ITEM 1. BUSINESS
Overview
We are an intellectual property asset management company. Our
principal operations include the development, acquisition, licensing and enforcement of intellectual property rights that are either
owned or controlled by us or one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries. We currently own, control or manage eleven intellectual property
portfolios, which principally consist of patent rights. Our eleven intellectual property portfolios include the portfolios which
we acquired from Intellectual Ventures Assets 16, LLC (“Intellectual Ventures”) and seven of its affiliates. As part
of our intellectual property asset management activities and in the ordinary course of our business, it has been necessary for
us or the intellectual property owner who we represent to initiate, and it is likely to continue to be necessary to initiate, patent
infringement lawsuits and engage in patent infringement litigation. We anticipate that our primary source of revenue will come
from the grant of licenses to use our intellectual property, including licenses granted as part of the settlement of patent infringement
lawsuits. We also generated revenue from management fees from managing intellectual property portfolios in 2017, although we do
not currently receive these fees and we do not have any agreements that provide for such payments.
We seek to generate revenue from three sources:
|
●
|
Patent licensing fees relating to our intellectual property portfolio, which includes fees from the licensing of our intellectual property, primarily from litigation relating to enforcement of our intellectual property rights.
|
|
●
|
Management fees, which we receive for managing
structured licensing programs, including litigation, related to our intellectual property rights, although we do not
currently receive these fees and do not have any agreements that provide for such payments.
|
|
●
|
Licensed packaging sales, which relate to the sale of licensed products.
|
Intellectual property monetization includes the generation of
revenue and proceeds from the licensing of patents, patented technologies and other intellectual property rights. Patent litigation
is often a necessary element of intellectual property monetization where a patent owner, or a representative of the patent owner,
seeks to protect its patent rights against the unlicensed manufacture, sale, and use of the owner’s patent rights or products
which incorporate the owner’s patent rights. In general, we seek to monetize the bundle of rights granted by the patents
through structured licensing and when necessary enforcement of those rights through litigation, although to date all of our patent
license revenues have resulted from litigation.
We intend to develop our business by acquiring intellectual
property rights, either in the form of ownership of or an exclusive license to the underlying intellectual property. Our goal
is to enter into agreements with inventors of innovative technologies for which there may be a significant market for products
which use or incorporate the intellectual property. We seek to purchase all of, or interests in, intellectual property in exchange
for cash, securities of our company, the formation or a joint venture or separate subsidiary in which the owner has an equity
interest, and/or interests in the monetization of those assets. Our revenue from this aspect of our business can be generated
through licensing and, when necessary, which is typically the case, litigation efforts as well as intellectual property management
fees, although we do not currently receive these fees and do not have any agreements that provide for such payments. We engage
in due diligence and a principled risk underwriting process to evaluate the merits and potential value of any acquisition, partnership
or joint venture. We seek to structure the terms of our acquisitions in a manner that will achieve the highest risk-adjusted returns
possible, in the context of our financial condition. In connection with the acquisition of intellectual property portfolios,
we have granted the party providing the financing an interest in any recovery we have with respect to the intellectual property
purchased with the financing, and we expect that we will have to continue to grant such interests until and unless we have generated
sufficient cash from licensing our intellectual property to enable us to acquire additional intellectual property portfolios without
outside financing. However, we cannot assure you that we will ever generate sufficient revenues to enable us to purchase additional
intellectual property without third-party financing.
We employ a due diligence process before completing the acquisition
of an intellectual property interest. We begin with an investment thesis supporting the potential transaction and then proceed
to test the thesis through an examination of the critical drivers of the value of the underlying intellectual property asset. Such
an examination focuses on areas such as title and inventorship issues, the quality of the drafting and prosecution of the intellectual
property assets, legal risks inherent in licensing programs generally, the applicability of the invention to the relevant marketplace
and other issues such as the effects of venue and other procedural issues. However, our financial position may affect our ability
to conduct due diligence with respect to intellectual property rights.
It is frequently necessary to commence litigation in order to
obtain a recovery for past infringement of, or to license the use of, our intellectual property rights. Intellectual property litigation
is very expensive, with no certainty of any recovery. To the extent possible we seek to engage counsel on a contingent fee or partial
contingent fee basis, which significantly reduces our litigation cost, but which also reduces the value of the recovery to us.
We do not have the resources to enable us to fund the cost of litigation. To the extent that we cannot fund litigation ourselves,
we may enter into an agreement with a third party, which may be the patent owner or the former patent owner who transferred the
patent rights to us, or an independent third party. In view of our limited cash and our working capital deficiency, we are not
able to institute any monetization program that may require litigation unless we engage counsel on a fully contingent basis or
we obtain funding from third party funding sources. In these cases, counsel may be afforded a greater participation in the recovery
and the third party that funds the litigation would be entitled to participate in any recovery.
Purchase of Intellectual Property from Intellectual Ventures
Entities
On October 22, 2015, pursuant to an agreement with an effective
date of July 8, 2015, as amended, between us and Intellectual Ventures, we purchased three groups of patents from Intellectual
Ventures for a purchase price of $3,000,000, which was paid in three annual installments of $1,000,000 from the proceeds of our
loans from United Wireless. Contemporaneously with our acquisition of the patents, we granted Intellectual Ventures a security
interest in the patents transferred to us as security for the payment of the balance of the purchase price. Intellectual Ventures
released its security interest upon receipt of the third installment payment in November 2017. The patent portfolios which we acquired
from Intellectual Ventures are the anchor structure portfolio, the power management/bus control portfolio and the diode on chip
portfolio, which are described under “Business – Our Intellectual Property Portfolios.”
On July 28, 2017, CXT Systems, Inc. (“CXT”), a wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into an agreement
with Intellectual Ventures Assets 34 LLC and Intellectual Ventures Assets 37 LLC (“IV 34/37”) pursuant to which CTX
paid IV 34/37 $25,000 and IV34/37 transferred to CXT all right, title and interest in a portfolio of thirteen United States patents
(the “CXT Portfolio”). Under the agreement, CXT will distribute 50% of net proceeds, as defined, to IV 34/37, as long
as we generate revenue from the CXT Portfolio. The $25,000 payment to IV 34/37 was made from a loan from United Wireless and was
paid directly by United Wireless to IV 34/37. The agreement with IV 34/37, as amended on January 26, 2018, provides that if, on
December 31, 2018, December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2020, cumulative distributions to IV 34/37 total less than $100,000, $375,000
and $975,000, respectively, CXT shall pay the difference between such cumulative amounts and the amount paid to IV 34/37 within
ten days after the applicable date. The $25,000 advance is treated as an advance against distributions of net proceeds payable
to IV 34/37. The useful lives of the patents, at the date of acquisition, was 5-6 years. Neither we nor any affiliate of CXT has
guaranteed the minimum payments. CXT’s obligations under the agreement with IV 34/37 are secured by a security interest in
the proceeds (from litigation or otherwise) from the CXT Portfolio. The patent portfolio which we acquired from IV 34/37 is the
CXT portfolio which is described under “Business – Our Intellectual Property Portfolios.”
On January 26, 2018, CXT entered into an agreement with Intellectual Ventures Assets 62 LLC and Intellectual
Ventures Assets 71 LLC “(IV 62/71”) pursuant to which CXT advanced IV 62/71 $10,000 at closing and IV 62/71 assigned
to CXT all right, title, and interest in a portfolio of sixteen United States patents and three pending applications. Under the
agreement, CXT will distribute 50% of net proceeds, as defined, to IV 62/71, as long as we generate net proceeds from this portfolio.
The initial $10,000 advance is treated as an advance toward our future distributions of net proceeds payable to IV 62/71. CXT’s
obligations under the agreement are secured by a security interest in the proceeds (from litigation or otherwise) from the CXT
Portfolio. We agreed to modify the monetization proceeds agreement between CXT and United Wireless to include the patents acquired
from IV 62/71.
On January 26, 2018, Photonic Imaging Solutions Inc. (“PIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary, entered
into an agreement with Intellectual Ventures Assets 6 LLC (“IV 64”) pursuant to which PIS advanced $10,000 to IV 64
at closing and IV 64 assigned to PIS all right, title, and interest in a portfolio of eleven United States patents and sixteen
foreign patents (the “CMOS Portfolio”). Under the agreement, PIS will distribute to IV 64 70% of the first $1,500,000
of revenue, as defined in the agreement, 30% of the next $1,500,000 of revenue and 50% of revenue over $3,000,000; with the $10,000
advance being treated as an advance against the first distributions of net proceeds payable to IV 64. PIS’ obligations under
the monetization proceeds agreement are secured by a security interest in the proceeds (from litigation or otherwise) from the
portfolio. The patent portfolio which we acquired from IV 64 is the CMOS portfolio which is described under “Business –
Our Intellectual Property Portfolios.”
On March 15, 2019, M-RED Inc. (“M-RED”), a wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into an agreement
with Intellectual Ventures Assets 113 LLC and Intellectual Ventures Assets 108 LLC (“IV 113/108”) pursuant to which
M-RED paid IV 113/108 $75,000 and IV 113/108 transferred to M-RED all right, title and interest in a portfolio of sixty United
States patents and eight foreign patents (the “M-RED Portfolio”). Under the agreement, M-RED will distribute 50% of
net proceeds, as defined, to IV 113/108, as long as we generate revenue from the M-RED Portfolio. The agreement with IV 113/108
provides that if, on September 30, 2020, September 30, 2021 and September 30, 2022, cumulative distributions to IV 113/108 total
less than $450,000, $975,000 and $1,575,000, respectively, M-RED shall pay the difference between such cumulative amounts and the
amount paid to IV 113/108 within ten days after the applicable date. The $75,000 advance is treated as an advance against distributions
the first distributions of net proceeds payable to IV 113/108. The useful lives of the patents, at the date of acquisition, was
approximately nine years. Neither we nor any affiliate of M-RED has guaranteed the minimum payments. M-RED’s obligations
under the agreement with IV 113/108 are secured by a security interest in the proceeds (from litigation or otherwise) from the
M-RED Portfolio. The patent portfolio which we acquired from IV 113/108 is the M-RED portfolio which is described under “Business
– Our Intellectual Property Portfolios.”
Our Organization
We were incorporated in Delaware on July 17, 1987 under
the name Phase Out of America. On September 21, 1997, we changed our name to Quest Products Corporation, and, on June 6,
2007, we changed our name to Quest Patent Research Corporation. We have been engaged in the intellectual property
monetization business since 2008. Our executive principal office is located at 411 Theodore Fremd Ave., Suite 206S, Rye, New
York 10580-1411, telephone (888) 743-7577. Our website is
www.qprc.com
. Information contained on or derived from our
website or any other website does not constitute a part of this annual report.
Our Intellectual Property Portfolios
Mobile Data
The real-time mobile data portfolio relates to the automatic
update of information delivered to a mobile device without the need for a manual refreshing. The portfolio is comprised of U.S.
Patent No. 7,194,468 “Apparatus and Method for Supplying Information” and all related patents, patent applications,
and all continuations, continuations-in-part, divisions, extensions, renewals, reissues and re-examinations relating to all inventions
thereof (the “Mobile Data Portfolio”). We initially entered into an agreement with the patent owner, Worldlink Information
Technology Systems Limited, whereby we received the exclusive license to license and enforce the Mobile Data Portfolio. Under the
agreement we received a monthly management fee and a percentage of licensing revenues. Subsequently Worldlink transferred its remaining
interest in the Mobile Data Portfolio to Allied Standard Limited. In October 2012, we entered into an agreement with Allied pursuant
to which Allied transferred its entire right title and interest in the Mobile Data Portfolio to Quest Licensing Corporation, which
was at the time, a wholly-owned subsidiary. Under the agreement, Allied was entitled to receive a 50% interest in Quest Licensing.
Quest Licensing’s only intellectual property is the Mobile Data Portfolio. Our agreement with Allied provides that we and
Allied will each receive 50% of the net licensing revenues, as defined by the agreement. In June 2013, we entered into an agreement
with The Betting Service Limited, an entity controlled by a former director of Worldlink. Pursuant to the agreement, we granted
The Betting Service an interest in licensing proceeds from the Mobile Data Portfolio in return for The Betting Service’s
assistance in developing certain Mobile Data Portfolio assets. In April 2014, we entered into a further agreement with Allied whereby
Allied relinquished certain rights under the October 2012 agreement, including its entitlement to a 50% interest in Quest Licensing,
in exchange for our commitment to fund a structured licensing program for the Mobile Data Portfolio.
In March 2014, we entered into a funding agreement whereby a
third party agreed to provide funds to us to enable us to implement a structured licensing program, including litigation if necessary,
for the Mobile Data Portfolio and engaged counsel on a partial contingency basis in connection with a proposed patent infringement
action relating to the Mobile Data Portfolio. Under the funding agreement, the third party receives an interest in the proceeds
from the program, and we have no other obligation to the third party.
In April and June 2014, as part of a structured licensing program, Quest Licensing Corporation brought
patent infringement suits in the U.S. District for the District of Delaware against Bloomberg LP et. al., FactSet Research Systems
Inc., Interactive Data Corporation, SunGard Data Systems Inc. and The Charles Schwab Corporation et. al. These cases have been
consolidated for trial. A hearing, known as a Markman hearing, in which the judge examines the evidence from the parties on the
appropriate meanings of relevant key words in the claim was held on February 8, 2016. In June and August 2016 Quest Licensing Corporation
entered into settlement agreements with SunGard Data Systems Inc. and FactSet Research Systems Inc. On January 19, 2017 the Court
granted the remaining defendants’ motion for summary judgment of non-infringement. On January 31, 2017, Quest Licensing Corporation
filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit whereby Quest Licensing Corporation appealed
the court’s order construing the terms of U.S. patent No. 7,194,468 as well as the court’s order granting defendants’
motion for summary judgment of non-infringement. On June 8, 2018 the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s decision.
On June 9, 2018 Quest Licensing Corporation filed a petition for rehearing with the appellate court. On July 30, 2018 the appellate
court denied Quest Licensing Corporations petition for rehearing. In connection with this litigation, a third party funding source
incurred approximately $0 in 2018 and $153,125 in 2017, which was paid to litigation counsel and other third parties. In addition,
the funding source paid management fees to us of approximately $0 in 2018 and $21,000 in 2017. Through December 31, 2018, we did
not receive any proceeds from the Mobile Data Portfolio.
