XML 46 R12.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.22.4

CONTINGENCIES | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
CONTINGENCIES | CONTINGENCIESFrom time to time, we receive claims from third parties asserting that our technologies, or those of our licensees, infringe on the other parties’ IP rights. Management believes that these claims are without merit. Additionally, periodically, we are involved in routine legal matters and contractual disputes incidental to our normal operations. In management’s opinion, unless we disclosed otherwise, the resolution of such matters will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. In the normal course of business, we provide indemnification of varying scope to customers, most commonly to licensees in connection with licensing arrangements that include our IP, although these provisions can cover additional matters. Historically, costs related to these guarantees have not been significant, and we are unable to estimate the maximum potential impact of these guarantees on its future results of operations. Samsung Electronics Co. v. Immersion Corporation and Immersion Software Ireland Limited On April 28, 2017, Immersion and Immersion Software Ireland Limited (collectively referred to as “Immersion” in this section) received a letter from Samsung Electronics Co. (“Samsung”) requesting that we reimburse Samsung with respect to withholding tax and penalties imposed on Samsung by the Korean tax authorities following an investigation where the tax authority determined that Samsung failed to withhold taxes on Samsung’s royalty payments to Immersion Software Ireland from 2012 to 2016. On July 12, 2017, on behalf of Samsung, Immersion filed an appeal with the Korea Tax Tribunal regarding their findings with respect to the withholding taxes and penalties. On September 29, 2017, Samsung filed an arbitration demand with the International Chamber of Commerce against us demanding that we reimburse Samsung for the imposed tax and penalties that Samsung paid to the Korean tax authorities. Samsung requested that we pay Samsung the amount of KRW7,841,324,165 (approximately $6.9 million) plus interest from and after May 2, 2017, plus the cost of the arbitration including legal fees. On October 18, 2018, the Korea Tax Tribunal held a hearing and on November 19, 2018, the Korea Tax Tribunal issued its ruling in which it decided not to accept our arguments with respect to the Korean tax authorities’ assessment of withholding tax and penalties imposed on Samsung. On behalf of Samsung, we filed an appeal with the Korea Administrative Court on February 15, 2019. On March 27, 2019, we received the final award relating to the arbitration demand that Samsung had filed on September 29, 2017. The award ordered Immersion to pay Samsung KRW7,841,324,165 (approximately $6.9 million as of March 31, 2019), which we paid on April 22, 2019, denied Samsung’s claim for interest from and after May 2, 2017; and ordered Immersion to pay Samsung’s cost of the arbitration in the amount of approximately $871,454, which was paid in 2019. On July 16, 2020, the Korea Administrative Court issued its ruling in which it ruled that the withholding taxes and penalties which were imposed by the Korean tax authorities on Samsung should be cancelled with some litigation costs to be borne by the Korean tax authorities. On August 1, 2020, the Korean tax authorities filed an appeal with the Korea High Court. The first hearing in the Korea High Court occurred on November 11, 2020. A second hearing occurred on January 13, 2021. A third hearing occurred on March 21, 2021. The Korea High Court had indicated that a final decision was originally expected on May 28, 2021, but instead, decided to hold a fourth hearing on July 9, 2021. On October 1, 2021, the Korea High Court issued its ruling in which it ruled that withholding taxes and penalties totaling approximately KRW6,186,218,586 (approximately $5.2 million) in national-level withholding tax and local withholding taxes imposed by the Korean tax authorities on Samsung for royalties paid to Immersion during the period of 2012 – 2014 be cancelled on the basis that the Korea tax authorities wrongfully engaged in a duplicative audit with respect to such time period. The Korea High Court also ruled that approximately KRW1,655,105,584 (approximately$1.4 million) of national-level withholding tax and local withholding taxes imposed by the Korean tax authorities on Samsung for royalties paid to Immersion during 2015 and 2016 be upheld in part on the basis that Immersion Software Ireland Limited did not have sufficient economic substance to be considered the beneficial owner of the royalties paid by Samsung to Immersion Software Ireland Limited. On or about October 22, 2021, the Korean tax authorities filed an appeal with the Korea Supreme Court with respect to certain portions of the Korea High Court decision and we filed an appeal with the Korea Supreme Court with respect to certain portions of the Korea High Court decision. On December 1, 2021, the Korean tax authorities submitted its brief to the Korea Supreme Court challenging the cancellation by the Korea High Court of a portion of the withholding tax imposed by the Korean tax authorities. On December 3, 2021, we submitted our own brief to the Korea Supreme Court providing arguments in support of our position that Immersion Software Ireland Limited has sufficient economic substance to be considered the beneficial owner of the royalties paid by Samsung to Immersion Software Ireland Limited. Such brief also provided arguments challenging the calculation of the imposed withholding tax upheld by the Korea High Court. On December 2021, the Korean tax authorities filed a rebuttal brief relating to our brief filed on December 3, 2021. On December 29, 2021, we filed our rebuttal