QPRC Quest Patent Research Corporation (QB)

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2019

NOTE 1 – DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION

The Company is a Delaware corporation, incorporated on July 17, 1987 and has been engaged in the intellectual property monetization business since 2008.

As used herein, the “Company” refers to Quest Patent Research Corporation and its wholly and majority-owned and controlled operating subsidiaries unless the context indicates otherwise. All intellectual property acquisition, development, licensing and enforcement activities are conducted by the Company’s wholly and majority-owned and controlled operating subsidiaries.

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the US (GAAP) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, these interim financial statements do not include all of the information and notes required by GAAP for complete financial statements. All adjustments (consisting of normal recurring items) necessary to present fairly the Company’s consolidated financial position have been included. These interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018. Operating results for the interim periods presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for any other interim period or for the entire year. Reclassifications have been made to conform with the current year presentation.

NOTE 2 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Principles of consolidation and financial statement presentation

The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“US GAAP”) and present the consolidated financial statements of the Company and its wholly owned and majority owned subsidiaries as of June 30, 2019. 

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts and operations of:

Prior to April 2019, the operations of Wynn Technologies, Inc. were not included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements as there were significant contingencies related to its control of Wynn Technologies, Inc. The sole asset of Wynn Technologies, Inc. was US Patent No. RE38,137E. Wynn Technologies, Inc. could not transfer, assign, sell, hypothecate or otherwise encumber US Patent No. RE38,137E without the express written consent of Sol Li, owner of 35% of Wynn Technologies, Inc., unless, as of the date of such transfer, assignment, sale, hypothecation or other encumbrance, Mr. Li had received a total of at least $250,000. US Patent No. RE38,137E expired on September 28, 2015. The Company accounted for its 65% interest in Wynn Technologies, Inc. under the equity method whereby the investment accounts were increased for contributions by the Company plus its 60% share of income pursuant to the contractual agreement which provides that Sol Li, owner of 35% of Wynn Technologies, Inc. retained 40% of the income, and reduced for distributions and its 60% share of losses incurred, respectively, with the restriction whereby the account balances cannot go below zero. On April 11, 2019, Quest NetTech Corporation merged with Wynn Technologies, Inc. with Quest NetTech Corporation being the surviving entity. Pursuant to the merger agreement, we issued to Mr. Li a 35% interest in Quest NetTech Corporation.

Significant intercompany transaction and balances have been eliminated in consolidation. 

Use of Estimates

In preparing financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, management is required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. 

Intangible Assets

Intangible assets consist of patents which are amortized using the straight-line method over their estimated useful lives or statutory lives whichever is shorter and are reviewed for impairment upon any triggering event that may give rise to the assets ultimate recoverability as prescribed under the guidance related to impairment of long-lived assets. Costs incurred to acquire patents, including legal costs, are also capitalized as long-lived assets and amortized on a straight-line basis with the associated patent.  

Patents include the cost of patents or patent rights (hereinafter, collectively “patents”) acquired from third-parties or acquired in connection with business combinations.  Patent acquisition costs are amortized utilizing the straight-line method over their remaining economic useful lives, ranging from one to ten years. Certain patent application and prosecution costs incurred to secure additional patent claims that, based on management’s estimates are deemed to be recoverable, are capitalized and amortized over the remaining estimated economic useful life of the related patent portfolio.

Derivative Financial Instruments

The Company evaluates the embedded conversion feature within its convertible debt instruments under ASC 815-15 and ASC 815-40 to determine if the conversion feature meets the definition of a liability and, if so, whether to bifurcate the conversion feature and account for it as a separate derivative liability. For derivative financial instruments that are accounted for as liabilities, the derivative instrument is initially recorded at its fair value and is then re-valued at each reporting date, with changes in the fair value reported in the statements of operations. For stock-based derivative financial instruments, the Company uses a Black Scholes model, in accordance with ASC 815-15 “Derivative and Hedging” to value the derivative instruments at inception and on subsequent valuation dates. The classification of derivative instruments, including whether such instruments should be recorded as liabilities or as equity, is evaluated at the end of each reporting period. Derivative instrument liabilities are classified in the balance sheet as current or non-current based on whether net-cash settlement of the derivative instrument could be required within 12 months after the balance sheet date. 

Fair value of financial instruments

Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. A fair value hierarchy is used which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. See Note 4 for information about derivative liabilities. 

The fair value hierarchy based on the three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value are as follows:

Level 1 – Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

Level 2 – Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.

Level 3 – Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are financial instruments whose values are determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques, as well as instruments for which the determination of fair value requires significant judgment or estimation. 

The carrying value reflected in the consolidated balance sheets for cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued expenses and short-term borrowings approximate fair value due to the short-term nature of these items.

Income Tax

The Company records revenues on a gross basis, before deduction for income taxes. The Company incurred foreign income tax expenses of $0 and $225 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2019, respectively, and approximately $990,000 and approximately $1,040,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2018, respectively.