Following the court’s decision granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the defendants
moved for an award of attorneys’ fees under Section 285 of the patent act which provides that “the court in exceptional
cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.” On June 29, 2017, the defendants’ motion for attorney
fees in the Mobile Data litigation was denied, without prejudice and with leave to renew their motion thirty days from the decision
of the appellate court on Quest Licensing Corporation’s appeal. On August 8, 2018, the defendants’ renewed their
motion for an award of attorneys’ fees under Section 285 of the Patent Act. On March 27, 2019 the defendants’ motion
for attorney fees in the Mobile Data litigation was denied.
Online Marketing, Sweepstakes, Promotions & Rewards
(Von Kohorn Portfolio)
The portfolio consists of three United States Patents that include
patent claims related to, among other areas, online couponing, print-at-home boarding passes and tickets, online sweepstakes; including
the promotion by television networks of online sweepstakes (the “Von Kohorn Portfolio”). In December 2009, we entered
into an agreement with Intertech Holdings, LLC pursuant to which our wholly-owned subsidiary, Quest NetTech Corporation, acquired
by assignment all right, title, and interest in the Von Kohorn Portfolio. Under the agreement, we will receive 20% of adjusted
gross recoveries, as defined. In August 2013, we and Intertech Holdings amended the December 2009 agreement to provide that Intertech
Holdings will receive 33% of the adjusted gross recoveries and Quest NetTech will receive 67% of adjusted gross recoveries.
We did not generate license from the Von Kohorn Portfolio for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017
and no further licensing activities are contemplated.
On December 17, 2018, Wynn Technologies, Inc. granted an exclusive license to the Financial Data Portfolio,
including the right to enforce, to Quest NetTech. Under the agreement, Quest NetTech receives 100% of the net proceeds, as defined
by the agreement.
Flexible Packaging - Turtle Pak
TM
In March 2008, we entered into an agreement with Emerging Technologies
Trust whereby our majority-owned subsidiary, Quest Packaging Solutions Corporation, acquired the exclusive license to make, use,
sell, offer for sale or sublicense the intellectual property of Emerging Technologies Trust (the “Turtle Pak™ Portfolio”).
The Turtle Pak portfolio relates to a cost effective, high-protection packaging system recommended for fragile items weighing less
than ten pounds. The intellectual property consists of two U.S. patents, U.S. Patent No. RE36,412 and U.S. Patent No.6,490,844,
and the Turtle Pak
TM
trademark. Turtle Pak™ brand packaging is suited for such uses as electrical and electronic
components, medical, dental, and diagnostic equipment, instrumentation products, and control components. Turtle Pak™ brand
packaging materials are 100% curbside recyclable.
As the exclusive licensee and manager of the manufacture and
sale of licensed product, we coordinate the manufacture and sale of licensed products to end users; we contract for the manufacture
and assembly of the product components, and we coordinate order receipt, fulfillment and invoicing. Revenues from the TurtlePak
TM
product sales were approximately $20,000 and $14,000 for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. We continue
to generate modest revenue from this product.
Universal Financial Data System
The invention describes a universal financial data system which allows its holder to use the device to
access one or more accounts stored in the memory of the device as a cash payment substitute as well as to keep track of financial
and transaction records and data, such as transaction receipts, in a highly portable package, such as a cellular device (the “Financial
Data Portfolio”). The inventive universal data system is capable of supporting multiple accounts of various types, including
but not limited to credit card accounts, checking/debit accounts, and loyalty accounts. Our wholly-owned subsidiary, Wynn Technologies
Inc., acquired US Patent No. 5,859,419, from the owner, Sol Wynn. In January 2001, we filed a reissue application for the patent,
and the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued patent RE38,137. This reissued patent, which contains 35 separate claims,
replaces the original patent, which had seven claims. In February 2011, we entered into a new agreement with Sol Li (formerly Sol
Wynn), pursuant to which we issued to Mr. Li a 35% interest in Wynn Technologies and warrants to purchase up to 5,000,000 shares
of our common stock at an exercise price of $0.001 per share, the warrants expired unexercised. We also agreed that Mr. Li would
receive 40% of the net licensing revenues generated by Wynn Technologies with respect to this patent, which is the only patent
owned by Wynn Technologies. On December 17, 2018, Wynn Technologies, Inc. granted an exclusive license to the Financial Data Portfolio,
including the right to enforce, to our wholly owned subsidiary, Quest NetTech. Under the agreement, Quest NetTech receives 100%
of the net proceeds, as defined by the agreement.
Through December 31, 2018, we did not generate any revenue from
the Financial Data Portfolio.
Rich Media
The rich media portfolio is directed to methods, systems, and
processes that permit typical Internet users to design rich-media production content (
i.e.
, rich-media applications), such
as websites. The portfolio consists of U.S. Patent No. 7,000,180, “Methods, Systems, and Processes for the Design and Creation
of Rich Media Applications via the Internet” and all related patents, patent applications, corresponding foreign patents
and foreign patent applications and foreign counterparts, and all continuations, continuations-in-part, divisions, extensions,
renewals, reissues and re-examinations relating to all inventions thereof (the “Rich Media Portfolio”). In July 2008,
we entered into a consulting and licensing program management agreement with Balthaser Online, Inc., the patent owner, pursuant
to which we performed services related to the establishment and management of a licensing program to evaluate and analyze the relevant
market and to obtain licenses for the Rich Media Portfolio in exchange for management fees as well as an irrevocable entitlement
to a distribution of 15% of all proceeds generated by the Rich Media Portfolio for the remaining life of the portfolio regardless
of whether those proceeds are derived from litigation, settlement, licensing or otherwise. Our 15% distribution right is subject
to reduction to 7.5% in the event that we refuse or are unable to perform the services detailed in the agreement.
Through December 31, 2018, we did not generate any revenue from
the rich media patents.
Anchor Structure Portfolio
This portfolio, which we acquired from Intellectual Ventures
in October 2015 and transferred to a newly formed subsidiary, Mariner IC Inc., consists of two United States patents which relate
to technology for incorporating metal structures in the corners and edges of semiconductor dies to prevent cracking from stresses.
In March 2016, we entered into a funding agreement whereby a
third party agreed to provide funds to us to enable us to implement a structured licensing program, including litigation if necessary,
for the Anchor Structure Portfolio and engaged counsel on a partial contingency basis in connection with a proposed patent infringement
action relating to the Anchor Structure Portfolio. Under the funding agreement, the third party receives an interest in the proceeds
from the program, and we have no other obligation to the third party.
Following the execution of the funding agreements and the
engagement of counsel, in April 2016, Mariner IC brought patent infringement suits in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Texas against MediaTek Inc., Texas Instruments Incorporated, LG Electronics, Inc., Toshiba
Corporation, and Funai Electric Co., Ltd. In May 2016, the action against Funai was dismissed, and in November 2016, the
action against Texas Instruments was dismissed. The remaining suits settled in 2017.
In March 2018, Mariner IC brought patent infringement suits in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Texas against Acer Inc., Schneider Electric, Sharp Corporation, AsusTek Computer Inc., and Bose Corporation.
In April 2018, the actions against Acer Inc., Schneider Electric and Bose Corporation were dismissed. In April 2018, Mariner IC
brought patent infringement actions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against TiVo Corporation
and Huawei Device Co., Ltd et. al. In August 2018, the action against Huawei Device Co., Ltd et. al. was voluntarily dismissed.
In September 2018, Mariner IC brought a patent infringement action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of Texas against Huawei Device Co., Ltd et. al. A Markman claim construction hearing in the AsusTek actions is scheduled for June
20, 2019 with trial scheduled to commence on December 2, 2019. A Markman claim construction hearing in the Sharp action is scheduled
for July 23, 2019 with trial scheduled to commence on February 3, 2020. A Markman claim construction hearing in the Huawei action
is scheduled for October 31, 2019 with trial scheduled to commence on May 4, 2020. All hearing and trial dates are subject to change
at the discretion of the court.
We did not generate license fees from the Anchor Structure Portfolio in 2018. We generated license fees
of approximately $1,196,000 for the year ended December 31, 2017.
Power Management/Bus Control Portfolio
This portfolio, which is the second portfolio which we acquired
from Intellectual Ventures and transferred to a newly-formed subsidiary, Semcon IP Inc., consists of four United States patents
that cover fundamental technology for adjusting the processor clock and voltage to save power based on the operating characteristics
of the processor and one United States patent that relates to coordinating direct bus communications between subsystems in an assigned
channel.
In March 2016, we entered into a funding agreement whereby a
third party agreed to provide funds to us to enable us to implement a structured licensing program, including litigation if necessary,
for the Power Management/Bus Control Portfolio and engaged counsel on a partial contingency basis in connection with a proposed
patent infringement action relating to the Power Management/Bus Control. Under the funding agreement, the third party receives
an interest in the proceeds from the program, and we have no other obligation to the third party.
Following the execution of the funding agreement and
partial contingency agreement with counsel, in April 2016, Semcon IP Inc. brought patent infringement suits in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Huawei Technologies, MediaTek Inc., STMicroelectronics Inc.,
Texas Instruments Incorporated and ZTE Corporation. As of December 31, 2018, these actions have been settled and dismissed.
Our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2018 includes revenue from these settlements.
In May 2018 Semcon brought patent infringement actions in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Amazon.com, Inc., AsusTeK Computer Inc., TCT Mobile International
Limited et. al., Kyocera Corporation, LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton, SE, Shenzhen OnePlus Science & Technology Co., Ltd.,
and Michael Kors Holdings Ltd. A Markman claim construction hearing in the Amazon action has been scheduled for May 2, 2019 with
trial to commence on November 4, 2019. A Markman claim construction hearing in the AsusTek and Michael Kors actions has been scheduled
for June 19, 2019 with trial to commence on December 2, 2019. A Markman claim construction hearing in the Kyocera action has been
scheduled for June 19, 2019 with trial to commence on February 3, 2020. All hearing and trial dates are subject to change at the
discretion of the court.
Pursuant to the terms of the funding agreement and the partial
contingency agreement with counsel, we do not have any liability or obligations with respect to the costs associated with prosecuting
the actions, and we do not receive any payments for any assistance which we may provide in connection with the litigation. Both
the funding source and counsel will participate in any recovery in these lawsuits.
We generated license fees from the Power Management/Bus Control Portfolio of approximately $7,049,000
for the year ended December 31, 2018. We did not generate revenue from this portfolio prior to 2018.
Diode on Chip Portfolio
This portfolio, which is the third portfolio which we acquired
from Intellectual Ventures and transferred to a newly-formed subsidiary, IC Kinetics Inc., consists of three United States patents
and one pending continuation application which cover technology relating to on-chip temperature measurement for semiconductors.
As of December 31, 2018, we did not generate any revenue from this portfolio.
CXT Portfolio
This portfolio consists of twenty-nine United States patents
and three pending continuation applications which cover technology relating to systems and methods of operating an accessible information
database which provides for inventory evaluation, filtering according to preferences, alternative product recommendations, and
access to a database of consumer feedback/evaluation.
In April 2018 CXT brought patent infringement suits in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Academy Ltd., The Container Store Group, Inc. and Pier 1 Imports,
Inc. In May 2018 CXT brought patent infringement suits in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against
Conn’s, Inc., Fossil Group, Inc., JC Penney Company, Inc., Stage Stores, Inc. and Tailored Brands, Inc. A Markman claim construction
hearing has been scheduled in these actions for August 1, 2019 with trial to commence on February 18, 2020. All hearing and trial
dates are subject to change at the discretion of the court.
Through December 31, 2018, we did not generate any revenues
from this portfolio.
CMOS Portfolio
This portfolio consists of eleven United States patents and
sixteen foreign patents which cover technology relating to digital image sensor technology systems and methods which PIS acquired
on January 26, 2018.
In April 2018 PIS brought patent infringement actions in the
United States District Court for the District of Delaware against Lenovo Group Ltd., AsusTek Computer Inc., Lorex Technology Inc.,
and NETGEAR, Inc. A Markman claim construction hearing has been scheduled in these actions for August 30, 2019 with trials to commence
on October 26, 2020 and November 2, 2020. All hearing and trial dates are subject to change at the discretion of the court.
Through December 31, 2018, we did not generate any revenues
from this portfolio.
M-RED Portfolio
This portfolio consists of sixty-one United States patents and
eight foreign patents which cover technology relating to processor and power management which M-RED acquired on March 15, 2019.
Competition
We encounter and expect to continue to encounter competition
in the areas of intellectual property acquisitions for the sake of licensure from both private and publicly traded companies that
engage in intellectual property monetization activities. Such competitors and potential competitors include companies seeking to
acquire the same intellectual property assets and intellectual property rights that we may seek to acquire. Entities such as Acacia
Research Corporation, Document Security Systems, Inc., Intellectual Ventures, Wi-LAN, Conversant IP, VirnetX Holding Corporation,
Network-1 Security Solutions, Round Rock Research LLC, IPvalue Management Inc., Form Holdings, Pendrell Corporation , Finjan Holdings,
Inc., Inventergy Global, Inc., Netlist Inc., Parkervision Inc., Spherix Incorporated, Intelligent Partners, Walker Innovation, Inc.
and others derive all or a substantial portion of their revenue from patent monetization activities, and we expect more entities
to enter the market. Most of our competitors have longer operating histories and significantly greater financial resources and
personnel than we have.
We also compete with venture capital firms, strategic corporate
buyers and various industry leaders for intellectual property and technology acquisitions and licensing opportunities. Many of
these competitors have more financial and human resources than our company. In seeking to obtain intellectual property assets or
intellectual property rights, we seek to both demonstrate our understanding of the intellectual property that we are seeking to
acquire or license and our ability to monetize their intellectual property rights. Our weak cash position may impair our ability
to negotiate successfully with the intellectual property owners.
Other companies may develop competing technologies that offer
better or less expensive alternatives to intellectual property rights that we may acquire and/or out-license. Many potential competitors
may have significantly greater resources than we do. The development of technological advances or entirely different approaches
could render certain of the technologies owned or controlled by our operating subsidiaries obsolete and/or uneconomical.
Intellectual Property
Rights
We have eleven intellectual property portfolios: financial data, mobile data, Von Kohorn, Turtle Pak,
anchor structure, power management/bus control, diode on chip, rich media, CXT, CMOS and M-RED. The following table sets forth
information concerning our patents and other intellectual property.
Each patent or other
intellectual property right listed in the table below that has been granted is publicly accessible on the Internet website of the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office at
www.uspto.gov
.
In the table below, the anchor structure portfolio is referred
to as Mariner, the power management/bus control portfolio is referred to as Semcom, and the diode on chip portfolio is referred
to as IC.
Segment
|
|
Type
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Title
|
|
File Date
|
|
Issue / Publication
Date
|
|
Expiration
|
|
Financial
Data
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
RE38,137
|
|
|
Programmable multiple company credit card system
|
|
1/11/2001
|
|
6/10/2003
|
|
|
9/28/2015
|
|
Mobile
Data
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,194,468
|
|
|
Apparatus and method for supplying information
|
|
2/9/2001
|
|
3/20/2007
|
|
|
2/9/2021
|
|
Mobile
Data
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
9,288,605
|
|
|
Apparatus and method for supplying information
|
|
11/12/2009
|
|
3/15/2016
|
|
|
2/9/2021
|
|
Mobile Data
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
9,913,068
|
|
|
Apparatus and method for supplying information
|
|
3/15/2013
|
|
3/6/2018
|
|
|
2/9/2021
|
|
Mobile Data
|
|
US Application
|
|
|
15/877,820
|
|
|
Apparatus and method for supplying information
|
|
1/23/2018
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Turtle Pak
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
RE36,412
|
|
|
Article packaging kit, system, and method
|
|
6/18/1996
|
|
11/30/1999
|
|
|
6/24/2013
|
|
Turtle Pak
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,490,844
|
|
|
Film wrap packaging apparatus and method
|
|
6/21/2001
|
|
12/10/2002
|
|
|
7/10/2021
|
|
Turtle Pak
|
|
US Trademark
|
|
|
74709827
|
|
|
Turtle pak - design plus words, letters, and/or numbers
|
|
8/1/1995
|
|
6/4/1996
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Mariner
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
5,650,666
|
|
|
Method and apparatus for preventing cracks in semiconductor die
|
|
11/22/1995
|
|
7/22/1997
|
|
|
11/22/2015
|
|
Mariner
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
5,846,874
|
|
|
Method and apparatus for preventing cracks in semiconductor die
|
|
2/28/1997
|
|
12/8/1998
|
|
|
11/22/2015
|
|
Semcon
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,100,061
|
|
|
Adaptive power control
|
|
1/18/2000
|
|
8/29/2006
|
|
|
1/18/2020
|
|
Semcon
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,596,708
|
|
|
Adaptive power control
|
|
4/25/2006
|
|
9/29/2009
|
|
|
1/18/2020
|
|
Semcon
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
8,566,627
|
|
|
Adaptive power control
|
|
7/14/2009
|
|
10/22/2013
|
|
|
1/18/2020
|
|
Semcon
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
8,806,247
|
|
|
Adaptive power control
|
|
12/21/2012
|
|
8/12/2014
|
|
|
1/18/2020
|
|
Semcon
|
|
PCT Application
|
|
|
PCT/US2001/001684
|
|
|
Adaptive power control
|
|
1/16/2001
|
|
7/26/2001
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Semcon
|
|
Reexam Certificate
|
|
|
7,100,061C1
|
|
|
Adaptive power control
|
|
6/13/2007
|
|
8/4/2009
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Semcon
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
5,978,876
|
|
|
System and method for controlling communications between subsystems
|
|
4/14/1997
|
|
11/2/1999
|
|
|
4/14/2017
|
|
IC
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,118,273
|
|
|
System for on-chip temperature measurement in integrated circuits
|
|
4/10/2003
|
|
10/10/2006
|
|
|
4/10/2023
|
|
IC
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,108,420
|
|
|
System for on-chip temperature measurement in integrated circuits
|
|
10/7/2004
|
|
9/19/2006
|
|
|
4/10/2023
|
|
IC
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
9,222,843
|
|
|
System for on-chip temperature measurement in integrated circuits
|
|
9/23/2011
|
|
12/29/2015
|
|
|
4/10/2023
|
|
IC
|
|
US Application
|
|
|
15/210,208
|
|
|
System for on-chip temperature measurement in integrated circuits
|
|
7/14/2016
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Rich Media
|
|
Patent Proceeds Interest
|
|
|
7,000,180
|
|
|
Methods, systems, and processes for the design and creation of rich media applications via the internet
|
|
02/09/2001
|
|
02/14/2006
|
|
|
10/16/2023
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,103,568
|
|
|
Online product exchange system
|
|
2/23/2004
|
|
9/5/2006
|
|
|
8/8/2015
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,933,806
|
|
|
Online product exchange system with price-sorted matching products
|
|
9/11/2006
|
|
4/26/2011
|
|
|
8/8/2015
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
8,024,226
|
|
|
Product exchange system
|
|
11/6/2006
|
|
4/26/2011
|
|
|
8/8/2015
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
5,983,220
|
|
|
Suppporting intuitive decision in complex multi-attributive domains using fuzzy, hierarchial expert models
|
|
11/14/1996
|
|
11/9/1999
|
|
|
11/14/2016
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,463,431
|
|
|
Database evaluation system suppporting intuitive decision in complex multi-attributive domains using fuzzy, hierarchial expert models
|
|
6/25/1999
|
|
10/8/2002
|
|
|
11/14/2016
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
5,940,807
|
|
|
Automated and independently accessible inventory information exchange system
|
|
5/28/1997
|
|
8/17/1999
|
|
|
5/23/17
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,081,789
|
|
|
Automated and independently accessible inventory information exchange system
|
|
1/8/1999
|
|
6/27/2000
|
|
|
5/23/17
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,601,043
|
|
|
Automated and independently accessible inventory information exchange system
|
|
6/26/2000
|
|
7/29/2003
|
|
|
5/23/17
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,011,537
|
|
|
System for delivering and simultaneously displaying primary and secondary information, and for displaying only the secondary information during interstitial space
|
|
1/27/1998
|
|
1/4/2000
|
|
|
1/27/2018
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,133,835
|
|
|
Online exchange market system with a buyer auction and a seller auction
|
|
10/30/1995
|
|
11/7/2006
|
|
|
5/27/2018
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,412,012
|
|
|
System, method, and article of manufacture for making a compatibility aware recommendation to a user
|
|
12/23/1998
|
|
6/25/2002
|
|
|
12/23/2018
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,493,703
|
|
|
System and method for implementing intelligent online community message board
|
|
5/11/1999
|
|
12/10/2002
|
|
|
5/11/2019
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,571,234
|
|
|
System and method for managing online message board
|
|
5/11/1999
|
|
5/27/2003
|
|
|
5/11/2019
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,721,748
|
|
|
Online content provider system and method
|
|
5/13/2002
|
|
4/13/2004
|
|
|
5/11/2019
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,778,982
|
|
|
Online content provider system and method
|
|
2/20/2003
|
|
8/17/2004
|
|
|
5/11/2019
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,804,675
|
|
|
Online content provider system and method
|
|
3/17/2003
|
|
10/12/2004
|
|
|
5/11/2019
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,159,011
|
|
|
System and method for managing an online messaging board
|
|
8/16/2004
|
|
1/2/2007
|
|
|
5/11/2019
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,162,471
|
|
|
Content query system and method
|
|
8/16/2004
|
|
1/9/2007
|
|
|
5/11/2019
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
RE43,835
|
|
|
Online content tabulating system and method
|
|
2/22/2007
|
|
11/27/2012
|
|
|
5/11/2019
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
RE45,661
|
|
|
Online content tabulating system and method
|
|
11/20/2012
|
|
9/1/2015
|
|
|
5/11/2019
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,065,494
|
|
|
Electronic customer service and rating system and method
|
|
6/25/1999
|
|
6/20/2006
|
|
|
6/25/2019
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,340,411
|
|
|
System and method for generating, capturing, and managing customer lead information over a computer network
|
|
10/20/2003
|
|
3/4/2008
|
|
|
8/2/2021
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
8,260,806
|
|
|
Storage, management and distribution of consumer information
|
|
6/29/2007
|
|
9/4/2012
|
|
|
10/17/2021
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,487,130
|
|
|
Consumer-controlled limited and constrained access to a centrally stored information account
|
|
1/6/2006
|
|
2/3/2009
|
|
|
11/7/2021
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,016,877
|
|
|
Consumer-controlled limited and constrained access to a centrally stored information account
|
|
11/7/2001
|
|
3/21/2006
|
|
|
2/22/2023
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,257,581
|
|
|
Storage, management and distribution of consumer information
|
|
8/6/2001
|
|
8/14/2007
|
|
|
6/2/2023
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,467,141
|
|
|
Branding and revenue sharing models for facilitating storage, management and distribution of consumer information
|
|
8/20/2001
|
|
12/16/2008
|
|
|
8/11/2023
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,016,875
|
|
|
Single sign-on for access to a central data repository
|
|
10/9/2001
|
|
3/21/2006
|
|
|
8/19/2023
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
8,566,248
|
|
|
Initiation of an information transaction over a network via a wireless device
|
|
11/20/2001
|
|
10/22/2013
|
|
|
6/17/2026
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Application
|
|
|
11/327,176
|
|
|
Single sign-on for access to a central data repository
|
|
1/6/2006
|
|
9/7/2006
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Application
|
|
|
14/941,528
|
|
|
Information transactions over a network
|
|
11/13/2015
|
|
5/19/2016
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
CXT
|
|
US Application
|
|
|
15/880,314
|
|
|
Single sign-on for access to a central data repository
|
|
1/25/2018
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,624,404
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor having enhanced photosensitivity and method for fabricating the same
|
|
11/26/2001
|
|
9/23/2003
|
|
|
12/30/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Korean Patent
|
|
|
KR10-0303774
|
|
|
Method for fabricating cmos image sensor
|
|
12/30/1998
|
|
7/13/2001
|
|
|
12/30/2018
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,348,361
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor having enhanced photosensitivity and method for fabricating the same
|
|
12/30/1999
|
|
2/19/2002
|
|
|
12/30/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,184,055
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor with equivalent potential diode and method for fabricating the same
|
|
2/26/1999
|
|
2/6/2001
|
|
|
2/26/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Chinese Patent
|
|
|
CNZL99105588.8
|
|
|
Complementary mos image sensor and making method thereof
|
|
2/28/1999
|
|
10/13/2004
|
|
|
2/27/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Chinese Patent
|
|
|
CNZL200310104488.4
|
|
|
Image sensing device and its manufacturing method
|
|
2/28/1999
|
|
3/26/2008
|
|
|
2/27/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
German Patent
|
|
|
DE19908457.2
|
|
|
Photodiode used in cmos image sensing device
|
|
2/26/1999
|
|
11/28/2013
|
|
|
2/26/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
French Patent
|
|
|
FR2775541
|
|
|
Photodiode for use in a cmos image sensor and method for fabricating the same
|
|
3/1/1999
|
|
8/2/2002
|
|
|
3/1/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
French Patent
|
|
|
FR2779870
|
|
|
Photodiodes for image sensors
|
|
3/1/1999
|
|
5/13/2005
|
|
|
3/1/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
United Kingdom Patent
|
|
|
GB2334817
|
|
|
Photodiode for use in a cmos image sensor and method for fabricating the same
|
|
3/1/1999
|
|
7/1/2003
|
|
|
3/1/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
United Kingdom Patent
|
|
|
GB2383900
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor and method for fabricating the same
|
|
3/1/1999
|
|
8/20/2003
|
|
|
3/1/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Japanese Patent
|
|
|
JP4390896
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor and manufacture thereof
|
|
3/1/1999
|
|
10/16/2009
|
|
|
3/1/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Korean Patent
|
|
|
KR10-0278285
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor and manufacturing method thereof
|
|
2/24/1999
|
|
10/18/2000
|
|
|
2/24/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Taiwanese Patent
|
|
|
TWI141677
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor with equivalent potential diode
|
|
3/22/1999
|
|
10/1/2001
|
|
|
3/21/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,180,969
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor with equivalent potential diode
|
|
2/26/1999
|
|
1/30/2001
|
|
|
2/26/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,563,187
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor integrated together with memory device
|
|
6/29/1999
|
|
5/13/2003
|
|
|
6/29/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,949,388
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor integrated together with memory device
|
|
5/12/2003
|
|
9/27/2005
|
|
|
11/9/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Korean Patent
|
|
|
KR10-0464955
|
|
|
CMOS image sensor integrated with memory device
|
|
6/29/1998
|
|
12/24/2004
|
|
|
6/29/2018
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,627,929
|
|
|
Solid state ccd image sensor having a light shielding layer
|
|
6/13/2001
|
|
9/30/2003
|
|
|
10/13/2018
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Korean Patent
|
|
|
KR10-0263473
|
|
|
Solid state image device and fabrication method thereof
|
|
2/16/1998
|
|
5/17/2000
|
|
|
2/16/2018
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,300,157
|
|
|
Solid state image sensor and method for fabricating the same
|
|
10/13/1998
|
|
10/9/2001
|
|
|
10/13/2018
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,113,203
|
|
|
Method and system for single-chip camera
|
|
5/7/2002
|
|
9/26/2006
|
|
|
5/13/2022
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,706,550
|
|
|
Photodiode having a plurality of PN junctions and image sensor having the same
|
|
10/16/2002
|
|
3/16/2004
|
|
|
2/26/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Japanese Patent
|
|
|
JP4139931
|
|
|
Pinned photodiode of image sensor, and its manufacture
|
|
6/28/1999
|
|
6/20/2008
|
|
|
6/28/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Korean Patent
|
|
|
KR10-0275123
|
|
