XML 94 R20.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.21.2

Commitments and Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2021
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Contingencies The Company accounts for contingent liabilities in accordance with ASC 450, Contingencies. This guidance requires management to assess potential contingent liabilities that may exist as of the date of the financial statements to determine the probability and amount of loss that may have occurred, which inherently involves an exercise of judgment. If the assessment of a contingency indicates that it is probable that a material loss has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be estimated, then the estimated liability would be accrued in the Company’s financial statements. If the assessment indicates that a potential material loss contingency is not probable but is reasonably possible, or is probable but cannot be estimated, then the nature of the contingent liability, and an estimate of the range of possible losses, if determinable and material, would be disclosed. For loss contingencies considered remote, no accrual or disclosures are generally made. Management has assessed potential contingent liabilities as of June 30, 2021, and based on the assessment there are no probable loss contingencies requiring accrual or disclosures within its financial statements. Legal Accruals In addition to commitments and obligations in the ordinary course of business, from time to time, the Company is subject to various claims, pending and potential legal actions, investigations relating to governmental laws and regulations and other matters arising out of the normal conduct of its business. Management assesses contingencies to determine the degree of probability and range of possible loss for potential accrual in the consolidated financial statements. An estimated loss contingency is accrued in the consolidated financial statements if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because evaluating legal claims and litigation results are inherently unpredictable and unfavorable results could occur, assessing contingencies is highly subjective and requires judgments about future events. When evaluating contingencies, management may be unable to provide a meaningful estimate due to a number of factors, including the procedural status of the matter in question, the presence of complex or novel legal theories, and/or the ongoing discovery and development of information important to the matters. In addition, damage amounts claimed or asserted against the Company may be unsupported, exaggerated or unrelated to possible outcomes, and as such are not meaningful indicators of a potential liability. Management regularly reviews contingencies to determine the adequacy of financial statement accruals and related disclosures. The amount of ultimate loss may differ from these estimates. It is possible that cash flows or results of operations could be materially affected in any particular period by the unfavorable publicity or resolution of one or more of these contingencies. Whether any losses finally determined in any claim, action, investigation or proceeding or publicity related to such could reasonably have a material effect on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows will depend on a number of variables, including: the timing and amount of such losses; the structure and type of any remedies; the significance of the impact of any such losses, damages or remedies may have on the consolidated financial statements; and the unique facts and circumstances of the particular matter that may give rise to additional factors. Class Action Lawsuit (Smith v. LifeVantage Corp.): On January 24, 2018, a purported class action was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, entitled Smith v. LifeVantage Corp., Case No. 3:18-cv-a35 (D. Connecticut filed Jan. 24, 2018). In this action, Plaintiffs alleged that the Company, its Chief Executive Officer, Chief Sales Officer and Chief Marketing Officer operated a pyramid scheme in violation of a variety of federal and state statutes, including RICO and the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act. On April 16, 2018, the Company filed motions with the court to dismiss the complaint against LifeVantage, dismiss the complaint against the Company's executives, transfer the venue of the case from the State of Connecticut to the State of Utah, and contest class certification. On July 23, 2018, the parties filed a stipulation with the Court agreeing to transfer the case to the Federal District Court for Utah. On September 20, 2018, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in Utah. As per the parties stipulated agreement, Plaintiffs' amended complaint dropped the RICO and Connecticut state law claims and removed the Company's Chief Sales Officer and Chief Marketing Officer as individual defendants (the former Chief Executive Officer remains a defendant in the case). The Plaintiffs' amended complaint added an antitrust claim, alleging that the Company fraudulently obtained patents for its products and is attempting to use those patents in an anti-competitive manner. The Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended complaint on November 5, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a response to the Company’s Motion to Dismiss on December 17, 2018, and the Company filed a reply brief on January 10, 2019. The Court ruled on the motion on December 5, 2019, dismissing three of the Plaintiff's four claims, including the antitrust claim, unjust enrichment claim, and the securities claim for the sale of unregistered securities. On December 19, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint which included three causes of action, including a 10(b)(5) securities fraud claim, and renewed claims relating to the sale of unregistered securities and unjust enrichment. LifeVantage filed a Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint on January 28, 2020, and with the Motion fully briefed by the parties as of March 17, 2020, the Court decided the matter on the parties’ briefs only on November 25, 2020. In its decision, the Court dismissed with prejudice the Plaintiffs’ Section 12(1) claim (sale of an unregistered security), because the Court concluded the claim is time barred. The Court also dismissed the Plaintiffs’ claim for unjust enrichment against LifeVantage without prejudice, and the Plaintiffs did not amend their complaint following the Court’s order to re-plead unjust enrichment. The court found that the Plaintiffs had sufficiently pled their claim under Section 12(2) (offer to sell a security that misstates or omits a material fact by means of a prospectus or oral communication). LifeVantage filed its Answer to the Second Amended Complaint on December 23, 2020, responding to the Plaintiffs’ remaining securities claims. On February 2, 2021, the Court issued an amended scheduling order that reflects the parties’ agreement on a schedule for discovery and other litigation matters. Initial discovery has begun and will continue per the amended scheduling order. On June 15, 2021, the plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification, and on July 13, 2021, the defendants, including LifeVantage Corporation, filed their opposition brief that opposed class certification. The court has not set a hearing for the motion for class certification and it is unknown when the court may rule. The Company has not established a loss contingency accrual for this lawsuit as it believes liability is not probable or estimable, and the Company plans to vigorously defend against this lawsuit. Nonetheless, an unfavorable resolution of this matter could have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, results of operations or financial condition.Other Matters. In addition to the matters described above, the Company also may become involved in other litigation and regulatory matters incidental to its business and the matters disclosed in this annual report on Form 10-K, including, but not limited to, product liability claims, regulatory actions, employment matters and commercial disputes. The Company intends to defend itself in any such matters and does not currently believe that the outcome of any such matters will have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

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 commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6491277&loc=d3e6429-115629 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration