As part of this settlement agreement, Pi-Net International, Inc. and Paycom entered a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice on July 1, 2014.

We are involved in various other legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business. Although we cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings, legal matters are subject to inherent uncertainties and there exists the possibility that the ultimate resolution of these matters could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Operating Leases

We lease office space under several noncancellable operating leases with contractual terms expiring from 2014 to 2019. Minimum rent expenses are recognized over the lease term. The lease term is defined as the fixed noncancellable term of the lease plus all periods, if any, for which failure to renew the lease imposes a penalty on us in an amount that a renewal appears, at the inception of the lease, to be reasonably assured. When a lease contains a predetermined fixed escalation of the minimum rent, we recognize the related rent expense on a straight-line basis and record the difference between the recognized rent expense and the amount payable under the lease as a liability.

Future annual minimum lease payments under noncancellable operating leases with initial or remaining terms of one year or more at June 30, 2014 were as follows:


Year Ending December 31,	Operating
2014	$	1,566
2015		3,281
2016		3,000
2017		2,606
2018		2,015
Thereafter		1,192

Total minimum lease payments	$	13,660

On July 3, 2014, we entered into a new lease for our Boston sales office. This new lease replaces the lease that had previously been in place. The new lease increases total future minimum lease payments by $1.3 million and is not included in the table above.

Rent expense under operating leases for the three and six months ended June 30, 2014 was $0.8 million and $1.4 million, respectively. Rent expense under operating leases for the three and six months ended June 30, 2013 was $0.5 million and $0.9 million, respectively.