|
Pinned photodiode of image sensor and manufacturing method thereof
|
|
6/29/1998
|
|
9/19/2000
|
|
|
6/29/2018
|
|
CMOS
|
|
Taiwanese Patent
|
|
|
TWI133257
|
|
|
Photodiode having a plurality of PN junctions and image sensor having the same
|
|
6/30/1999
|
|
5/28/2001
|
|
|
6/29/2019
|
|
CMOS
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,489,643
|
|
|
Photodiode having a plurality of PN junctions and image sensor having the same
|
|
6/28/1999
|
|
12/3/2002
|
|
|
6/28/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,853,259
|
|
|
RING OSCILLATOR DYNAMIC ADJUSTMENTS FOR AUTO CALIBRATION
|
|
8/15/2001
|
|
2/8/2005
|
|
|
8/15/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,068,557
|
|
|
RING OSCILLATOR DYNAMIC ADJUSTMENTS FOR AUTO CALIBRATION
|
|
1/25/2005
|
|
6/27/2006
|
|
|
8/15/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,209,401
|
|
|
RING OSCILLATOR DYNAMIC ADJUSTMENTS FOR AUTO CALIBRATION
|
|
5/2/2006
|
|
4/24/2007
|
|
|
8/15/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,221,682
|
|
|
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EVALUATING A KNOWN GOOD DIE USING BOTH WIRE BOND AND FLIP-CHIP INTERCONNECTS
|
|
5/28/1999
|
|
4/24/2001
|
|
|
5/28/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
RE43,607
|
|
|
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR EVALUATING A KNOWN GOOD DIE USING BOTH WIRE BOND AND FLIP-CHIP INTERCONNECTS
|
|
5/31/2007
|
|
8/28/2012
|
|
|
12/31/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,177,843
|
|
|
OSCILLATOR CIRCUIT CONTROLLED BY PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC
|
|
5/26/1999
|
|
1/23/2001
|
|
|
5/26/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,628,171
|
|
|
METHOD, ARCHITECTURE AND CIRCUIT FOR CONTROLLING AND/OR OPERATING AN OSCILLATOR
|
|
1/23/2001
|
|
9/30/2003
|
|
|
5/26/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,831,690
|
|
|
ELECTRICAL SENSING APPARATUS AND METHOD UTILIZING AN ARRAY OF TRANSDUCER ELEMENTS
|
|
12/7/1999
|
|
12/14/2004
|
|
|
12/7/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,511,754
|
|
|
ELECTRICAL SENSING APPARATUS AND METHOD UTILIZING AN ARRAY OF TRANSDUCER ELEMENTS
|
|
10/26/2004
|
|
3/31/2009
|
|
|
2/7/2022
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,498,399
|
|
|
LOW DIELECTRIC-CONSTANT DIELECTRIC FOR ETCHSTOP IN DUAL DAMASCENE BACKEND OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS
|
|
9/8/1999
|
|
12/24/2002
|
|
|
9/8/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,744,311
|
|
|
SWITCHING AMPLIFIER WITH VOLTAGE-MULTIPLYING OUTPUT STAGE
|
|
4/23/2002
|
|
6/1/2004
|
|
|
4/23/2022
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,646,465
|
|
|
Programmable Logic Device Including Bi-Directional Shift Register
|
|
2/7/2002
|
|
11/11/2003
|
|
|
2/7/2022
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,721,310
|
|
|
MULTIPORT NON-BLOCKING HIGH CAPACITY ATM AND PACKET SWITCH
|
|
11/2/2001
|
|
4/13/2004
|
|
|
11/2/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,456,183
|
|
|
Inductor for Integrated Circuit
|
|
2/24/2000
|
|
9/24/2002
|
|
|
2/24/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,838,970
|
|
|
Inductor for Integrated Circuit
|
|
7/26/2002
|
|
1/4/2005
|
|
|
9/30/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,459,135
|
|
|
Monolithic Integrated Circuit Incorporating An Inductive Component And Process For Fabricating Such An Integrated Circuit
|
|
3/15/2000
|
|
10/1/2002
|
|
|
3/15/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,388,322
|
|
|
Article comprising a mechanically compliant bump
|
|
1/17/2001
|
|
5/14/2002
|
|
|
1/17/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,458,411
|
|
|
Method of making a mechanically compliant bump
|
|
10/5/2001
|
|
10/1/2002
|
|
|
1/17/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,506,648
|
|
|
Method of fabricating a high power RF field effect transistor with reduced hot electron injection and resulting structure
|
|
9/2/1998
|
|
1/14/2003
|
|
|
6/27/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,735,422
|
|
|
Calibrated DC compensation system for a wireless communication device configured in a zero intermediate frequency architecture
|
|
10/2/2000
|
|
5/11/2004
|
|
|
10/2/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,674,998
|
|
|
System and method for detecting and correcting phase error between differential signals
|
|
12/21/2000
|
|
1/6/2004
|
|
|
10/2/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,891,440
|
|
|
Quadrature oscillator with phase error correction
|
|
12/21/2000
|
|
1/6/2004
|
|
|
8/8/2022
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,763,228
|
|
|
Precision automatic gain control circuit
|
|
12/21/2001
|
|
7/13/2004
|
|
|
10/3/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,748,200
|
|
|
Automatic gain control system and method for a ZIF architecture
|
|
4/4/2003
|
|
6/8/2004
|
|
|
10/2/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
RE42,799
|
|
|
PACKET ACQUISITION AND CHANNEL TRACKING FOR A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE CONFIGURED IN A ZERO INTERMEDIATE FREQUENCY ARCHITECTURE
|
|
6/27/2008
|
|
10/4/2011
|
|
|
1/22/2023
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,560,448
|
|
|
DC compensation system for a wireless communication device configured in a zero intermediate frequency architecture
|
|
10/2/2000
|
|
5/6/2003
|
|
|
8/29/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,448,910
|
|
|
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONVOLUTION ENCODING AND VITERBI DECODING OF DATA THAT UTILIZE A CONFIGURABLE PROCESSOR TO CONFIGURE A PLURALITY OF RE-CONFIGURABLE PROCESSING ELEMENTS
|
|
3/26/2001
|
|
9/10/2002
|
|
|
3/26/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
7,127,588
|
|
|
Apparatus and method for an improved performance VLIW processor
|
|
12/5/2000
|
|
10/24/2006
|
|
|
3/17/2022
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,757,752
|
|
|
Micro Controller Development System
|
|
1/14/2002
|
|
6/29/2004
|
|
|
1/14/2022
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,509,646
|
|
|
Apparatus For Reducing An Electrical Noise Inside A Ball Grid Array Package
|
|
5/22/2000
|
|
1/21/2003
|
|
|
5/22/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,365,970
|
|
|
Bond Pad Structure And Its Method Of Fabricating
|
|
12/10/1999
|
|
4/2/2002
|
|
|
12/10/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,912,601
|
|
|
Method of programming PLDs using a wireless link
|
|
6/28/2000
|
|
6/28/2005
|
|
|
5/11/2022
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,496,054
|
|
|
Control signal generator for an overvoltage-tolerant interface circuit on a low voltage process
|
|
5/9/2001
|
|
12/17/2002
|
|
|
5/9/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,194,279
|
|
|
Fabrication method for gate spacer
|
|
6/28/1999
|
|
2/27/2001
|
|
|
6/28/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,281,554
|
|
|
Electrostatic discharge protection circuit
|
|
3/20/2000
|
|
8/28/2001
|
|
|
3/20/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,657,263
|
|
|
MOS transistors having dual gates and self-aligned interconnect contact windows
|
|
6/28/2001
|
|
12/2/2003
|
|
|
3/24/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,461,908
|
|
|
Method of manufacturing a semiconductor device
|
|
4/10/2001
|
|
10/8/2002
|
|
|
4/10/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,737,995
|
|
|
Clock and data recovery with a feedback loop to adjust the slice level of an input sampling circuit
|
|
4/10/2002
|
|
5/18/2004
|
|
|
4/18/2022
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,747,522
|
|
|
Digitally controlled crystal oscillator with integrated coarse and fine control
|
|
5/3/2002
|
|
6/8/2004
|
|
|
5/17/2022
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,275,116
|
|
|
METHOD, CIRCUIT AND/OR ARCHITECTURE TO IMPROVE THE FREQUENCY RANGE OF A VOLTAGE CONTROLLED OSCILLATOR
|
|
6/8/1999
|
|
8/14/2001
|
|
|
6/8/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,608,763
|
|
|
Stacking system and method
|
|
9/15/2000
|
|
8/19/2003
|
|
|
5/24/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,404,043
|
|
|
Panel stacking of BGA devices to form three-dimensional modules
|
|
6/21/2000
|
|
6/11/2002
|
|
|
6/21/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,472,735
|
|
|
Three-dimensional memory stacking using anisotropic epoxy interconnections
|
|
4/5/2001
|
|
10/29/2002
|
|
|
6/27/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,544,815
|
|
|
Panel stacking of BGA devices to form three-dimensional modules
|
|
8/6/2001
|
|
4/8/2003
|
|
|
6/21/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,566,746
|
|
|
Panel stacking of BGA devices to form three-dimensional modules
|
|
12/14/2001
|
|
5/20/2003
|
|
|
6/21/2020
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,878,571
|
|
|
Panel stacking of BGA devices to form three-dimensional modules
|
|
12/11/2002
|
|
4/12/2005
|
|
|
4/30/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,627,984
|
|
|
Chip stack with differing chip package types
|
|
7/24/2001
|
|
9/30/2003
|
|
|
7/24/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,908,792
|
|
|
Chip stack with differing chip package types
|
|
10/3/2002
|
|
6/21/2005
|
|
|
2/21/2022
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,205,524
|
|
|
MULTIMEDIA ARBITER AND METHOD USING FIXED ROUND-ROBIN SLOTS FOR REAL-TIME AGENTS AND A TIMED PRIORITY SLOT FOR NON-REAL-TIME AGENTS
|
|
9/16/1998
|
|
3/20/2001
|
|
|
9/16/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,157,978
|
|
|
MULTIMEDIA ROUND-ROBIN ARBITRATION WITH PHANTOM SLOTS FOR SUPER-PRIORITY REAL-TIME AGENT
|
|
1/6/1999
|
|
12/5/2000
|
|
|
9/16/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,117,750
|
|
|
Process for obtaining a layer of single-crystal germanium or silicon on a substrate of single-crystal silicon or germanium, respectively
|
|
12/21/1998
|
|
9/12/2000
|
|
|
12/21/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,429,098
|
|
|
Process for obtaining a layer of single-crystal germanium or silicon on a substrate of single-crystal silicon or germanium, respectively, and multilayer products obtained
|
|
9/11/2000
|
|
8/6/2002
|
|
|
12/21/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,134,176
|
|
|
DISABLING A DEFECTIVE ELEMENT IN AN INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DEVICE HAVING REDUNDANT ELEMENTS
|
|
11/24/1998
|
|
10/17/2000
|
|
|
11/24/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,366,998
|
|
|
RECONFIGURABLE FUNCTIONAL UNITS FOR IMPLEMENTING A HYBRID VLIW-SIMD PROGRAMMING MODEL
|
|
10/14/1998
|
|
4/2/2002
|
|
|
10/14/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,401,217
|
|
|
Method For Error Recognition In A Processor System
|
|
7/22/1998
|
|
6/4/2002
|
|
|
7/22/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,169,028
|
|
|
Method for fabricating metal interconnected structure
|
|
1/26/1999
|
|
1/2/2001
|
|
|
1/26/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,190,981
|
|
|
Method for fabricating metal oxide semiconductor
|
|
2/3/1999
|
|
2/20/2001
|
|
|
2/3/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,130,823
|
|
|
Stackable ball grid array module and method
|
|
2/1/1999
|
|
10/10/2000
|
|
|
2/1/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,208,004
|
|
|
Semiconductor device with high-temperature-stable gate electrode for sub-micron applications and fabrication thereof
|
|
8/19/1998
|
|
3/27/2001
|
|
|
8/19/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
US Patent
|
|
|
6,479,362
|
|
|
Semiconductor device with high-temperature-stable gate electrode for sub-micron applications and fabrication thereof
|
|
2/14/2001
|
|
11/12/2002
|
|
|
8/19/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
Korean Patent
|
|
|
KR10-0796825
|
|
|
Method of manufacturing a semiconductor device
|
|
4/3/2001
|
|
6/24/2009
|
|
|
4/3/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
British Patent
|
|
|
GB0930382
|
|
|
PROCESS FOR OBTAINING A LAYER OF SINGLE CRYSTAL GERMANIUM OR SILICON ON SINGLE CRYSTAL SILICON OR GERMANIUM SUBSTRATE RESPECTIVELY, AND MULTILAYER PRODUCTS THUS OBTAINED
|
|
12/9/1998
|
|
8/21/2002
|
|
|
12/9/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
Italian Patent
|
|
|
IT0930382
|
|
|
PROCESS FOR OBTAINING A LAYER OF SINGLE CRYSTAL GERMANIUM OR SILICON ON SINGLE CRYSTAL SILICON OR GERMANIUM SUBSTRATE RESPECTIVELY, AND MULTILAYER PRODUCTS THUS OBTAINED
|
|
12/9/1998
|
|
8/21/2002
|
|
|
12/9/2018
|
|
M-RED
|
|
Korean Patent
|
|
|
KR10-0633947
|
|
|
METHOD OF FABRICATING A HIGH POWER RF FIELD EFFECT TRANSISTOR WITH REDUCED HOT ELECTRON INJECTION AND RESULTING STRUCTURE
|
|
8/17/1999
|
|
10/4/2006
|
|
|
8/17/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
French Patent
|
|
|
FR2791470
|
|
|
Monolithic Integrated Circuit Comprising An Inductor And A Method Of Fabricating The Same
|
|
3/23/1999
|
|
6/1/2001
|
|
|
3/23/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
French Patent
|
|
|
FR2790328
|
|
|
Inductive Component, Integrated Transformer, In Particular For A Radio Frequency Circuit, And Associated Integrated Circuit With Such Inductive Component Or Integrated Transformer
|
|
2/26/1999
|
|
4/20/2001
|
|
|
2/26/2019
|
|
M-RED
|
|
Japanese Patent
|
|
|
JP4846167
|
|
|
Method of manufacturing a semiconductor device
|
|
4/3/2001
|
|
10/21/2011
|
|
|
4/3/2021
|
|
M-RED
|
|
Japanese Patent
|
|
|
JP5051939
|
|
|
ELECTRIC SENSOR DEVICE, METHOD FOR GENERATING ELECTRIC SIGNAL FROM ARRAY OF CONVERTER ELEMENT
|
|
12/5/2000
|
|
8/3/2012
|
|
|
12/5/2020
|
|
Purchase of Intellectual Property from Intellectual Ventures
Entities
On October 22, 2015, pursuant to an agreement with an effective
date of July 8, 2015, as amended, between us and Intellectual Ventures, we purchased three groups of patents from Intellectual
Ventures for a purchase price of $3,000,000, which was paid in three annual installments of $1,000,000 from the proceeds of our
loans from United Wireless. Contemporaneously with our acquisition of the patents, we granted Intellectual Ventures a security
interest in the patents transferred to us as security for the payment of the balance of the purchase price. Intellectual Ventures
released its security interest upon receipt of the third installment payment in November 2017. The patent portfolios which we acquired
from Intellectual Ventures are the anchor structure portfolio, the power management/bus control portfolio and the diode on chip
portfolio.
