Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 6 - Commitments and Contingencies Minimum Lease Commitments At March 31, 2018, the Company’s total future minimum lease payments under non-cancelable operating leases have not changed significantly from the disclosure in the 2017 Form 10-K. Purchase Commitments Veeco has purchase commitments of $160.4 million at March 31, 2018, substantially all of which become due within one year. Bank Guarantees Veeco has bank guarantees and letters of credit issued by a financial institution on its behalf as needed. At March 31, 2018, outstanding bank guarantees and letters of credit totaled $7.2 million, and unused bank guarantees and letters of credit of $66.3 million were available to be drawn upon. Legal Proceedings On September 21, 2017, Blueblade Capital Opportunities LLC et al., on behalf of purported beneficial owners of 440,100 shares of Ultratech common stock, filed an action against Ultratech in Delaware Court of Chancery requesting an appraisal of the value of their Ultratech stock pursuant to 8 Del. C. §262. The Company believes that the merger price, which was the product of arms-length negotiations, was fair and reasonable, and intends to contest the appraisal claim. Discovery in the matter has commenced and a trial on the action is scheduled to begin in December 2018. On April 12, 2017, the Company filed a patent infringement complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York against SGL Carbon, LLC and SGL Carbon SE (collectively, “SGL”), alleging infringement of patents relating to wafer carrier technology used in MOCVD equipment. The complaint alleges that SGL infringes Veeco’s patents by making and selling certain wafer carriers to Veeco’s competitor, Advanced Micro-Fabrication Equipment, Inc. (“AMEC”). On November 2, 2017, the U.S. District Court granted the Company’s motion for a preliminary injunction prohibiting SGL from shipping wafer carriers using the Company’s patented technology without the Company’s express authorization. On July 13, 2017, AMEC filed a patent infringement complaint against Veeco Instruments Shanghai Co., Ltd. (“Veeco Shanghai”) with the Fujian High Court in China, alleging that the Company’s MOCVD products infringed a Chinese utility model patent relating to the synchronous movement engagement mechanism in a chemical vapor deposition reactor and seeking injunctive relief and monetary damages against Veeco Shanghai. On December 7, 2017, without providing notice to Veeco and without hearing Veeco’s position on alleged infringement, the Fujian High Court issued a preliminary injunction, applicable in China, that requires Veeco Shanghai to stop importing, making, selling, and offering to sell Veeco EPIK 700 model MOCVD systems and to stop importing, selling, and offering to sell wafer carriers used as supplies for the EPIK 700 MOCVD system. On February 8, 2018, Veeco, AMEC, and SGL announced that they had mutually agreed to settle the pending litigation among the parties and to amicably resolve all pending disputes, including AMEC’s lawsuit against Veeco before the Fujian High Court in China and Veeco’s lawsuit against SGL before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. As part of the settlement, all legal actions worldwide (in court, patent offices, and otherwise), between Veeco, AMEC, and SGL, and their affiliates, were dismissed and/or otherwise withdrawn. As a result, all business processes, including sales, service, and importation, were resumed promptly following the settlement. The Company is involved in various other legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business. The Company does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. Receivable Purchase Agreement In December 2017, the Company entered into a Receivable Purchase Agreement with a financial institution to sell certain of its trade receivables from customers without recourse, up to $23.0 million at any point in time for a term of one year. There were no sales of accounts receivable under the agreement for the three months ended March 31, 2018, and as of March 31, 2018, the Company maintained $23.0 million available under the agreement for additional sales of trade receivables.

Note 6 - Commitments and Contingencies

Minimum Lease Commitments

At March 31, 2018, the Company’s total future minimum lease payments under non-cancelable operating leases have not changed significantly from the disclosure in the 2017 Form 10-K.

Purchase Commitments

Veeco has purchase commitments of $160.4 million at March 31, 2018, substantially all of which become due within one year.

Bank Guarantees

Veeco has bank guarantees and letters of credit issued by a financial institution on its behalf as needed. At March 31, 2018, outstanding bank guarantees and letters of credit totaled $7.2 million, and unused bank guarantees and letters of credit of $66.3 million were available to be drawn upon.

Legal Proceedings

On September 21, 2017, Blueblade Capital Opportunities LLC et al., on behalf of purported beneficial owners of 440,100 shares of Ultratech common stock, filed an action against Ultratech in Delaware Court of Chancery requesting an appraisal of the value of their Ultratech stock pursuant to 8 Del. C. §262. The Company believes that the merger price, which was the product of arms-length negotiations, was fair and reasonable, and intends to contest the appraisal claim. Discovery in the matter has commenced and a trial on the action is scheduled to begin in December 2018.

On April 12, 2017, the Company filed a patent infringement complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York against SGL Carbon, LLC and SGL Carbon SE (collectively, “SGL”), alleging infringement of patents relating to wafer carrier technology used in MOCVD equipment. The complaint alleges that SGL infringes Veeco’s patents by making and selling certain wafer carriers to Veeco’s competitor, Advanced Micro-Fabrication Equipment, Inc. (“AMEC”). On November 2, 2017, the U.S. District Court granted the Company’s motion for a preliminary injunction prohibiting SGL from shipping wafer carriers using the Company’s patented technology without the Company’s express authorization.

On July 13, 2017, AMEC filed a patent infringement complaint against Veeco Instruments Shanghai Co., Ltd. (“Veeco Shanghai”) with the Fujian High Court in China, alleging that the Company’s MOCVD products infringed a Chinese utility model patent relating to the synchronous movement engagement mechanism in a chemical vapor deposition reactor and seeking injunctive relief and monetary damages against Veeco Shanghai. On December 7, 2017, without providing notice to Veeco and without hearing Veeco’s position on alleged infringement, the Fujian High Court issued a preliminary injunction, applicable in China, that requires Veeco Shanghai to stop importing, making, selling, and offering to sell Veeco EPIK 700 model MOCVD systems and to stop importing, selling, and offering to sell wafer carriers used as supplies for the EPIK 700 MOCVD system.

On February 8, 2018, Veeco, AMEC, and SGL announced that they had mutually agreed to settle the pending litigation among the parties and to amicably resolve all pending disputes, including AMEC’s lawsuit against Veeco before the Fujian High Court in China and Veeco’s lawsuit against SGL before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. As part of the settlement, all legal actions worldwide (in court, patent offices, and otherwise), between Veeco, AMEC, and SGL, and their affiliates, were dismissed and/or otherwise withdrawn. As a result, all business processes, including sales, service, and importation, were resumed promptly following the settlement.

The Company is involved in various other legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business. The Company does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

Receivable Purchase Agreement

In December 2017, the Company entered into a Receivable Purchase Agreement with a financial institution to sell certain of its trade receivables from customers without recourse, up to $23.0 million at any point in time for a term of one year. There were no sales of accounts receivable under the agreement for the three months ended March 31, 2018, and as of March 31, 2018, the Company maintained $23.0 million available under the agreement for additional sales of trade receivables.