NOTE 7. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Lease

As of January 1, 2019, we leased approximately 180,000 square feet in 1305 O’Brien Drive, Menlo Park, California, where we house our headquarters, research and development, service and support functions, and our in-house manufacturing operations for which the right of use assets totaled $35.3 million. We also leased a sales office facility in Singapore and engineering support facilities in Allen, Texas for which the right of use assets totaled $0.2 million as of January 1, 2019.

On July 22, 2015, we entered into a lease agreement with respect to our facility located at 1305 O’Brien Drive, Menlo Park, California. The term of the O’Brien Lease is one hundred thirty-two (132) months. In December 2016, we entered into an amendment to the O’Brien Lease which defined the commencement date of the lease to be October 25, 2016, notwithstanding that such substantial completion did not occur until the first quarter of 2017. Base monthly rent was abated for the first six (6) months of the lease term and thereafter was $540,000 per month during the first year of the lease term, with specified annual increases thereafter until reaching $711,000 per month during the last twelve (12) months of the lease term. If the rent is not received within five days of the due date there will be an additional sum equal to 5% of the amount overdue as a late charge. Any amount not paid within 10 days after receipt of landlord’s written notice will bear interest from the date due until paid, at the lesser rate of (1) the prime rate of interest as published in the Wall Street Journal, plus 2% or (2) the maximum rate allowed by law, in addition to the late payment charge. We were required to establish a letter of credit for the benefits of the landlord and to submit $4.5 million as a deposit for the letter of credit in October 2015. Subsequently pursuant to the terms of the O’Brien Lease, at May 1, 2019, the $4.5 million in restricted cash was reduced to $4.0 million. As such, $4.0 million and $4.5 million was recorded in “Long-term restricted cash” in the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Pursuant to the terms of the O’Brien Lease, the letter of credit balance of $4.0 million at December 31, 2019 will be reduced again in May 2020 by $500,000.

All of our leases are operating leases. Operating lease assets and liabilities are reflected within “Operating lease right-of-use assets, net”, “Operating lease liabilities, current” and “Operating lease liabilities, non-current” on the consolidated balance sheets. These assets and liabilities are recognized at the commencement date based on the present value of remaining minimum lease payments over the lease term using our estimated secured incremental borrowing rates at the effective date of January 1, 2019. Lease payments included in the measurement of the lease liability comprise the base rent per the term of the Lease. Lease expense for these leases is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term, with variable lease payments, such as common area maintenance fees, recognized in the period those payments are incurred.

We often have options to renew lease terms for buildings. For the O’Brien Lease, the renewal option is 5 years and the rent will be based on fair market value at the time of renewal and was not included in the lease term. In addition, certain lease arrangements may be terminated prior to their original expiration date at our discretion. We evaluate renewal and termination options at the lease commencement date to determine if we are reasonably certain to exercise the option on the basis of economic factors. The weighted average remaining lease term for our operating leases as of December 31, 2019 was 7.8 years.

The discount rate implicit within our leases is generally not determinable and therefore we determine the discount rate based on our incremental borrowing rate. The incremental borrowing rate for our leases is determined based on lease term and currency in which lease payments are made, adjusted for impacts of collateral. The weighted average discount rate used to measure our operating lease liabilities as of December 31, 2019 was 7.9%.

The following table presents information as to the amount and timing of cash flows arising from our operating leases as of December 31, 2019:



Maturity of Lease Liabilities	Amount
Years ending December 31,	(in thousands)
2020	$	7,150
2021		7,306
2022		7,488
2023		7,704
2024		7,920
Thereafter		23,598
Total undiscounted operating lease payments		61,166
Less: imputed interest		(15,365)
Present value of operating lease liabilities	$	45,801

Balance Sheet Classification
Operating lease liabilities, current	$	3,837
Operating lease liabilities, non-current		41,964
Total operating lease liabilities	$	45,801

Cash Flows

An initial right-of-use asset of $35.5 million was recognized on the consolidated balance sheet as of January 1, 2019 with the adoption of the new lease accounting standard. Cash paid for amounts included in the present value of operating lease liabilities was $7.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 and included in operating cash flow.

Operating Lease Costs

Operating lease costs were $6.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, primarily related to our operating leases, but also include immaterial amounts for variable lease payments.

Rent expense for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 was $6.2 million, $6.2 million and $6.3 million, respectively. We are also required to pay our share of operating expenses with respect to the facilities in which we operate.

Contingencies

We may become involved in legal proceedings, claims and assessments from time to time in the ordinary course of business. We accrue liabilities for such matters when it is probable that future expenditures will be made and such expenditures can be reasonably estimated.

In addition, we had other purchase commitments of an estimated amount of approximately $15.5 million as of December 31, 2019, consisting of open purchase orders and contractual obligations in the ordinary course of business, including commitments with contract manufacturers and suppliers for which we have not received the goods or services, and acquisition and licensing of intellectual property. A majority of these purchase obligations are due within a year. Although open purchase orders are considered enforceable and legally binding, the terms generally allow us the option to cancel, reschedule and adjust our requirements based on our business needs prior to the delivery of goods or performance of services.