On July 28, 2017, CXT, entered into an agreement with IV 34/37 pursuant to which CTX paid IV 34/37 $25,000
and IV34/37 transferred to CXT all right, title and interest in a portfolio of the thirteen United States patents that constitute
the CXT Portfolio. Under the agreement, CXT will distribute 50% of net proceeds, as defined, to IV 34/37 as long as we generate
revenue from the portfolio. The $25,000 payment to IV 34/37 represents the proceeds of a loan from United Wireless and was paid
directly to IV34/37. The agreement with IV 34/37, as amended on January 26, 2018, provides that if, on December 31, 2018, December
31, 2019 and December 31, 2020, cumulative distributions to IV 34/37 total less than $100,000, $375,000 and $975,000, respectively,
CXT shall pay the difference between such cumulative amounts and the amount paid to IV 34/37 within ten days after the applicable
date. The $25,000 advance is treated as an advance against distributions of net proceeds payable to IV 34/37. The useful lives
of the patents, at the date of acquisition, was 5-6 years. Neither we nor any affiliate of CXT has guaranteed the minimum payments.
CXT’s obligations under the agreement are secured by a security interest in the proceeds (from litigation or otherwise) from
the CXT Portfolio. The patent portfolio which we acquired from IV 34/37 is the CXT portfolio.
On January 26, 2018, CXT entered into an agreement with IV 62/71 pursuant to which CXT advanced IV 62/71
$10,000 at closing and IV 62/71 assigned to CXT all right, title, and interest in a portfolio of sixteen United States patents
and three pending applications. Under the agreement, CXT will distribute 50% of net proceeds, as defined, to IV 62/71 as long as
we generate net proceeds from the portfolio. The initial $10,000 advance is treated as an advance toward our future distributions
of net proceeds payable to IV 62/71. CXT’s obligations under the agreement are secured by a security interest in the proceeds
(from litigation or otherwise) from the CXT Portfolio. We agreed to modify the monetization proceeds agreement between CXT and
United Wireless to include the patents acquired from IV 62/71.
On January 26, 2018, PIS, entered into an agreement with IV 64 pursuant to which PIS advanced $10,000
to IV 64 at closing and IV 64 assigned to PIS all right, title, and interest in the CMOS Portfolio. Under the agreement, PIS will
distribute to IV 64 70% of the first $1,500,000 of revenue, as defined in the agreement, 30% of the next $1,500,000 of revenue
and 50% of revenue over $3,000,000; with the $10,000 advance being treated as an advance against first distributions of net proceeds
payable to IV 64. PIS’ obligations under the monetization proceeds agreement are secured by a security interest in the proceeds
(from litigation or otherwise) from the portfolio.
On March 15, 2019, M-RED entered into an agreement with Intellectual Ventures Assets 113 LLC and Intellectual
Ventures Assets 108 LLC (“IV 113/108”) pursuant to which M-RED paid IV 113/108 $75,000 and IV 113/108 transferred to
M-RED all right, title and interest in the M-RED Portfolio. Under the agreement, M-RED will distribute 50% of net proceeds, as
defined, to IV 113/108, as long as we generate revenue from the M-RED Portfolio. The agreement with IV 113/108 provides that if,
on September 30, 2020, September 30, 2021 and September 30, 2022, cumulative distributions to IV 113/108 total less than $450,000,
$975,000 and $1,575,000, respectively, M-RED shall pay the difference between such cumulative amounts and the amount paid to IV
113/108 within ten days after the applicable date. The $75,000 advance is treated as an advance against distributions of net proceeds
first payable to IV 113/108. The useful lives of the patents, at the date of acquisition, was approximately nine years. Neither
we nor any affiliate of M-RED has guaranteed the minimum payments. M-RED’s obligations under the agreement with IV 113/108
are secured by a security interest in the proceeds (from litigation or otherwise) from the M-RED Portfolio. The patent portfolio
which we acquired from IV 113/108 is the M-RED portfolio which is described under “Business – Our Intellectual Property
Portfolios.”
Agreements with United Wireless
Summary
As of December 31, 2018, United Wireless has transferred the
note and assigned all of its remaining rights under the agreements to Intelligent Partners. As a result, Intelligent Partners holds
the rights under the notes and the agreements we signed with United Wireless.
On October 22, 2015, we entered into a series of agreements
with United Wireless:
Pursuant to a securities purchase agreement between us and five
of our subsidiaries (Quest Licensing Corporation, Wynn Technologies, Inc., Mariner IC Inc., Semcon IP Inc., and IC Kinetics Inc.),
at the closing, United Wireless agreed to lend us a total of $4,250,000. As of December 31, 2018, United Wireless had lent us $3,900,000,
of which $3,000,000 was used to purchase the intellectual property from Intellectual Ventures in three annual installments of $1,000,000,
with the final installment in November 2017, $25,000 was used to purchase intellectual property from IV 34/37 and the balance of
$875,000 was used for working capital, including expenses relating to the agreements with United Wireless. Pursuant to the loan
agreement, we issued to United Wireless our 10% promissory notes. The terms of the notes are described under “Promissory
Notes.”
Pursuant to the securities purchase agreement, at the closing
we sold to United Wireless 50,000,000 shares of common stock for $250,000, or $0.005 per share.
Pursuant to the securities purchase agreement, we granted United
Wireless an option to purchase a total of 50,000,000 shares, with exercise prices of $0.01 per share as to 16,666,667 shares, which
may be exercised from September 30, 2016 through September 30, 2020, $0.03 per share as to 16,666,667 shares, which may be exercised
from September 30, 2017 through September 30, 2020, and $0.05 per share as to 16,666,666 shares, which may be exercised from September
30, 2018 through September 30, 2020.
United Wireless agreed to make loans to us for payment of the
second and third $1,000,000 payments due to Intellectual Ventures regardless of whether we are in compliance with our obligations
under the securities purchase agreement or our other agreements with United Wireless.
All of the notes to be issued to United Wireless, whether in respect of the purchase of the patent rights
from Intellectual Ventures or for working capital, will have the same terms and conditions, including default provisions and conversion
rights. In the event that certain events of default, which are called Conversion Eligible Events of Default, shall have occurred
and are continuing on the date a $1,000,000 payment is due to Intellectual Ventures, United Wireless shall have the obligation
to make the payment, and immediately upon the United Wireless’ payment to Intellectual Ventures, we shall be deemed to have
assigned, transferred and conveyed to United Wireless and/or its nominee full, absolute and unconditional title to and ownership
of the stock of three subsidiaries that hold the patents acquired from Intellectual Ventures, and our obligations on the notes
including the conversion rights, to the extent that the notes relate to the payment of the purchase price of the patents from Intellectual
Venture, terminate, and United Wireless will have no further obligation to make working capital loans to us. On November 15, 2017,
when the last payment was made to Intellectual Venture, no Conversion Eligible Event of Default had occurred. As of the December
31, 2018, of the $4,790,590 note that is outstanding, $3,000,000 relates to the purchase of the patents from Intellectual Ventures,
$25,000 relates to the purchase of intellectual property from IV 34/37, $875,000 relates to working capital, including expenses
relating to the agreement with United Wireless, approximately $395,000 relates to interest accrued through, and added to principal
on September 30, 2017 and 2018 in accordance with the terms of the note and $117,780 relates to interest accrued through December
31, 2018.
In October 2015, we entered into a monetization proceeds agreement
pursuant to which United Wireless received the right to receive 15% of the net monetization proceeds received from (a) the patents
acquired by us from Intellectual Ventures and (b) the patents in our mobile data and financial data intellectual property portfolios.
On July 31, 2017, we entered into a monetization agreement with United Wireless pursuant to which we agreed to pay United Wireless
7.5% of the net monetization proceeds from the patents acquired by CXT. This obligation was recorded as an expense and is reflected
in interest expenses. CXT’s obligations under the monetization proceeds agreement are secured by a security interest in the
proceeds (from litigation or otherwise) from the CXT Portfolio. The security interest in the proceeds from the CXT Portfolio is
junior to the security interest held by IV 34/37 in the CXT Portfolio and proceeds thereof. We agreed to amend the monetization
proceeds agreement between CXT and United Wireless to include the patents acquired from IV 62/71.
Our obligations under our agreements with United Wireless, including
our obligations under all notes issued to United Wireless and the monetization proceeds agreement, are secured by a pledge of the
stock of the three subsidiaries that hold the patents acquired from Intellectual Ventures and by the proceeds from the intellectual
property represented by (i) the patents acquired from Intellectual Ventures and (ii) the intellectual property in the mobile data
and financial data portfolios.
Five of our subsidiaries, Quest Licensing, Wynn, Mariner, Semcon,
and IC, guaranteed our obligations to United Wireless.
We granted United Wireless certain registration rights with
respect to (i) the 50,000,000 shares of common stock purchased by United Wireless at the closing, (ii) the 50,000,000 shares of
common stock issuable upon exercise of the purchase options, and (iii) in the event that the notes become convertible, to the extent
that the note holders request, the shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the notes.
We agreed that, within 135 days from the closing date (
i.e.
,
by March 2, 2016), we would increase our authorized common stock from 390,000,000 shares to 1,250,000,000 shares, and, in the event
that, in the future, the number of authorized shares of common stock is not sufficient to enable the full conversion of the notes,
we will have 135 days to take corporate action, as necessary, so as to have a sufficient number of shares, including to increase
the common stock (or effect a reverse split or a combination of an increase in the authorized common stock and a reverse split)
to an amount requested by United Wireless, or absent such request, as we believe to be necessary such that there will be sufficient
shares of common stock available for full conversion of the notes. United Wireless agreed to vote its shares or give its consent
in connection with any such increase in authorized common stock. On January 22, 2016, we filed an amended and restated certificate
of incorporation which increased our authorized common stock to 1,250,000,000 shares. On the dates that United Wireless purchased
notes from us in 2016, we were in compliance with the authorized share requirement. Because there is no fixed conversion price,
compliance with the authorized share reserve requirement is outside of our control. As a result of fluctuations in our stock price,
at various times during the period, beginning May 4, 2016 and through December 31, 2016, but never for a period exceeding 135 days,
we did not have sufficient authorized shares of common stock necessary for United Wireless to convert its notes and exercise its
options. Because of a decrease in the price of our common stock, at February 13, 2017, we did not have a sufficient number of shares
to meet the authorized share requirements. On June 15, 2017, we amended our certificate of incorporation to increase our authorized
common stock to 10,000,000,000 shares. In the event that, in the future, we do not have sufficient shares to permit conversion
of the notes and the exercise of the options, we will have to either increase our authorized common stock or effect a reverse split
in order that we are in compliance with the authorized share requirement. The failure to have sufficient authorized common stock
may result in a Conversion Eligible Event of Default.
We agreed with United Wireless that, as long as United Wireless’
stockholdings exceed 10%, United Wireless has the right to designate one member of the board of directors and at such time and
for as long as United Wireless’ stockholdings exceed 24.9%, United Wireless may nominate a second director to the board.
Unless a Conversion Eligible Event of Default shall have occurred, United Wireless agreed not to seek to elect a majority of the
board for a period of at least three years from the closing date. We agreed that the size of the board would not exceed five during
the two years following the closing date.
Commencing six months from the closing date, if the shares owned
by United Wireless cannot be sold pursuant to a registration statement and cannot be sold pursuant to Rule 144 without our being
in compliance with the current public information requirements of Rule 144, if we are not in compliance with the current public
information requirements, the agreements provide for the payment of damages to United Wireless.
The securities purchase agreement, the note issued at the closing,
the monetization proceeds agreement, the patent proceeds security agreement, the pledge and security agreement and the registration
rights agreement are exhibits to this annual report. The description of these agreements are summaries only and are qualified in
their entireties by the agreements filed as exhibits.
Promissory Notes
The promissory notes bear interest at 10% per annum and mature
on September 30, 2020. Interest accrues through September 30, 2018, with accrued interest being added to principal on each of September
30, 2016, 2017 and 2018. Subsequent to September 30, 2018, we are to pay interest quarterly, with the first interest payment being
due on December 31, 2018. We have the right to prepay the notes in whole at any time and in part from time to time. Although the
notes have no conversion rights, if a Conversion Eligible Event of Default occurs, the notes become convertible at a conversion
price equal to 90% of the closing sale price of our common stock on the principal market on which the common stock is trading on
the trading day immediately preceding the date the holder gives notice of conversion. As required under our agreements with United
Wireless, we have increased our authorized common stock to 10,000,000,000 shares. However, we cannot assure you that such number
of shares would be sufficient to permit conversion of the notes in full if a Conversion Eligible Event of Default should occur.
We are required to have reserved from our authorized and unissued common stock, 130% of the number of shares of common stock as
shall be necessary for issuance upon conversion of the notes.
Conversion Eligible Events of Default include the breach of
selected representations and warranties and covenants contained in the securities purchase agreement and the note, including our
failure to pay principal of any note or interest and other charges in excess of $100,000. Although the observance of these covenants
is generally within our control, one of the provisions which would trigger a Conversion Eligible Event of Default is our inability
to have sufficient shares reserved for issuance upon conversion of the notes for more than 135 consecutive days from the date of
such inability. Because there is no fixed conversion price, this reserve requirement is outside of our control.
The holders of the notes also have the right to demand redemption
of the notes at 110% of the principal amount of the note in the event of a change of control.
Monetization Proceeds Agreement
Pursuant to the monetization proceeds agreement, United Wireless
has a right to receive 15% of the net monetization proceeds from (i) the patents acquired by us from Intellectual Ventures and
(ii) the patents in our mobile data and financial data intellectual property portfolios. The agreement has no termination provisions,
so United Wireless will be entitled to its percentage interest as long as revenue can be generated from the intellectual property
covered by the agreement.
Net monetization proceeds represent the amount by which any
consideration received from the patents, including royalty payments and amounts received as a result of litigation relating to
the patents exceeds monetization expenses, including legal fees, and certain other expenses, but not operating expenses not relating
to the monetization activities, including patent litigation. The percentage payable with respect to monetization proceeds from
the mobile data and financial data intellectual property (but not the patents acquired from Intellectual Ventures) is reduced in
the event that United breaches its agreement to make working capital loans pursuant to the securities purchase agreement.
Grant of Security Interest
Payment of the notes and our obligations under the monetization
proceeds agreement as well as the other obligations under the agreements with United Wireless is secured by a security interest
in all proceeds (from litigation or otherwise) from the (i) the patents acquired from Intellectual Ventures and (ii) the intellectual
property in the mobile data and financial data portfolios, and a pledge of the stock of the three subsidiaries which hold the patents
acquired from Intellectual Ventures. The security interest in proceeds from the patents relating to our mobile data portfolio is
junior to the security interest held by a third party litigation funding source.