brief relating to the Korean tax authorities’ brief filed on December 1, 2021. On February 24, 2022, the Korea Supreme Court issued a decision affirming the rulings of the Korea High Court. We believe that any impairment in the Long-term deposits associated with the rulings of the Korea High Court was appropriately reflected in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. In the fourth quarter of 2021, we recorded an impairment charge of $1.4 million related to long-term deposits paid to Samsung. In March 2022, as a result of the Korea Supreme Court decision described above, we were reimbursed by Samsung in an amount equal to KRW6,088,855,388 (approximately $5 million) representing Korea national-level taxes, penalties and interest that were canceled by the Korea Supreme Court, which amount is net of $1.3 million of the impairment charge previously recorded in the fourth quarter of 2021. We were also reimbursed an additional KRW608,885,000 (approximately $0.5 million) representing local-level taxes, penalties and interest that were canceled by the Korea Supreme Court, which amount is net of $0.1 million of the impairment charge previously recorded in the fourth quarter of 2021. LGE Korean Withholding Tax Matter On October 16, 2017, we received a letter from LG Electronics Inc. (“LGE”) requesting that we reimburse LGE with respect to withholding tax imposed on LGE by the Korean tax authorities following an investigation where the tax authority determined that LGE failed to withhold on LGE’s royalty payments to Immersion Software Ireland from 2012 to 2014. Pursuant to an agreement reached with LGE, on April 8, 2020, we provided a provisional deposit to LGE in the amount of KRW 5,916,845,454 (approximately $5.0 million) representing the amount of such withholding tax that was imposed on LGE, which provisional deposit would be returned to us to the extent we ultimately prevail in the appeal in the Korea courts. In the second quarter of 2020, we recorded this deposit in Long-term deposits on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. In the event that we do not ultimately prevail in our appeal in the Korean courts, the deposit included in Long-term deposits would be recorded as additional income tax expense on our Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income, in the period in which we do not ultimately prevail. On November 3, 2017, on behalf of LGE, we filed an appeal with the Korea Tax Tribunal regarding their findings with respect to the withholding taxes. The Korea Tax Tribunal hearing took place on March 5, 2019. On March 19, 2019, the Korea Tax Tribunal issued its ruling in which it decided not to accept our arguments with respect to the Korean tax authorities’ assessment of withholding tax and penalties imposed on LGE. On behalf of LGE, we filed an appeal with the Korea Administrative Court on June 10, 2019. The first hearing occurred on October 15, 2019. A second hearing occurred on December 19, 2019. A third hearing occurred on February 13, 2020. A fourth hearing occurred on June 9, 2020. A fifth hearing occurred on July 16, 2020. We anticipated a decision to be rendered on or about October 8, 2020, but the Korea Administrative Court scheduled and held a sixth hearing for November 12, 2020. A seventh hearing occurred on January 14, 2021. An eighth hearing occurred on April 8, 2021. A ninth hearing occurred on June 24, 2021. A tenth hearing occurred on September 13, 2021. An eleventh hearing occurred on November 15, 2021. A twelfth hearing occurred on December 23, 2021. The Court had indicated that it expected to render a decision on this matter by the end of February 2022. However, due to a reshuffling of judges, another hearing, which was originally scheduled for April 14, 2022, occurred on July 7, 2022. A thirteenth hearing occurred on October 27, 2022. A fourteenth hearing occurred November 24, 2022. The Court had indicated that it expected to render a decision on this matter by December 31, 2022, but had subsequently updated the parties to indicate that a decision on this matter is expected by February 16, 2023. On February 15, 2023, we were informed that the Court had scheduled another hearing for April 27, 2023. Based on the developments in these cases, we regularly reassess the likelihood that we will prevail in the claims from the Korean tax authorities with respect to the LGE case. To the extent that we determine that it is more likely than not that we will prevail against the claims from the Korean tax authorities, then no additional tax expense is provided for in our Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income. In the event that we determine that it is more likely than not that we will not prevail against the claims from the Korean tax authorities, or a portion thereof, then we would estimate the anticipated additional tax expense associated with that outcome and record it as additional income tax expense in our Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income in the period of the new determination. If the additional income tax expense was related to the periods assessed by Korean tax authorities and for which we recorded a Long-term deposits on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, then the additional income tax expense would be recorded as an impairment to the Long-term deposits. If the additional income tax expense was not related to the periods assessed by Korean tax authorities and for a which we recorded in Long-term deposits on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, then the additional income tax expense would be accrued as an Other current liabilities. In the event that we do not ultimately prevail in our appeal in the Korean courts with respect to this case, the applicable deposits included in Long-term deposits would be recorded as additional income tax expense