Legal Proceedings

USITC Proceedings

On November 2, 2016, we filed a complaint against Oxford Nanopore Technologies Ltd. (“ONT Ltd.”), Oxford Nanopore Technologies, Inc. (“ONT Inc.”) and Metrichor, Ltd. (“Metrichor” and, together with ONT Ltd. and ONT Inc., “ONT”) with the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC”) for patent infringement. On December 5, 2016, the USITC provided notice that an investigation had been instituted based on the complaint. We sought exclusionary relief with respect to several ONT products, including ONT’s MinION and PromethION devices. The complaint was based on our U.S. Patent No. 9,404,146, entitled “Compositions and methods for nucleic acid sequencing” which covers novel methods for sequencing single nucleic acid molecules using linked double-stranded nucleic acid templates, providing improved sequencing accuracy. On March 1, 2017, we filed an amended complaint to add a second patent in the same patent family, U.S. Patent No. 9,542,527, which was granted on January 10, 2017, to the investigation. We sought, among other things, an exclusion order permanently barring entry of infringing ONT products into the United States, and a cease and desist order preventing ONT from advertising and selling infringing products in the United States. On May 23, 2017, the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) assigned to the matter issued an order construing certain claim terms of the asserted patents. On June 8, 2017, ONT filed a summary determination motion to terminate the proceedings based on the ALJ’s claim construction decision, and we did not oppose the motion. The ALJ granted the motion on July 19, 2017, and, on July 31, 2017, we filed a petition to review with the USITC to correct what we believe was an incorrect construction of the claims. On September 5, 2017, the USITC issued a notice granting our petition to review the ALJ’s claim construction decision. On February 7, 2018, the USITC issued a notice indicating that it had determined to adopt the ALJ’s claim construction and terminating the investigation. On February 13, 2018, we filed a petition to appeal the USITC’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. (“Federal Circuit”). An oral hearing for this appeal was held on February 8, 2019. On February 12, 2019, the Federal Circuit filed a judgement affirming the USITC claim construction under Federal Circuit Rule 36 without a written opinion.

U.S. District Court Proceedings

On March 15, 2017, we filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against ONT Inc. for patent infringement (C.A. No. 17-cv-275 (“275 Action”)). The complaint is based on our U.S. Patent No. 9,546,400 (the “’400 Patent”), entitled “Nanopore sequencing using n-mers” which covers novel methods for nanopore sequencing of nucleic acid molecules using the signals from multiple monomeric units. This patent was granted on January 17, 2017. We are seeking remedies including injunctive relief, damages and costs. On August 23, 2018, we filed an amended complaint, adding ONT Ltd. as a defendant in the 275 Action. On August 15, 2019, the judge granted our motion to amend the complaint in the 275 Action to add allegations of willful infringement by ONT Inc. and ONT Ltd.

On September 25, 2017, we filed a second complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against ONT Inc. for patent infringement (C.A. No. 17-cv-1353 (“1353 Action”)). The complaint is based on our U.S. Patent No. 9,678,056 (the “’056 Patent”) entitled “Control of Enzyme Translation in Nanopore Sequencing”, granted June 13, 2017, and U.S. Patent No. 9,738,929 (the “’929 Patent”) entitled “Nucleic Acid Sequence Analysis”, granted August 22, 2017. We are seeking remedies including injunctive relief, damages and costs. On March 28, 2018, we added a claim for infringement of our U.S. Patent No. 9,772,323 (the “’323 Patent”), entitled “Nanopore sequencing using n-mers.” On August 23, 2018 we filed an amended complaint, adding ONT Ltd. as a defendant in the 1353 Action. On August 15, 2019, the judge granted our motion to amend the complaint in the 1353 Action to add allegations of willful infringement by ONT Inc. and ONT Ltd.

A claim construction (or “Markman”) hearing for the U.S. District Court matters was held on December 17, 2018. On March 6, 2019, a claim construction order construing various claim terms in the patents in suit was issued. On January 8, 2020, the Court held a summary judgement and expert testimony admissibility (or “Daubert”) hearing. On February 19, 2020, the Court issued its summary judgement and Daubert opinions. All of our claims survived summary judgement. A trial for the U.S. District Court matters is scheduled to begin on March 9, 2020.

Unrelated to the preceding matters, on September 26, 2019, Personal Genomics of Taiwan, Inc. (“PGI”) filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against us for patent infringement (C.A. No. 19-cv-1810). The complaint is based on PGI’s U.S. Patent No. 7,767,441. We plan to vigorously defend in this matter. On November 20, 2019, we filed our answer to the complaint, denying infringement and seeking a declaratory judgement of invalidity of the ‘441 Patent. A trial for this matter is scheduled to begin on March 14, 2022.

UK and German Court Proceedings

On February 2, 2017, we filed a claim in the High Court of England and Wales against ONT Ltd. and Metrichor for infringement of Patent EP(UK) 3 045 542 (the “’542 Patent”), which is in the same patent family as the patents asserted in the USITC action referred to above. We sought remedies including injunctive relief, damages, and costs. On August 31, 2017, we added a claim for infringement of a newly granted divisional, EP(UK) 3 170 904 (the “’904 Patent”). On December 22, 2017, ONT Ltd. added to the action a request for declaration of non-infringement of its 1D2 product. A trial for these matters was scheduled to occur in May 2018.

