XML 27 R18.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2011
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

NOTE 12. – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

 

Facilities - The Company leases a total of approximately 45,000 square feet of office space and data center for its administrative offices and its printing, plastics and digital facilities at monthly rentals aggregating approximately $49,000. The leases expire at various dates through July 2014, although renewal options exist to extend lease agreements for up to an additional 60 months. On August 30, 2011, the Company’s wholly owned subsidiary Premier entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement to purchase the Company’s packaging plant at 6 Framark Drive, Victor, NY, from Bzdick Properties, a Company owned by the Company’s COO Bob Bzdick, a related party (See Note 6). Premier was leasing the Real Estate from Bzdick Properties under a lease which was set to expire in January 2020 at a rental rate of $13,333 per month.  The Real Estate transaction resulted from the exercise of a purchase option under the existing lease, and the lease was terminated on August 30, 2011. 

 

Equipment Leases  - The Company leases office equipment, digital and offset presses, laminating and finishing equipment for its various printing operations. The leases may be capital leases or operating leases and are generally for a term of 36 to 60 months. The leases expire at various dates through July 2016.

 

The following table summarizes the Company’s lease commitments. Included in payments made for facilities operating leases during the year ended December 31, 2011 are related party payments made to Mr. Bob Bzdick for our Packaging division facility of approximately $107,000.

 

          Operating Leases  
    Capital Leases     Equipment     Facilities     Total  
                         
Payments made in 2011   $ 107,052     $ 625,218       599,806     $ 1,225,024  
Future minimum lease commitments:                                
2012     101,803       411,454       417,215       828,669  
2013     6,282       295,088       416,366       711,454  
2014     -       245,100       179,398       424,498  
2015     -       228,300       -       228,300  
2016     -       54,450       -       54,450  
                                 
Total future minimum lease commitments   $ 108,085     $ 1,234,392     $ 1,012,979     $ 2,247,371  
                                 
Less amount representing interest     (8,780 )                        
Present value of future minimum lease commitments     99,305                          
                                 
Less current portion     (88,172 )                        
                                 
Long term portion   $ 11,133                          

 

Employment Agreements - The Company has employment agreements with four members of its management team with terms ranging from one to 10 years through February 2020. The agreements provide for severance payments in the event of termination for certain causes. As of December 31, 2011, the minimum annual severance payments under these employment agreements are, in aggregate, approximately $1,660,000.

 

Related Party Consulting Payments - During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company paid approximately $40,000 in consulting fees to a member of its board. The consulting agreement was terminated on December 30, 2011.

 

Contingent Litigation Payment –In May 2005, the Company made an agreement with its legal counsel in charge of the Company’s litigation with the European Central Bank which capped the fees for all matters associated with that litigation at $500,000 plus expenses, and a $150,000 contingent payment upon a successful ruling or settlement on the Company’s behalf in that litigation. The Company will record the $150,000 in the period in which the Company has determined that a successful ruling or settlement is probable.

 

In addition, pursuant to an agreement made in December 2004, the Company is required to share the economic benefit derived from settlements, licenses or subsequent business arrangements that the Company obtains from any infringer of patents formerly owned by the Wicker Family. For infringement matters involving certain U.S. patents, the Company will be required to disburse 30% of the settlement proceeds. For infringement matters involving certain foreign patents, the Company will be required to disburse 14% of the settlement proceeds. These payments do not apply to licenses or royalties to patents that the Company has developed or obtained from persons other than the Wicker Family. As of December 31, 2011, there have been no settlement amounts related to these agreements.

 

In addition, in conjunction with the Company’s litigation against Coupons.com, the Company’s counsel in the case has agreed to represent the Company on a contingency fee basis, except for approximately $40,000 of legal fees incurred prior to the filing of the case for preliminary research and investigation of the merits of the case. Under the contingency fee arrangement, the Company has agreed to pay its counsel 33 1/3% of all sums paid to the Company, whether obtained by settlement, arbitration award, court proceedings or otherwise, pursuant to the case. The fees described above do not include out-of-pocket charges and disbursements which will be the responsibility of the Company.

  

Legal Proceedings — On August 1, 2005, the Company commenced a suit in the European Court of First Instance in Luxembourg against the ECB alleging patent infringement by the ECB and claimed unspecified damages (the “ECB Litigation”). The Company brought the suit in the European Court of First Instance in Luxembourg.   The Company alleged that all Euro banknotes in circulation infringe the Company European Patent 0 455 750B1 which covers a method of incorporating an anti-counterfeiting feature into banknotes or similar security documents to protect against forgeries by digital scanning and copying devices.  In 2006, the Company received notices that the ECB had filed separate claims in each of the United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, France, Spain, Germany, Austria and Luxembourg courts seeking the invalidation of the Patent.  Proceedings were commenced before each of the national courts seeking revocation and declarations of invalidity of the Patent. On August 20, 2008, the Company entered into an agreement with Trebuchet Capital Partners, LLC (“Trebuchet”) under which Trebuchet agreed to pay substantially all of the litigation costs associated with validity proceedings in eight European countries relating to the Patent. The Company provided Trebuchet with the sole and exclusive right to manage infringement litigation relating to the Patent in Europe, including the right to initiate litigation in the name of the Company, Trebuchet or both and to choose whom and where to sue, subject to certain limitations set forth in the Trebuchet Agreement. In consideration for Trebuchet's funding obligations, the Company assigned and transferred a 49% interest in the Company's rights, title and interest in the Patent to Trebuchet which allows Trebuchet to have a separate and distinct interest in and share of the Patent, along with the right to sue and recover in litigation, settlement or otherwise and to collect royalties or other payments under or on account of the Patent. In addition, the Company and Trebuchet agreed to equally share all proceeds generated from litigation relating to the Patent, including judgments and licenses or other arrangements entered into in settlement of any such litigation. On July 7, 2011, Trebuchet and the Company entered into a series of agreements wherein Trebuchet effectively ended its ongoing participation in the ECB litigation, except for continuing involvement in the final settlement of fees that may become payable as a result of the infringement case in the Netherlands described below. The original agreement with Trebuchet will remain in effect until Trebuchet makes any and all final payments that may become due in the Netherland infringement case.

 

On March 26, 2007, the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, Patents Court in London, England ruled that the Patent was deemed invalid in the United Kingdom, and on March 19, 2008 this decision was upheld on appeal.   As a result of these decisions, the Company paid the ECB costs for both court cases in the amount of ₤356,490. On March 27, 2007 the Bundespatentgericht of the Federal Republic of Germany ruled that the German part of the Patent was valid, having considered the English Court’s decision.  However, on July 6, 2010, the Company was notified that the German Court had reversed the ruling on appeal and the Patent was deemed invalid in Germany. The Court of First Instance in Luxembourg ruled on September 5, 2007 that it does not have jurisdiction to rule on the patent infringement claim. On January 9, 2008 the French Court held that the Patent was invalid in France and on March 10, 2010, this decision was upheld on appeal.   On March 12, 2008 the Dutch Court ruled that the Patent was valid in the Netherlands.   However, on December 21, 2010 the Dutch Court reversed the ruling on appeal and the Patent was deemed invalid in the Netherlands. On November 3, 2009, the Belgium Court held that the Patent was invalid in Belgium. On November 17, 2009, the Austrian Court held that the Patent was invalid in Austria.   On March 24, 2010 the Spanish Court ruled that the Patent was valid. The decision is being appealed by the ECB. In July 2010, the Company was notified that the Italian Court deemed the patent invalid. The decision was not appealed.

 

In certain jurisdictions in the ECB Litigation, the losing party is responsible for the other party’s legal fees, subject to court approval. The Company paid a total of ₤356,490 to the ECB for the United Kingdom case. Trebuchet paid for the costs reimbursements due, if any, for all of the other jurisdictions involved, except for approximately €156,000 for the Germany case, of which approximately €132,000 ($170,000 at December 31, 2011) is due as of December 31, 2011, and approximately €175,000 ($226,000 at December 31, 2011) for the Netherlands case, for which Trebuchet transferred funds to the Company for disbursement of these amounts in July 2011, which the Company has recorded as accrued liabilities at December 31, 2011. In addition, the ECB formally requested the Company to pay attorneys and court fees for the Court of First Instance case in Luxembourg in the amount of €93,752 ($121,000 at December 31, 2011) which, unless the amount is settled will be subject to an assessment procedure that has not been initiated. The Company will accrue the assessed amount, if any, as soon as it is reasonably estimable.

 

On February 18, 2010, Trebuchet, on behalf of the Company, filed an infringement suit in the Netherlands against the ECB and two security printing entities with manufacturing operations in the Netherlands, Joh. Enschede Banknotes B.V and Koninklijke Joh. Enschede B.V.  Upon determination on December 21, 2010, that the patent was invalid in the Netherlands, the infringement case was terminated by Trebuchet. Trebuchet is responsible for costs reimbursement associated with the case, if any, when determined by the Dutch Court.

  

On October 24, 2011 the Company initiated a law suit against Coupons.com Incorporated (“Coupons.com”). The suit was filed in the United States District Court, Western District of New York, located in Rochester, New York. Coupons.com is a Delaware corporation having its principal place of business located in Mountain View, California. In the Coupons.com suit, the Company alleges breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition and unjust enrichment, and is seeking in excess of $10 million in money damages from Coupons.com for those claims.

  

In addition to the foregoing, we are subject to other legal proceedings that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and have not been finally adjudicated. Although there can be no assurance in this regard, in the opinion of management, none of the legal proceedings to which we are a party, whether discussed herein or otherwise, will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, cash flows or our financial condition.