Registration Rights Agreement
Pursuant to a registration rights agreement, we agreed to file
a registration statement with the SEC covering the 50,000,000 shares of common stock issued to United Wireless at the closing and
the 50,000,000 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of the purchase option. We are required to file the registration statement
within 60 days of the October 22, 2015 closing, which is December 21, 2015, and have the registration statement declared effective
by the SEC within 120 days of the closing if the registration statement is not subject to a full review by the SEC and 180 days
if the registration statement is subject to a full review. We filed the registration statement on December 14, 2015 and it was
declared effective by the SEC on February 11, 2016. We are required to maintain the effectiveness of the registration statement
until United Wireless (or its transferees) may sell all the shares covered by the registration statement without restriction or
limitation pursuant to Rule 144 and without the requirement to be in compliance with Rule 144(c)(1). We are also required to file
a registration statement covering the shares issuable upon conversion of the notes upon request by the note holders. The notes
do not become convertible until and unless there is a Conversion Eligible Event of Default, and the failure to maintain the effectiveness
of the registration statement is not a Conversion Eligible Event of Default. The registration rights agreement provides for us
to pay damages in the event that we do not meet the required deadlines or do not maintain the effectiveness of the registration
statement. The damages are computed at 1.5% of the aggregate purchase price paid for such securities, which was $250,000 on the
date we fail to maintain the effectiveness of the registration statement and each 30 days thereafter. The registration ceased to
be current and effective on November 11, 2016. On June 12, 2017, we entered into a standstill agreement with United Wireless pursuant
to which we agreed (i) to increase its authorized common stock to 10,000,000,000 shares, (ii) to file by June 30, 2017, a post-effective
amendment to the registration statement covering the sale of the shares of common stock initially issued to United Wireless pursuant
to the Securities Purchase Agreement and the shares of common stock issuable upon the option granted to United Wireless pursuant
to the Securities Purchase agreement, (iii) if the existing warrant held by our chief executive officer is not exercised prior
to its expiration date, any re-issuance will not have an exercise price less than the current exercise price and the existing warrants
will not be amended to lower the exercise price, and (iv) United Wireless no longer has any obligation to purchase any note pursuant
to the Securities Purchase Agreement other than the $1,000,000 note related to the final payment to Intellectual Ventures, except
in connection with the potential acquisition by us of patent rights which would trigger a $25,000 working capital loan in connection
with the potential acquisition and require United Wireless to make $125,000 working capital loans to us, at our sole discretion,
on December 31, 2017, March 31, 2018 and June 30, 2018 pursuant to securities purchase agreement and, in such event, United Wireless
would have a 7½% net proceeds percentage interest in the net proceeds from such patent rights. On June 15, 2017, we amended
our certificate of incorporation to increase our authorized common stock to 10,000,000,000 shares. On June 30, 2017, we filed a
post-effective amendment to the registration statement covering the sale of the shares of common stock initially issued to United
Wireless pursuant to the Securities Purchase Agreement and the shares of common stock issuable upon the option granted to United
Wireless pursuant to the Securities Purchase agreement which shares were transferred by United Wireless to two of its affiliates.
The registration statement was declared effective on July 6, 2017.
Research and Development
Research and development expense are incurred by us in connection
with the evaluation of patents. We did not incur research and development expenses during 2018 or 2017.
Employees
As of April 16, 2019, we have no employees other than our two
officers, only one of whom, Mr. Jon Scahill, our chief executive officer and president, is full time. Our employees are not represented
by a labor union, and we consider our employee relations to be good.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
An investment in our common stock involves a high degree
of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below together with all of the other information included in this annual
report before making an investment decision with regard to our securities. The statements contained in this annual report include
forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from
those set forth in or implied by forward-looking statements. The risks set forth below are not the only risks facing us. Additional
risks and uncertainties may exist that could also adversely affect our business, prospects or operations. If any of the following
risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be harmed. In that case, the trading price
of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or a significant part of your investment.
Risks Relating to our Financial Conditions and Operations
We have a history of losses and are continuing to incur
losses
. During the period from 2008, when we changed
our business to become an intellectual property management company, through 2018, we generated a cumulative loss of more than
$18,660,000 on cumulative revenues of less than $13,000,000 and our losses are continuing. Our total assets were approximately
$2,215,000 at December 31, 2018, of which approximately $2,046,000 represented the book value of patents we acquired from Intellectual
Ventures and its affiliates. At December 31, 2018, we had a working capital deficiency of approximately $5,665,000, and our continuing
losses are generating an increase in our negative working capital. We cannot give assurance that we can or will ever operate profitably.
Our independent auditors have included a going concern qualification
in their report on our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2018
. Because of our history of losses, deficiency
in stockholders’ equity, working capital deficiency and the uncertainty of generating revenues in the future, our independent
auditors have included a going concern qualification in their report on our financial statements for the year ended December 31,
2018.
We require significant funding in order to develop our business
.
Our business requires substantial funding to evaluate and acquire intellectual property rights and to develop and implement programs
to monetize our intellectual property rights, including the prosecution of any litigation necessary to enable us to monetize our
intellectual property rights. Our failure to develop and implement these programs could both jeopardize our relationships under
our existing agreements and could inhibit our ability to generate new business, either through the acquisition of intellectual
property rights or through exclusive management agreements. We cannot be profitable unless we are able to obtain the funding necessary
to develop our business, including litigation to monetize our intellectual property. We cannot assure you that we will be able
to obtain necessary funding or to develop our business.
Unless we generate significant revenue from our intellectual
properties, we may be unable to pay the notes we incurred in connection with our recent intellectual property purchase
.
Through December 31, 2018, we owed approximately $4,791,000 to Intelligent Partners as holder of the notes representing loans
and accrued interest, including capitalized interest. The notes are due September 30, 2020. Unless we generate revenue either
from our existing intellectual property portfolio, including the patent rights we acquired from the Intellectual Ventures Entities,
or from any new intellectual property portfolios which we may acquire in the future, we do not expect to have the funds necessary
to pay principal and interest on the notes. If we are not able to make payment when due, we may not be able to continue in business
and it may be necessary for us to seek protection under the Bankruptcy Act. We cannot assure you that we will be able to generate
the revenue necessary to pay Intelligent Partners.
If we breach certain obligations under our agreement with
United Wireless, including our failure to pay the notes when due or have sufficient authorized common stock for potential conversion
of our notes due to Intelligent Partners, as transferee of United Wireless, the notes may become convertible
. Under our agreement
with United Wireless, in the event that certain events of default, which are called Conversion Eligible Events of Default, occur,
any outstanding notes become convertible into common stock at a conversion price equal to 90% of the closing sale price of our
common stock on the trading day immediately preceding the date the Intelligent Partners, as transferee of United Wireless, gives
notice of conversion. Conversion Eligible Events of Default include, among other events,
|
●
|
our failure to pay principal on any note;
|
|
●
|
our failure to pay interest and other charges in excess of $100,000; and
|
|
●
|
our inability, for more than 135 consecutive days, to have reserved for issuance upon conversion of the notes the number of shares of common stock that equals at least 130% of the aggregate maximum number of shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the then outstanding notes.
|
We cannot assure you that we will be able to prevent a Conversion
Eligible Event of Default.
Because of our lack of funds, we may not be able to conduct
adequate due diligence on any new intellectual property which we may seek to acquire
. We currently have nominal current assets
and are operating at a loss. In order to evaluate any intellectual property rights which we may seek to acquire, we need to conduct
due diligence on the intellectual property and underlying technology. To the extent that we are unable to perform the necessary
due diligence, we will not be able to value any asset which we acquire, which may impair our ability to generate revenue from the
intellectual property rights. If any conditions occur, such as defects in the ownership of the intellectual property, infringement
on intellectual property rights of others, the existence of better technology which does not require our intellectual property,
or other conditions that affect the value of the patents or marketability of the underlying intellectual property rights, we may
not be able to monetize the patents and we may be subject to liability to a third party who has rights in the intellectual property.
Any funding we obtain may result in significant dilution
to our stockholders
. Because of our financial position, our continuing losses and our negative working capital from operations,
we do not expect that we will be able to obtain any debt financing for our operations. Our stock price has generally been trading
at a price which is less than $0.01 per share for more than the past two years. As a result, it will be very difficult for us to
raise funds in the equity markets. However, in the event that we are able to raise funds in the equity market, the sale of shares
would result in significant dilution to the present stockholders, and even a modest equity investment could result in the issuance
of a very significant number of shares.
We are dependent upon our chief executive officer
. We
are dependent upon Jon Scahill, our chief executive officer and president and sole full-time employee, for all aspects of our business
including locating, evaluating and negotiating for intellectual property rights from the owners, managing our intellectual property
portfolios, engaging in licensing activities and monetizing the rights through licensing and managing and monitoring any litigation
with respect to our intellectual property as well as defending any actions by potential licensees seeking a declaratory judgment
that they do not infringe. The loss of Mr. Scahill would materially impair our ability to conduct our business. Although we have
an employment agreement with Mr. Scahill, the employment agreement does not insure that Mr. Scahill will remain with us.
Risks Relating to Monetizing our Intellectual Property
Rights
We may not be able to monetize our intellectual property
portfolios
. Although our business plan is to generate revenue from our intellectual property portfolios, we have not been successful
in generating any significant revenue from our portfolios and we have not generated any revenues from several of our intellectual
property portfolios. We cannot assure you that we will be able to generate any significant revenue from our existing portfolios
or that we will be able to acquire new intellectual property rights that will generate significant revenue.
If we are not successful in monetizing our portfolios, we
may not be able to continue in business
. Although we have ownership of some of our intellectual property, we also license the
rights pursuant to agreements with the owners of the intellectual property. If we are not successful in generating revenue for
those parties who have an interest in the results of our efforts, those parties may seek to renegotiate the terms of our agreements
with them, which could both impair our ability to generate revenue from our intellectual property and make it more difficult for
us to obtain rights to new intellectual property rights. If we continue to be unable to generate revenue from our existing intellectual
property portfolios and any new portfolios we may acquire, we may be unable to continue in business.
If we are not successful in patent litigation, the defendants
may seek to have the court award attorneys’ fees to them against us which could result in the bankruptcy of the plaintiff
subsidiary and a default under our agreement with United Wireless
. The United States patent laws provide that “the court
in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.” Although the patents are owned by our subsidiaries
and any judgment would be awarded against the subsidiaries, the subsidiaries have no assets other than the patent rights. Our funding
sources for our patent litigation do not provide for the funding source to pay any judgment against us. Thus, if any defendants
obtain a judgment against one of our subsidiaries, they may seek to enforce their judgment against the patents owned by the subsidiary
or seek to put the subsidiary into bankruptcy and acquire the patents in the bankruptcy proceeding. As a result, it is possible
that an adverse verdict in a petition for legal fees could result in the loss of the patents owned by the subsidiary and a default
under our note held by Intelligent Partners as transferee of United Wireless.
Our inability to acquire intellectual property portfolios
will impair our ability to generate revenue and develop our business
. We do not have the personnel to develop patentable technology
by ourselves. Thus, we need to depend on acquiring rights to intellectual property and intellectual property portfolios from third
parties. In acquiring intellectual property rights, there are delays in (i) identifying the intellectual property which we may
want to acquire, (ii) negotiating an agreement with the owner or holder of the intellectual property rights, and (iii) generating
revenue from those intellectual property rights which we acquire. During these periods, we will continue to incur expenses with
no assurance that we will generate revenue. We currently hold intellectual property portfolios from which we have not generated
any revenue to date, and we cannot assure you that we will generate revenue from our existing intellectual property portfolios
or any additional intellectual properties which we may acquire.
We may be unable to enforce our intellectual
property rights unless we obtain third party funding
. Because of the expense of litigation and our lack of working capital,
we may be unable to enforce our intellectual property rights unless we obtain the agreement of a third party to provide funding
in support of our litigation. We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain third party funding, and the failure to obtain
such funding may impair our ability to monetize our intellectual property portfolio.
Because we need to rely on third-party funding sources to
provide us with funds to enforce our intellectual property rights we are dependent upon the perception by potential funding sources
of the value of our intellectual property
. Because we do not have funds to pursue litigation to enforce our intellectual property
rights, we are dependent upon the valuation which potential funding sources give to our intellectual property. In determining whether
to provide funding for intellectual property litigation, the funding sources need to make an evaluation of the strength of our
patents, the likelihood of success, the nature of the potential defendants and a determination as to whether there is a sufficient
potential recovery to justify a significant investment in intellectual property litigation. Typically, such funding sources receive
a percentage of the recovery after litigation expenses, and seek to generate a sufficient return on investment to justify the investment.
Unless that funding source believes that it will generate a sufficient return on investment, it will not fund litigation. We cannot
assure you that we will be able to negotiate funding agreements with third party funding sources on terms reasonably acceptable
to us, if at all. Because of our financial condition, we may only be able to obtain funding on terms which are less favorable to
us than we would otherwise be able to obtain.
Even if we enter into funding agreements, there is no assurance
that we will generate revenue from the funded litigation
. Although the funding source makes its evaluation as to the likelihood
of success, patent litigation is very uncertain, and we cannot assure you that, just because we obtain litigation funding, we will
be successful or that any recovery we may obtain will be significant.
Because of the terms of a funding agreement and our agreement
with United Wireless, we allocate to third parties a significant portion of any recovery we may obtain
. Typically, an agreement
with a litigation funding source provides that the funding party received a negotiated percentage of the recovery after legal
expenses. In addition, we have a monetization proceeds agreement with United Wireless pursuant to which United Wireless has the
right to receive 15% of the net monetization proceeds received from the patents we acquired from Intellectual Ventures and our
mobile data and financial data intellectual property portfolios, and 7.5% of the net proceeds received from the CXT portfolio.
As a result, the amount we recover from any successful litigation, after the costs of the litigation, represents only a fraction
of the net recovery.
Because we granted United Wireless a security interest in
almost all of our intellectual property and the proceeds from our intellectual property, we may not be able to raise funds through
a debt financing
. Pursuant to our agreements with United Wireless, we granted United Wireless a security interest in the stock
of our subsidiaries that hold the intellectual property acquired from Intellectual Ventures and in the proceeds from the monetization
of the intellectual property acquired from Intellectual Ventures and our mobile data and financial data portfolios. The inability
to grant a security interest in these assets to a new lender would materially impair our ability to obtain debt financing for our
operations, and may also impair our ability to obtain financing to acquire additional intellectual property rights.
