XML 37 R27.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.10.0.1
Commitments and Contingencies
9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2018
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies

19)

Commitments and Contingencies

In March 2016, two putative class actions lawsuit captioned Dixon Chung v. Newport Corp., et al., Case No. A-16-733154-C and Hubert C. Pincon v. Newport Corp., et al., Case No. A-16-734039-B were filed in the District Court, Clark County, Nevada on behalf of a putative class of stockholders of Newport for claims related to the Merger Agreement between the Company, Newport, and Merger Sub. The lawsuits named as defendants the Company, Newport, Merger Sub, and certain then current and former members of Newport’s board of directors. Both complaints alleged that Newport directors breached their fiduciary duties to Newport’s stockholders by agreeing to sell Newport through an inadequate and unfair process, which led to inadequate and unfair consideration, by agreeing to unfair deal protection devices and by omitting material information from the proxy statement. The complaints also alleged that the Company, Newport, and Merger Sub aided and abetted the directors’ alleged breaches of their fiduciary duties. The complaints sought injunctive relief, including to enjoin or rescind the Merger Agreement, and an award of attorneys’ and other fees and costs, among other relief. On April 14, 2016, the Court consolidated the actions.

On October 19, 2016, plaintiffs in the consolidated action filed an amended complaint captioned In re Newport Corporation Shareholder Litigation, Case No. A-16-733154-B, in the District Court, Clark County, Nevada, on behalf of a putative class of Newport’s stockholders for claims related to the Merger Agreement. The amended complaint contained substantially similar allegations related to Newport’s former board of directors’ alleged breaches of their fiduciary duties to Newport’s stockholders. The amended complaint sought monetary damages, including pre- and post-judgment interest. On June 22, 2017, the Court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed the amended complaint against all defendants but granted plaintiffs leave to amend.

On July 27, 2017, plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint containing substantially similar allegations but naming only Newport’s former directors as defendants. On August 8, 2017, the Court dismissed the Company and Newport from the action. The second amended complaint seeks monetary damages, including pre- and post-judgment interest. The Court granted a motion for class certification on September 27, 2018, appointing Mr. Pincon and Locals 302 and 612 of the International Union of Operating Engineers - Employers Construction Industry Retirement Trust as class representatives. On June 11, 2018, plaintiff Dixon Chung was voluntarily dismissed from the litigation. Discovery is ongoing in this action.

We are subject to various legal proceedings and claims, which have arisen in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the ultimate disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.