on our Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income, in the period in which we do not ultimately prevail. In the fourth quarter of 2021, we recorded an impairment charge of $0.8 million related to the long-term deposits paid to LGE. Immersion Software Ireland Limited v. Marquardt GMBH On August 3, 2021, we filed an arbitration demand with the American Arbitration Association (the “AAA”) against Marquardt GmbH (“Marquardt”), one of our licensees in the automotive market. The arbitration demand had arisen out of that certain Amended and Restated Patent License Agreement (the “Marquardt License”), effective as of January 1, 2018, between us as licensor and Marquardt, as licensee. Pursuant to the arbitration demand, we demanded that Marquardt cure its breach of the Marquardt License and pay all royalties currently owed under the Marquardt License. Pursuant to the terms of the Marquardt License, we requested arbitration by a single arbitrator in Madison County, New York. On August 9, 2021, the AAA confirmed receipt of our arbitration demand dated August 3, 2021. On August 13, 2021, the AAA conducted an administrative conference call to discuss communications, mediation, tribunal appointment, place of arbitration, and other administrative topics. On September 15, 2021, Marquardt filed an answer to our arbitration demand with the AAA, in which Marquardt provided general denials of our claims and asserted a counterclaim for approximately $138,000 in royalties previously paid to us under the Marquardt License. On September 30, 2021, we filed an answer to Marquardt’s counterclaim in which we denied the allegations set forth in Marquardt’s counterclaim. A preliminary hearing occurred on December 6, 2021, during which the parties agreed to explore mediation and the arbitrator set forth a schedule relating to the arbitration. A mediation session occurred during the period of March 14-16, 2022. At the mediation, we entered into a binding settlement term sheet with Marquardt pursuant to which we agreed to cause our arbitration demand to be dismissed. In exchange, Marquardt agreed to the prepayment of certain royalties otherwise payable under the Marquardt License. Additionally on April 4, 2022, we entered into an amendment to the Marquardt License to reflect such payment and other related terms. On May 20, 2022, the parties submitted a stipulation of dismissal to the AAA dismissing with prejudice all claims brought by us against Marquardt in the arbitration. Immersion Corporation vs. Meta Platforms, Inc., f/k/a Facebook, Inc. On May 26, 2022, we filed a complaint against Meta Platforms, Inc. (formerly known as Facebook, Inc.) (“Meta”) in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The complaint alleges that Meta’s augmented and virtual reality (“AR/VR”) systems, including the Meta Quest 2, infringe six of our patents that cover various uses of haptic effects in connection with such AR/VR systems. We are seeking to protect Meta from further infringement and to recover a reasonable royalty for such infringement. The complaint against Meta asserts infringement of the following patents: •U.S. Patent No. 8,469,806: “System and method for providing complex haptic stimulation during input of control gestures, and relating to control of virtual equipment” •U.S. Patent No. 8,896,524: “Context-dependent haptic confirmation system” •U.S. Patent No. 9,727,217: “Haptically enhanced interactivity with interactive content” •U.S. Patent No. 10,248,298: “Haptically enhanced interactivity with interactive content” •U.S. Patent No. 10,269,222: “System with wearable device and haptic output device” •U.S. Patent No. 10,664,143: “Haptically enhanced interactivity with interactive content” Meta responded to our complaint on August 1, 2022. On September 12, 2022, Meta filed a motion to transfer the lawsuit to the Northern District of California or, in the alternative, to the Austin Division of the Western District of Texas. Meta’s motion remains pending, and a hearing on the transfer motion occurred on January 23, 2023. In the meantime, claim construction briefing is closed, and fact discovery opened on February 7, 2023. The claim construction hearing is scheduled for March 6, 2023.

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 loss and gain contingencies. Describes any existing condition, situation, or set of circumstances involving uncertainty as of the balance sheet date (or prior to issuance of the financial statements) as to a probable or reasonably possible loss incurred by an entity that will ultimately be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur, and typically discloses the amount of loss recorded or a range of possible loss, or an assertion that no reasonable estimate can be made. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/subtopic&trid=2127163 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 30 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6397426&loc=d3e17499-108355 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 9 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=121557415&loc=d3e14557-108349 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 30 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/subtopic&trid=2127197 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=121557415&loc=d3e14435-108349 Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SAB Topic 5.Y.Q4) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=27011672&loc=d3e149879-122751 Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=121557415&loc=d3e14326-108349 Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SAB Topic 5.Y.Q2) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=27011672&loc=d3e149879-122751 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_LossContingencyDisclosures
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration