XML 55 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
Commitments and Contingencies
 3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies
(16) Commitments and Contingencies
 
Operating Lease
 
Orient Paper leases 32.95 acres of land from a local government through a real estate lease with a 30-year term, which expires on December 31, 2031. The lease requires an annual rental payment of approximately $19,149 (RMB 120,000).  This operating lease is renewable at the end of the 30-year term.
 
On November 27, 2012, Orient Paper entered into a 49.4 acres land lease with an investment company in the Economic Development Zone in Wei County, Hebei, China. The lease term of the Wei County land lease commences on the date of the lease and lasts for 15 years. The lease requires an annual rental payment of $574,474 (RMB 3,600,000). The Company will be building two new tissue paper production lines and future production facilities in the leased Wei County land.
 
The rental expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012 were $148,162 and $4,755, respectively.
 
Future minimum lease payments are as follows:
 
March 31,
  
Amount
  
2014
  
$
258,513
  
2015
    
593,623
  
2016
    
593,623
  
2017
    
593,623
  
2018
    
593,623
  
Thereafter
    
5,768,678
  
Total operating lease payments
  
$
8,401,683
  
 
Capital commitment
 
As of March 31, 2013, the Company has signed several contracts for construction of equipments and facilities, including a new tissue paper production line PM8 for a contract cost of $4,946,861. Total outstanding commitments under these contracts were $3,957,489 and $5,243,636 as of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. With the exception of a 5% performance holdback (approximately $247,343) on the new tissue paper production line, which is payable in 2014, the Company expected to pay off all the balances by the end of year 2013.
 
Pending Litigation
 
On August 6, 2010, a stockholder class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against the Company, certain current and former officers and directors of the Company, and Roth Capital Partners, LLP. The complaint in the lawsuit, Mark Henning, et al. v. Orient Paper et al., CV-10-5887 RSWL (AJWx), alleges, among other claims, that the Company issued materially false and misleading statements and omitted to state material facts that rendered its affirmative statements misleading as they related to the Company’s financial performance, business prospects, and financial condition, and that the defendants failed to prevent such statements from being issued or corrected. The complaint seeks, among other relief, compensatory damages, attorneys' fees and experts’ fees. Plaintiffs purport to sue on behalf of themselves and a class consisting of the Company’s stockholders (other than the defendants and their affiliates). The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on January 28, 2011, and the Company filed a motion to dismiss with the court on March 14, 2011. On July 20, 2011 the court denied the Company’s motion to dismiss, thus allowing the litigation to proceed to discovery. On June 21, 2012, the Company reached a proposed settlement of the securities class action lawsuit with the plaintiffs. The terms of the proposed settlement call for dismissal of all the defendants from the action in exchange for a $2 million payment from the Company’s insurer. The court granted preliminary approval of the settlement on November 5, 2012, and orally granted final settlement approval at a hearing on March 25, 2013. A formal written order has been entered by the Court on April 29, 2013.   The settlement has have no material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
 
On April 1, 2011 the Company was served a summon for a complaint filed by Tribank Capital Investments, Inc. (“Tribank”) on March 30, 2011 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles against the Company and its Chairman and CEO Mr. Zhenyong Liu (the “Tribank Matter”). By filing the complaint, Tribank alleges, among other claims, that the Company breached the Non-Circumvention Agreement dated October 29, 2008 between the Company and Tribank (the “Agreement”), and that the Company was unjustly enriched as a result of breaching the Agreement. The complaint seeks, among other relief, compensatory damages and plaintiff’s counsel’s fees. On April 29, 2011 the Company filed a Notice of Removal to remove the jurisdiction of the case from the state court of California to the Federal District Court for the District of Central California and filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit on May 6, 2011. On July 18, 2011, United States District Court Judge Manual Real granted Orient Paper motion to dismiss the complaint in its entirety, finding that venue is improper because the contract that forms the basis of the parties' relationship contains a valid and enforceable forum selection clause providing that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China is the exclusive forum for resolution of disputes. Tribank subsequently filed a notice of appeal with the court on August 5, 2011 and did file an opening brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, to which the Company filed an answering brief on August 31, 2012. Oral argument took place on April 9, 2013. Shortly thereafter, the Ninth Circuit entered a memorandum reversing the District Court’s dismissal because the record was not sufficiently developed to make a determination as to whether the forum selection clause applied, and remanding the case back to the District Court with instructions to hold an evidentiary hearing before ruling on the Company’s motion to dismiss.  The Company continues to believe that the complaint has no merit and intends to vigorously defend the lawsuit. While certain legal defense costs may be later reimbursed by the Company’s insurance carrier, no reasonable estimate of any impact of the outcome of the litigation or related legal fees on the financial statements can be made as of date of this statement.
 
Cross-Guarantee with a Third Party
 
As of March 31, 2013, the Company used land use right in the amount of $7,431,490 as a pledge for a bank loan of an independent third party, which cross-guarantees the Company’s credit facility of $1,595,762 from the Bank of Hebei. The amount of that long-term loan of the third party was $1,515,974 and will expire on February 26, 2014, while the credit facility guaranteed by the independent third party will expire on September 19, 2013.
 
As of December 31, 2012, the Company used land use right in the amount of $7,419,614 as a pledge for a bank loan of an independent third party, which cross-guarantees the Company’s credit facility of $1,535,138 from the Bank of Hebei. The amount of that long-term loan of the third party was $1,505,881 and will expire on February 26, 2014, while the credit facility guaranteed by the independent third party will expire on September 19, 2013.