XML 18 R17.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.3.0.15
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2011
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES [Abstract] 
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
NOTE 11. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

We are obligated under various operating leases for our facilities and certain equipment, most notably a lease for a  manufacturing and warehouse facility in St. Petersburg, Florida that requires monthly payments of approximately $13,000 and expires on October 31, 2013.  The following is a schedule of approximate future minimum lease payments under operating leases having remaining terms in excess of one year for the three months ended December 31, 2011 and the calendar years ended December 31, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 (in thousands):

2011
 
$
62
 
2012
 
 
251
 
2013
 
 
227
 
2014
 
 
12
 
2015
 
 
--
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total
 
$
552
 
 
Rent expense approximated $148,000 and $152,000 for the nine month periods ending September 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

On March 3, 2011 we entered into a settlement agreement related to the legal action with Salient Surgical Technologies, Inc. and Medtronic, Inc. The settlement called for us and related parties to immediately exit and not enter into the monopolar and bipolar saline-enhanced RF device business (including SEER™ and BOSS™) worldwide through February 2015. In exchange, the Plaintiffs made a one-time payment to us of $750,000. As a condition, we will not be able to sell certain finished products, which as of the settlement date amounted to approximately $100,000 of our inventory.  We reserved for approximately $87,000 of our inventory related to the products in this settlement in the first quarter of 2011. The terms also include a provision outlining a possible OEM contract manufacturing relationship between Salient and our Company. We currently already have a longstanding OEM contract manufacturing agreement with Medtronic for advanced electrosurgical generators. We have given Medtronic notice that the agreement will terminate at December 31, 2011, with final deliveries occurring in 2012. We will continue to service the generators sold during this contract for the next five years. We anticipate sales of accessories and spare parts to continue into the future.
 
On July 9, 2010, we filed a complaint in the United States District for the Middle District of Florida (Tampa division) naming Steven Livneh, who at the time was a director of the Company, and two of his related entities as defendants. In our complaint, we are seeking, among other things, a declaratory judgment from the Court concerning our rights under certain agreements entered into with the defendants in 2006 in connection with our acquisition of certain assets and technology, including intellectual property relating to our Seal-N-Cut™ product. We are also seeking damages for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty by Mr. Livneh relating to his service as an officer and director of the Company, tortious interference with contractual relations, defamation, slander of title and injunctive relief.  Mr. Livneh filed a motion seeking to (a) dismiss the complaint or, in the alternative, to (b) transfer venue. On December 20, 2010 the court issued an order dismissing without prejudice five of our fifteen claims, due to New York being defined in the forum selection clauses in two of the underlying contracts with Mr. Livneh.  The Company re-filed these five claims in federal court in New York.  Mr. Livneh's motion to dismiss the remaining claims in Florida was denied and the venue was not transferred.
 
On January 10, 2011 defendant Livneh filed a counter-complaint/third party complaint against us, our CEO, and our COO, alleging fraud, fraud in the inducement, fraudulent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, negligent misrepresentation, innocent misrepresentation, breach of contract, tortuous interference, shareholder derivative, defamation, breach of good faith and fair dealing, violation of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, and violation of the Florida Whistleblower's Act, and seeking rescission and a declaratory judgment. In addition to the foregoing relief, defendant also seeks reinstatement of Mr. Livneh to the Company's board of directors, issuance of certain shares of unrestricted stock, compensatory, actual and/or special damages, punitive and/or exemplary damages, and attorney's fees and costs.  The outcome of this matter is uncertain and accordingly no effect has been given to any loss that may result from the resolution of this matter in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.
 
On June 10, 2011 we signed a settlement agreement related to the legal action involving Dr. David Eisenstein, MD under which we paid $53,500 to Dr. Eisenstein and an additional $20,000 directly to his legal counsel for legal fees. In exchange, Dr. Eisenstein surrendered his 5,000 stock options and both parties signed a general release and dismissal.

In September 2011, we were served in a purported stockholder derivative action that was filed in the United State District Court for the Middle District of Florida against the Company and certain of its present and former officers and directors. The complaint asserts, among other things, breach of fiduciary duties and bad faith in relation to the management of the Company. The complaint seeks, among other things, unspecified compensatory damages and various forms of equitable relief. The allegations in the derivative action appear to be based largely on the January 10, 2011 Steven Livneh counterclaim described above. We are reviewing the allegations in the complaint and investigating whether there is a collusive connection between the newly-filed derivative action and the pending lawsuit with Mr. Livneh. We believe the allegations to be frivolous and without merit and we intend to defend the action vigorously. The outcome of this matter is uncertain and accordingly no effect has been given to any loss that may result from the resolution of this matter in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.