On April 21, 2017, ONT Ltd. and Harvard University filed a claim against us in the High Court of England and Wales for infringement of Patent EP(UK) 1 192 453 (the “’453 Patent”), a patent owned by Harvard University and entitled “Molecular and atomic scale evaluation of biopolymers,” and for which ONT Ltd. alleges it holds an exclusive license. ONT Ltd. and Harvard University sought remedies including injunctive relief, damages, and costs. On April 25, 2017, ONT Ltd. announced that it also had filed a claim against us in the District Court of Mannheim, Germany, for infringement of the German version of the patent. On December 6, 2017, we filed a cross-complaint in the German infringement matter alleging ONT Ltd.’s infringement in Germany of our ’542 Patent. The trial date for the German infringement matter and cross-complaint was set for July 27, 2018. A trial for the UK matter was scheduled to occur in March 2019.

On May 8, 2018, the parties entered a settlement of all UK and German court proceedings pending as of such date. Under the terms of the settlement, ONT agreed not to make, dispose of, use or import any “2D” nanopore sequencing products, or to induce or assist others to carry out a “2D” sequencing process, in the UK or Germany, through the end of 2023. During this time, we agreed not to assert the ’542 Patent and ’904 Patent against either ONT or its customers in the UK or Germany. Accordingly, the High Court of England and Wales entered an order staying our UK action against ONT through the end of 2023. As part of the settlement, ONT and Harvard University dismissed their UK and German actions under the ’453 Patent and agreed not to assert the ’453 Patent against us or our customers through the end of 2023. We correspondingly agreed to dismiss our separate German nullity action seeking to invalidate the ’453 Patent, which expires on June 22, 2020.

Related to these proceedings, on August 15, 2017, ONT Ltd. filed a notice of opposition to our ’542 Patent with the European Patent Office, and on August 16, 2017, an anonymous party filed a second notice of opposition to the same patent, each alleging invalidity of the patent. On April 5, 2018, we filed our response to the combined opposition. On January 22, 2019, an oral hearing in the matter occurred and the European Patent Office rendered a decision in favor of the opponents. We believe the European Patent Office errored in its decision and we are appealing the decision. The ’542 Patent will remain in effect while the appeal is pending. Our settlement agreement with ONT Ltd. and Harvard University will also remain in effect regardless of the outcome of the appeal.

Also related to these proceedings, on May 16, 2018, ONT Ltd. filed a notice of opposition to our ’904 Patent with the European Patent Office alleging invalidity of the ’904 Patent. On October 11, 2018, we filed our response to the opposition. On July 16, 2019, an oral hearing in the matter occurred and the European Patent Office rendered a decision in favor of the opponents. We believe the European Patent Office erred in its decision and we are appealing the decision. The ’904 Patent will remain in effect while the appeal is pending. Our settlement agreement with ONT Ltd. and Harvard University will also remain in effect regardless of the outcome of the appeal.

Litigation is inherently unpredictable, and, except for events that have already occurred, it is too early in the foregoing proceedings, including the U.S. District Court Proceedings, to predict the outcome of these proceedings, or any impact they may have on us. As such, the estimated financial effect associated with these complaints cannot be made as of the date of filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Litigation is a significant ongoing expense with an uncertain outcome, and has been in the past and may in the future be a material expense for us. Management believes this investment is important to protect our intellectual property position, even recognizing the uncertainty of the outcome.

Other Proceedings

From time to time, we may also be involved in a variety of other claims, lawsuits, investigations and proceedings relating to securities laws, product liability, patent infringement, contract disputes, employment and other matters that arise in the normal course of our business. In addition, third parties may, from time to time, assert claims against us in the form of letters and other communications. We record a provision for contingent losses when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. We currently do not believe that the ultimate outcome of any of the matters described above is probable or reasonably estimable, or that these matters will have a material adverse effect on our business; however, the results of litigation and claims are inherently unpredictable. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us because of litigation and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors.

Indemnification

Pursuant to Delaware law and agreements entered into with each of our directors and officers, we may have obligations, under certain circumstances, to hold harmless and indemnify each of our directors and officers against losses suffered or incurred by the indemnified party in connection with their service to us, and judgements, fines, settlements and expenses related to claims arising against such directors and officers to the fullest extent permitted under Delaware law, our bylaws and certificate of incorporation. We also enter and have entered into indemnification agreements with our directors and officers that may require us to indemnify them against liabilities that arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers, except as prohibited by applicable law. In addition, we may have obligations to hold harmless and indemnify third parties involved with our fund raising efforts and their respective affiliates, directors, officers, employees, agents or other representatives against any and all losses, claims, damages and liabilities related to claims arising against such parties pursuant to the terms of agreements entered into between such third parties and us in connection with such fund raising efforts. To the extent that any such indemnification obligations apply to the lawsuits described above, any associated expenses incurred are included within the related accrued litigation expense amounts. No additional liability associated with such indemnification obligations has been recorded at December 31, 2019.