Because of our financial condition and our failure to have
generated revenues from our existing portfolios, we may not be able to obtain intellectual property rights to the most advanced
technologies
. In order to generate meaningful revenues from intellectual property rights, we need to be able to identify, negotiate
rights to and offer technologies for which there is a developing market. Because of our financial condition and our lack of the
generation of any significant revenue from our existing intellectual property portfolios, we may be unable to negotiate rights
to technology for which there which will be a strong developing market, or, if we are able to negotiate agreements for such intellectual
property, the terms of our purchase or license may not be favorable to us. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will be able
to acquire intellectual property rights to the technology for which there is a strong market demand.
Potential acquisitions may present risks, and we may be unable
to achieve the financial or other goals intended at the time of any potential acquisition
. Our ability to grow depends, in
large part, on our ability to acquire interests in intellectual property, including patented technologies, patent portfolios, or
companies holding such patented technologies and patent portfolios. Accordingly, we intend to engage in acquisitions to expand
our intellectual property portfolios and we intend to continue to explore such acquisitions. Such acquisitions are subject to numerous
risks, including the following:
|
●
|
our failure to have sufficient funding to enable us to make the acquisition;
|
|
●
|
our failure to have sufficient personal to satisfy the seller that we have the personnel to monetize the assets we propose to acquire;
|
|
●
|
dilution to our stockholders to the extent that we use equity in connection with any acquisition;
|
|
●
|
our inability to enter into a definitive agreement with respect to any potential acquisition, or if we are able to enter into such agreement, our inability to consummate the potential acquisition;
|
|
●
|
difficulty integrating the operations, technology and personnel of the acquired entity;
|
|
●
|
our inability to achieve the anticipated financial and other benefits of the specific acquisition;
|
|
●
|
difficulty in maintaining controls, procedures and policies during the transition and monetization process;
|
|
●
|
diversion of our management’s attention from other business concerns, especially considering that we have only one full-time employee/officer; and
|
|
●
|
our failure, in our due diligence process, to identify significant issues, including issues with respect to patented technologies and intellectual property portfolios, and other legal and financial contingencies.
|
If we are unable to manage these risks effectively as part of
any acquisition, our business could be adversely affected.
Our acquisition of intellectual property rights may be time
consuming, complex and costly, which could adversely affect our operating results
. Acquisitions of patent or other intellectual
property assets, which are and will be critical to the development of our business, are often time consuming, complex and costly
to consummate. We may utilize many different transaction structures in our acquisitions and the terms of such acquisition agreements
tend to be heavily negotiated. As a result, we expect to incur significant operating expenses and may be required to raise capital
during the negotiations even if the acquisition is ultimately not consummated. Even if we are able to acquire particular intellectual
property assets, there is no guarantee that we will generate sufficient revenue related to those intellectual property assets to
offset the acquisition costs. We may also identify intellectual property assets that cost more than we are prepared to spend with
our own capital resources. We may incur significant costs to organize and negotiate a structured acquisition that does not ultimately
result in an acquisition of any intellectual property assets or, if consummated, proves to be unprofitable for us. These higher
costs could adversely affect our operating results.
If we acquire technologies that are in the early stages of
market development, we may be unable to monetize the rights we acquire
. We may acquire patents, technologies and other intellectual
property rights that are in the early stages of adoption in the commercial, industrial and consumer markets. Demand for some of
these technologies will likely be untested and may be subject to fluctuation based upon the rate at which companies may adopt our
intellectual property in their products and services. As a result, there can be no assurance as to whether technologies we acquire
or develop will have value that we can monetize. It may also be necessary for us to develop additional intellectual property and
file new patent applications as the underlying commercial market evolves, as a result of which we may incur substantial costs with
no assurance that we will ever be able to monetize our intellectual property.
Our intellectual property monetization cycle is lengthy and
costly and may be unsuccessful
. We expect to incur significant marketing, legal and sales expenses prior to entering into monetization
events that generate revenue for us. We will also spend considerable resources educating potential licensees on the benefits of
entering into an agreement with us that may include a non-exclusive license for future use of our intellectual property rights.
Thus, we may incur significant losses in any particular period before any associated revenue stream begins. If our efforts to convince
potential licensees of the benefits of a settlement arrangement are unsuccessful, we may need to continue with the litigation process
or other enforcement action to protect our intellectual property rights and to realize revenue from those rights. We may also need
to litigate to enforce the terms of existing agreements, protect our trade secrets, or determine the validity and scope of the
proprietary rights of others. Enforcement proceedings are typically protracted and complex. The costs are typically substantial,
and the outcomes are unpredictable. Enforcement actions will divert our managerial, technical, legal and financial resources from
business operations.
We may not be successful in obtaining judgments in our favor
.
We have commenced litigation seeking to monetize our intellectual property portfolios and it may be necessary for us to commence
ligation in the future. All litigation is uncertain, and a number of the actions we commenced have been dismissed by the trial
court. We cannot assure you that any litigation will be decided in our favor or that, if damages are awarded or a license is negotiated,
that we will generate any significant revenue from the litigation or that any recovery may be allocated to counsel and third party
funding source which may result in little if any revenue to us.
Our financial condition may cause both intellectual property
rights owners and potential licensees to believe that we do not have the financial resources to commence and prosecute litigation
for infringement
. Because of our financial condition, both intellectual property rights owners and potential licensees may
believe that we do not have the ability to commence and prosecute sustained and expensive litigation to protect our intellection
rights with the effect that (i) intellectual property rights owners may be reluctant to grant us rights to their intellectual property
and (ii) potential licensees may be less inclined to pay for license rights from us or settle any litigation we may commence on
terms which generate any meaningful monetization.
Any patents which may be issued to us pursuant to patent
applications which we filed or may file may fail to give us necessary protection
. We cannot be certain that patents will be
issued as a result of any pending or future patent applications, or that any of our patents, once issued, will provide us with
adequate protection from competing products. For example, issued patents may be circumvented or challenged, declared invalid or
unenforceable, or narrowed in scope. In addition, since publication of discoveries in scientific or patent literature often lags
behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that we will be the first to make additional new inventions or to file patent applications
covering those inventions. It is also possible that others may have or may obtain issued patents that could prevent us from commercializing
our products or require us to obtain licenses requiring the payment of significant fees or royalties in order to enable us to conduct
our business. As to those patents that we may acquire, our continued rights will depend on meeting any obligations to the seller
and we may be unable to do so. Our failure to obtain or maintain intellectual property rights for our inventions would lead to
the loss of our investments in such activities, which would have a material adverse effect on us.
The provisions of Federal Declaratory Judgment Act may affect
our ability to monetize our intellectual property
. Under the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, it is possible for a party who
we consider to be infringing upon our intellectual property to commence an action against us seeking a declaratory judgment that
such party is not infringing upon our intellectual property rights. In such a case, the plaintiff could choose the court in which
to bring the action and we would be the defendant in the action. Common claims for declaratory judgment in patent cases are claims
of non-infringement, patent invalidity and unenforceability. Although the commencement of an action requires a claim or controversy,
a court may find a letter from us to the alleged infringer seeking a royalty for the use of our intellectual property rights to
form the basis of a controversy. In such a case, the plaintiff, rather than we, would choose the court in which to bring the action
and the timing of the action. In addition, when we commence an action as plaintiff, we may be able to enter into a contingent fee
arrangement with counsel, it is possible that counsel may be less willing to accept such an arrangement if we are the defendant.
Further, we would not have the opportunity of choosing against which party to bring the action. An adverse decision in a declaratory
judgment action could significantly impair our ability to monetize the intellectual property rights which are the subject of the
litigation. We have been a defendant in one declaratory judgment action, which resulted in a settlement. We cannot assure you that
potential infringers will not be able to use the Declaratory Judgment Act to reduce our ability to monetize the patents that are
the subject of the action.
A 2014 Supreme Court decision could significantly impair
business method and software patents
. In June 2014, the United States Supreme Court, in
Alice v. CLS Bank
, struck down
patents covering a computer-implemented scheme for mitigating “settlement risk” by using a third party intermediary,
holding the patent claims to be ineligible as being drawn to a patent-ineligible abstract idea. The courts have been dealing for
many years over what business methods are patentable. We cannot predict the extent to which the decision in
Alice
as well
as prior Supreme Court decisions dealing with patents, will be interpreted by courts. To the extent that the Supreme Court decision
in
Alice
gives businesses reason to believe that business model and software patents are not enforceable, it may become
more difficult for us to monetize patents which are held to be within the ambit of the patents before the Supreme Court in
Alice
and for us to obtain counsel willing to represent us on a contingency basis. As a result, the decision in
Alice
could materially
impair our ability to obtain patent rights and monetize those which we do obtain.
Legislation, regulations or rules related to obtaining patents
or enforcing patents could significantly increase our operating costs and decrease our revenue
. We may apply for patents and
may spend a significant amount of resources to enforce those patents. If legislation, regulations or rules are implemented either
by Congress, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or the courts that impact the patent application process, the patent
enforcement process or the rights of patent holders, these changes could negatively affect our expenses and revenue. For example,
new rules regarding the burden of proof in patent enforcement actions could significantly both increase the cost of our enforcement
actions and make it more difficult to sign licenses without litigation, changes in standards or limitations on liability for patent
infringement could negatively impact our revenue derived from such enforcement actions, and any rules requiring that the losing
party pay legal fees of the prevailing party could also significantly increase the cost of our enforcement actions. United States
patent laws were recently amended with the enactment of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the America Invents Act, which
took effect on March 16, 2013. The America Invents Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. In general,
the legislation attempts to address issues surrounding the enforceability of patents and the increase in patent litigation by,
among other things, establishing new procedures for patent litigation. For example, the America Invents Act changes the way that
parties may be joined in patent infringement actions, increasing the likelihood that such actions will need to be brought against
individual parties allegedly infringing by their respective individual actions or activities. The America Invents Act and its implementation
increases the uncertainties and costs surrounding the enforcement of our patented technologies, which could have a material adverse
effect on our business and financial condition. In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice has conducted reviews of the patent
system to evaluate the impact of patent assertion entities on industries in which those patents relate. It is possible that the
findings and recommendations of the Department of Justice could impact the ability to effectively license and enforce standards-essential
patents and could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the enforcement of any such patented technologies.
Proposed legislation may affect our ability to conduct our
business
. There are presently pending or proposed a number of laws which, if enacted, may affect the ability of companies such
as us to generate revenue from our intellectual property rights. Typically, these proposed laws cover legal actions brought by
companies which do not manufacture products or supply services but seek to collect licensing fees based on their intellectual property
rights and, if they are not able to enter into a license, to commence litigation. Although a number of such bills have been proposed
in Congress, we do not know which, if any, bills will be enacted into law or what the provisions will be and, therefore, we cannot
predict the effect, if any, that such laws, if passed by Congress and signed by the president, would provide. However, we cannot
assure you that legislation will not be enacted which would impair our ability to operate by making it more difficult for us to
commence litigation against a potential licensee or infringer. To the extent that an alleged infringer believes that we will not
prevail in litigation, it would be more difficult to negotiate a license agreement without litigation.
The unpredictability of our revenues
may harm our financial condition
. Our revenues from licensing have typically been lump sum payments entered into at the time
of the license, which may be in connection with the settlement of litigation, and not from licenses that pay an ongoing royalty.
Due to the nature of the licensing business and uncertainties regarding the amount and timing of the receipt of license and other
fees from potential infringers, stemming primarily from uncertainties regarding the outcome of enforcement actions, rates of adoption
of our patented technologies, the growth rates of potential licensees and certain other factors, our revenues, if any, may vary
significantly from quarter to quarter, which could make our business difficult to manage, adversely affect our business and operating
results, cause our quarterly results to fall below market expectations and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
Our success depends in part upon our
ability to retain the qualified legal counsel to represent us in patent enforcement litigation
. The success of our licensing
business may depend upon our ability to retain the qualified legal counsel to prosecute patent infringement litigation. As our
patent enforcement actions increase, it will become more difficult to find the preferred choice for legal counsel to handle all
of our cases because many of these firms may have a conflict of interest that prevents their representation of us or because they
are not willing to represent us on a contingent or partial contingent fee basis.
Our reliance on representations, warranties and opinions
of third parties may expose us to certain material liabilities
. From time to time, we rely upon the representations and warranties
of third parties, including persons claiming ownership of intellectual property rights, and opinions of purported experts. In certain
instances, we may not have the opportunity to independently investigate and verify the facts upon which such representations, warranties
and opinions are made. By relying on these representation, warranties and opinions, we may be exposed to liability in connection
with the licensing and enforcement of intellectual property and intellectual property rights which could have a material adverse
effect on our operating results and financial condition.
In connection with patent enforcement actions, counterclaims
may be brought against us and a court may rule against us in counterclaims which may expose us and our operating subsidiaries to
material liabilities
. In connection with patent enforcement actions, it is possible that a defendant may file counterclaims
against us or a court may rule that we have violated statutory authority, regulatory authority, federal rules, local court rules,
or governing standards relating to the substantive or procedural aspects of such enforcement actions. In such event, a court may
issue monetary sanctions against us or our operating subsidiaries or award attorney’s fees and/or expenses to the counterclaiming
defendant, which could be material, and if we or our operating subsidiaries are required to pay such monetary sanctions, attorneys’
fees and/or expenses, such payment could materially harm our operating results, our financial position and our ability to continue
in business.
Trial judges and juries may find it difficult to understand
complex patent enforcement litigation, and as a result, we may need to appeal adverse decisions by lower courts in order to successfully
enforce our patents
. It is difficult to predict the outcome of patent enforcement litigation at the trial level. It is often
difficult for juries and trial judges to understand complex, patented technologies, and, as a result, there is a higher rate of
successful appeals in patent enforcement litigation than more standard business litigation. Regardless of whether we prevail in
the trial court, appeals are expensive and time consuming, resulting in increased costs and delayed revenue, and attorneys may
be less likely to represent us in an appeal on a contingency basis especially if we are seeking to appeal an adverse decision.
Although we may diligently pursue enforcement litigation, we cannot predict the decisions made by juries and trial courts.
More patent applications are filed each year resulting in
longer delays in getting patents issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office
. We hold a number of pending patents
and may file or acquire rights to additional patent applications. We have identified a trend of increasing patent applications
each year, which we believe is resulting in longer delays in obtaining approval of pending patent applications. The application
delays could cause delays in recognizing revenue, if any, from these patents and could cause us to miss opportunities to license
patents before other competing technologies are developed or introduced into the market.
U.S. Federal courts are becoming more crowded, and, as a
result, patent enforcement litigation is taking longer
. Patent enforcement actions are almost exclusively prosecuted in federal
district courts. In May 2017, the United States Supreme Court, in
TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Groups Brands
, held that a
corporate defendant may be sued either in its state of incorporation, or where it has committed acts of infringement and has a
regular and established place of business. To the extent that the Supreme Court decision in
TC Heartland
concentrates patent
litigation in districts within states popular for business incorporation, such as the Federal District Court for the District of
Delaware, such courts may become increasingly crowded. Federal trial courts that hear patent enforcement actions also hear criminal
and other civil cases. Criminal cases always take priority over patent enforcement actions. As a result, it is difficult to predict
the length of time it will take to complete any enforcement action. Moreover, we believe there is a trend in increasing numbers
of civil lawsuits and criminal proceedings, and, as a result, we believe that the risk of delays in patent enforcement actions
will have a significant effect on our business in the future unless this trend changes.
Any reductions in the funding of the United States Patent
and Trademark Office could have an adverse impact on the cost of processing pending patent applications and the value of those
pending patent applications
. Our primary assets are our patent portfolios, including pending patent applications before the
United States Patent and Trademark Office. The value of our patent portfolios is dependent upon the issuance of patents in a timely
manner, and any reductions in the funding of the United States Patent and Trademark Office could negatively impact the value of
our assets. Further, reductions in funding from Congress could result in higher patent application filing and maintenance fees
charged by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, causing an unexpected increase in our expenses.
The rapid development of technology may impair our ability
to monetize intellectual property that we own
. In order for us to generate revenue from our intellectual property, we need
to offer intellectual property that is used in the manufacture or development of products. Rapid technological developments have
reduced the market for products using less advanced technology. To the extent that technology develops in a manner in which our
intellectual property is not a necessary element or to the extent that others design around our intellectual property, our ability
to license our intellectual property portfolios or successfully prosecute litigation will be impaired. We cannot assure you that
we will have rights to intellectual property for most advanced technology or that there will be a market for products which require
our technology.
The intellectual property management business is highly competitive
.
A large number of other companies seek to obtain rights to new intellectual property and to market existing intellectual property.
Most of these companies have significantly both greater resources that we have and industry contacts which place them in a better
position to generate new business. Further, our financial position, our lack of executive personnel and our inability to generate
revenue from our portfolio can be used against us by our competitors. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in obtaining
intellectual property rights to new developing technologies.
As intellectual property enforcement litigation becomes more
prevalent, it may become more difficult for us to voluntarily license our intellectual property
.
We believe that the
more prevalent intellectual property enforcement actions become, the more difficult it will be for us to voluntarily license our
intellectual property rights. As a result, we may need to increase the number of our intellectual property enforcement actions
to cause infringing companies to license the intellectual property or pay damages for lost royalties.
Weak global economic conditions may cause potential licensees
to delay entering into licensing agreements, which could prolong our litigation and adversely affect our financial condition and
operating results
. Our business depends significantly on strong economic conditions that would encourage potential licensees
to enter into license agreements for our intellectual property rights. The United States and world economies have recently experienced
weak economic conditions. Uncertainty about global economic conditions poses a risk as businesses may postpone spending in response
to tighter credit, negative financial news and declines in income or asset values. This response could have a material adverse
effect on the willingness of parties infringing on our assets to enter into settlements or other revenue generating agreements
voluntarily.
If we are unable to adequately protect our intellectual property,
we may not be able to compete effectively
.
Our ability to compete depends in part upon the strength of the intellectual
property and intellectual property rights that we own or may hereafter acquire in our technologies, brands and content and our
ability to protect such intellectual property rights. We rely on a combination of patent and intellectual property laws and agreements
to establish and protect our patent, intellectual property and other proprietary rights. The efforts we take to protect our patents,
intellectual property and other proprietary rights may not be sufficient or effective at stopping unauthorized use of our patents,
intellectual property and other proprietary rights. In addition, effective trademark, patent, copyright and trade secret protection
may not be available or cost-effective in every country in which we have rights. There may be instances where we are not able to
protect or utilize our patent and other intellectual property in a manner that maximizes competitive advantage. If we are unable
to protect our patent assets and intellectual property and other proprietary rights from unauthorized use, the value of those assets
may be reduced, which could negatively impact our business. Our inability to obtain appropriate protections for our intellectual
property may also allow competitors to enter our markets and produce or sell the same or similar products as those covered by our
intellectual property rights. In addition, protecting our intellectual property and intellectual property rights is expensive and
diverts our critical and limited managerial resources. If any of the foregoing were to occur, or if we are otherwise unable to
protect our intellectual property and proprietary rights, our business and financial results could be impaired. If it becomes necessary
for us to commence legal proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights, the proceedings could be burdensome and expensive.
In addition, our intellectual property rights could be at risk if we are unsuccessful in, or cannot afford to pursue, those proceedings.
We also rely on trade secrets and contract law to protect some of our intellectual property rights. We will enter into confidentiality
and invention agreements with our employees and consultants. Nevertheless, these agreements may not be honored and they may not
effectively protect our right to our un-patented trade secrets and know-how. Moreover, others may independently develop substantially
equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets and know-how.
Risks Concerning our Common Stock
Our notes held by Intelligent Partners, as transferee of
United Wireless, will become convertible at a conversion price equal to 90% of the market price of the stock on the date the holder
of the notes gives notice of conversion in the event of certain defaults under the notes
. Although the notes that we issued
held by Intelligent Partners, as transferee of United Wireless, are not presently convertible, they become convertible upon certain
events of default. If the notes become convertible, the holders of the notes can convert the notes in part from time to time at
90% of the market price at the time of conversion. The ability, or the potential ability, of the holder to convert the notes into
common stock at a price which is less than the market price on the date of conversion could result in significant downward pressure
on the price of our common stock. If the notes become convertible, the possible additional dilution resulting from the issuance
of shares of common stock on conversion of the notes, together with the below market conversion price, could result in continued
downward pressure on our stock price until the notes are paid in full. Further, even though we increased our authorized common
stock to 10,000,000,000 shares in June 2017, the possibility that the notes may become convertible in the future could also have
a negative impact on the market price of our common stock.
If the notes issued held by Intelligent Partners, as transferee
of United Wireless, become convertible, we may not have sufficient authorized common stock to enable us to fulfill our obligation
to issue common stock on conversion of the notes
. Because there is no fixed conversion price, it is possible that, even though
we increased our authorized common stock to 10,000,000,000 shares in June 2017, we cannot assure you that we will continue to have
sufficient shares of authorized common stock to permit conversion. Although we have an obligation to increase our authorized common
stock further in the event that 10,000,000,000 authorized shares are not sufficient, we cannot assure you that we will be able
to obtain stockholder approval of such an increase. The failure to be able to deliver common stock on conversion would be a further
default under the notes and could result in our obligation to pay damages to the note holders.
There is a limited market for our common stock, which may
make it difficult for you to sell your stock
. Our common stock trades on the OTC Pink marketplace under the symbol “QPRC.”
The OTC Pink market is not a national securities exchange and does not provide the benefits to stockholders which a national exchange
provides. Furthermore, according to the OTC Markets website, the OTC Pink “is for all types of companies that are there by
reasons of default, distress or design, which is why they are further segmented based on the level of information that they provide.”
There is a limited trading market for our common stock and there are frequently days on which there is no trading in our common
stock. Our common stock has traded for less than $0.01 for almost all trading days since prior to January 1, 2015. Accordingly,
there can be no assurance as to the liquidity of any markets that may develop for our common stock, the ability of holders of our
common stock to sell our common stock, or the prices at which holders may be able to sell our common stock. Further, because of
the thin float, the reported bid and asked prices may have little relationship to the price you would pay if you wanted to buy
shares or the price you would receive if you wanted to sell shares.
Because our common stock is a penny stock, you may have difficulty
selling our common stock in the secondary trading market
. Our common stock fits the definition of a penny stock and therefore
is subject to the rules adopted by the SEC regulating broker-dealer practices in connection with transactions in penny stocks.
The SEC rules may have the effect of reducing trading activity in our common stock making it more difficult for investors to purchase
and sell their shares. The SEC’s rules require a broker or dealer proposing to effect a transaction in a penny stock to deliver
the customer a risk disclosure document that provides certain information prescribed by the SEC, including, but not limited to,
the nature and level of risks in the penny stock market. The broker or dealer must also disclose the aggregate amount of any compensation
received or receivable by him in connection with such transaction prior to consummating the transaction. In addition, the SEC’s
rules also require a broker or dealer to make a special written determination that the penny stock is a suitable investment for
the purchaser and receive the purchaser’s written agreement to the transaction before completion of the transaction. The
existence of the SEC’s rules may result in a lower trading volume of our common stock and lower trading prices. Further,
some broker-dealers will not process transactions in penny stocks.
Our lack of internal controls over financial reporting may
affect the market for and price of our common stock
. Our disclosure controls and our internal controls over financial reporting
are not effective. Since we became engaged in the intellectual property management business in 2008, we have not had the financial
resources or personnel to develop or implement systems that would provide us with the necessary information on a timely basis so
as to be able to implement financial controls. Our continued poor financial condition together with the fact that we have one full
time employee, who is both our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, makes it difficult for us to implement a system
of internal controls over financial reporting, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to develop and implement the necessary
controls. The absence of internal controls over financial reporting may inhibit investors from purchasing our shares and may make
it more difficult for us to raise debt or equity financing.
Our lack of a full-time chief financial officer could affect
our ability to develop financial controls, which could affect the market price for our common stock
. We do not have a full-time
chief financial officer. At present, our chief executive officer, who does not have an accounting background, is also acting as
our chief financial officer. We do not anticipate that we will be able to hire a qualified chief financial officer unless our financial
condition improves significantly. The lack of an experienced chief financial officer, together with our lack of internal controls,
may impair our ability to raise money through a debt or equity financing, the market for our common stock and our ability to enter
into agreements with owners of intellectual property rights.
Our stock price may be volatile and your investment in our
common stock could suffer a decline in value
. As of the date of this annual report, there has only been limited trading activity
in our common stock. There can be no assurance that any significant market will ever develop in our common stock. Because of the
low public float and the absence of any significant trading volume, the reported prices may not reflect the price at which you
would be able to sell shares if you want to sell any shares you own or buy shares if you wish to buy share. Further, stocks with
a low public float may be more subject to manipulation than a stock that has a significant public float. The price may fluctuate
significantly in response to a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include, but are not limited
to, the following, in addition to the risks described above and general market and economic conditions:
|
●
|
our low stock price, which may result in a modest dollar purchase or sale of our common stock having a disproportionately large effect on the stock price;
|
|
●
|
the market’s perception as to our ability to generate positive cash flow or earnings from our intellectual property portfolios;
|
|
●
|
changes in our or securities analysts’ estimate of our financial performance;
|
|
●
|
our ability or perceived ability to obtain necessary financing for operations and for the monetization of our intellectual property rights;
|
|
●
|
the market’s perception of the effects of legislation or court decisions on our business;
|
|
●
|
the market’s perception that a defendant may obtain a judgement against a subsidiary and foreclose on the intellectual property of the subsidiary, which may result in a default under our agreement with United Wireless;
|
|
●
|
the effects or perceived effects of the potential convertibility of convertible notes issued by us;
|
|
●
|
the results or anticipated results of litigation by or against us;
|
|
●
|
the anticipated or actual results of our operations;
|
|
●
|
events or conditions relating to the enforcement of intellectual property rights generally;
|
|
●
|
changes in market valuations of other intellectual property marketing companies;
|
|
●
|
any discrepancy between anticipated or projected results and actual results of our operations;
|
|
●
|
the market’s perception or our ability to continue to make our filings with the SEC in a timely manner;
|
|
●
|
actions by third parties to either sell or purchase stock in quantities which would have a significant effect on our stock price; and
|
|
●
|
other matters not within our control.
|
Legislation, court decisions and other factors affecting
enforcement of intellectual property rights may affect the price of our stock
. Court rulings in intellectual property enforcement
actions and new legislation or proposed legislation are often difficult to understand, even when favorable or neutral to the value
of our intellectual property rights and our overall business. Investors and market analysts may react without a full understanding
of these matters, causing fluctuations in our stock prices that may not accurately reflect the impact of court rulings, legislation,
proposed legislation or other developments on our business operations and assets.
Raising funds by issuing equity or convertible debt securities
could dilute the value of the common stock and impose restrictions on our working capital
. If we were to raise additional capital
by issuing equity securities, either alone or in connection with a non-equity financing, the value of the then outstanding common
stock could decline. If the additional equity securities were issued at a per share price less than the per share value of the
outstanding shares, which is customary in the private placement of equity securities, the holders of the outstanding shares would
suffer a dilution in value with the issuance of such additional shares. Because of the low price of our stock and our working capital
deficiency, the dilution to our stockholders could be significant. We may have difficulty in raising funds through the sale of
debt securities because of both our financial position, the lack of any collateral on which a lender may place a value, and the
absence of any history of significant monetizing of our intellectual property rights. If we are able to raise funds from the sale
of debt securities, the lenders may impose restrictions on our operations and may impair our working capital as we service any
such debt obligations.
Our failure to have filed reports with the SEC may impair
the market for and the value of our common stock and may result in liability to us
. We did not file reports with the SEC from
2003 until December 2014. We filed our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 on December 15, 2014; our Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2013 on April 10, 2015; and our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 on August 18, 2015. Our
failure to have made such filings may affect both the market for our common stock and the value of our common stock as well as
the willingness of investors to purchase our stock. Further, because we did not have current information concerning our business
and operations available, we have potential liability resulting from our failure to have been current in our SEC filings, and the
SEC has broad power to take action against us for our failure to have been in compliance with the reporting requirement of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Although the SEC permits an issuer to file an omnibus 10-K covering the periods for which filings
were not made, the SEC is not foreclosed from seeking enforcement action for our filing delinquencies. Any such action could have
a material adverse effect upon us and the market for and price of our common stock.
Because we have a classified board of directors, it may be
more difficult for a third party to obtain control of us
. As a result of the approval by our stockholders of our amended and
restated certificate of incorporation, our board of directors is a classified board, which means that at each annual meeting, the
stockholder will vote for only one-third of the board. A classified board of directors may make it more difficult for a third party
of gain control of us which may affect the opportunity of our stockholders to receive any potential benefit which could be available
from a third party seeking to obtain control over us.
We do not intend to pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable
future
. We have not paid any cash dividends on our common stock and do not intend to pay cash dividends on our common stock
in the foreseeable future.