Inventor/Former Owner Royalties and Contingent Legal/Litigation Finance Expenses

In connection with the investment in certain patents and patent rights, certain of the Company’s operating subsidiaries may execute related agreements which grant to the inventors and/or former owners of the respective patents or patent rights, the right to receive a percentage of future net revenues (as defined in the respective agreements) generated as a result of licensing and otherwise enforcing the respective patents or patent portfolios.

The Company’s operating subsidiaries may retain the services of law firms that specialize in patent licensing and enforcement and patent law in connection with their licensing and enforcement activities. These law firms may be retained on a contingent fee basis whereby such law firms are paid a percentage of any negotiated fees, settlements or judgments awarded.

The Company’s operating subsidiaries may engage with funding sources that provide financing for patent licensing and enforcement. These litigation finance firms may be engaged on a non-recourse basis whereby such litigation finance firms are paid a percentage of any negotiated fees, settlements or judgments awarded in exchange for providing funding for legal fees and out of pocket expenses incurred as a result of the licensing and enforcement activities.

The economic terms of the inventor agreements, operating agreements, contingent legal fee arrangements and litigation financing agreements associated with the patent portfolios owned or controlled by the Company’s operating subsidiaries, if any, including royalty rates, contingent fee rates and other terms, vary across the patent portfolios owned or controlled by such operating subsidiaries. Inventor/former owner royalties, payments to non-controlling interests, contingent legal fees expenses and litigation finance expenses fluctuate period to period, based on the amount of revenues recognized each period, the terms and conditions of revenue agreements executed each period and the mix of specific patent portfolios with varying economic terms and obligations generating revenues each period. Inventor/former owner royalties, contingent legal fees expenses and litigation finance expenses will continue to fluctuate and may continue to vary significantly period to period, based primarily on these factors.

Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with ASC Topic 606, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers”. Revenue is recognized when control of the promised goods or services is transferred to customers at an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled to in exchange for those goods or services. Under Topic 606, revenue is recognized when there is a contract which has commercial substance which is approved by both parties and identifies the rights of the parties and the payment terms. The Company adopted Topic 606 as of January 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective transition method, with no impact on the consolidated financial position or results of operations.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

The Company adopted Topic 842 “Leases” as of January 1, 2019 using the modified retrospective transition method with no impact on the consolidated financial position or results of operations.

Management does not believe that there are any recently issued, but not effective, accounting standards which, if currently adopted, would have a material effect on the Company’s financial statements. 

Going Concern

As shown in the accompanying financial statements, the Company has an accumulated deficit of approximately $19,700,000 and negative working capital of approximately $6,734,000 as of June 30, 2019. Because of the Company’s continuing losses, its working capital deficiency, the uncertainty of future revenue, the Company’s low stock price and the absence of a trading market in its common stock, the ability of the Company to raise funds in equity market or from lenders is severely impaired. These conditions raise substantial doubt as to the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Although the Company may seek to raise funds and to obtain third party funding for litigation to enforce its intellectual property rights, the availability of such funds is uncertain. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

The loan payable – third party is a demand loan made by former officers and directors, who are unrelated third parties at June 30, 2019, and December 31, 2018, in the amount of $163,000. The loans are payable on demand plus accrued interest at 10% per annum. These third parties are also stockholders, but their stockholdings are not significant. 

The loan payable – related party at June 30, 2019 represents the principal amount of the Company’s 10% note to Intelligent Partners, LLC (“Intelligent Partners”) as transferee of the notes issued to United Wireless Holdings, Inc. (“United Wireless”), in the amount of $4,672,810 pursuant to securities purchase agreement dated October 22, 2015 between the Company and United Wireless, as more fully described in the Company’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2018. The notes payable to Intelligent Partners, as transferee of United Wireless, have been classified as a current liability as of June 30, 2019.

Interest on all notes issued pursuant to the securities purchase agreement, accrued through September 30, 2018, with accrued interest being added to principal on September 30, 2016, 2017 and 2018. On September 30, 2018, approximately $395,459 of accrued interest was added to principal. Since September 30, 2018, the Company has been required to pay interest quarterly. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2019, the Company paid approximately $115,000 and 233,000 in interest, respectively.

Because of its right to elect a director of the Company, United Wireless is treated as a related party. Prior to the securities purchase agreement with United Wireless, the Company had no relationship with United Wireless.

Long term liabilities

The purchase price of patents at June 30, 2019 represents:

The contingent funding liabilities at June 30, 2019 represents the non-current portion of our obligations under the litigation funding agreement with a third-party litigation funder entered into in December 2018 whereby the third-party agreed to provide litigation funding in the amount of $150,000 to the Company to enable the Company to support its structured licensing programs for the CMOS and M-RED portfolios. Under the funding agreement, the third party receives an interest in the proceeds from the programs that are payable to the Company, and the Company has no other obligation to the third party.

Our relationship with the funding source meets the criteria in ASC 470-10-25 - Sales of Future Revenues or Various Other Measures of Income (“ASC 470”), which relates to cash received from a funding source in exchange for a specified percentage or amount of revenue or other measure of income of a particular product line, business segment, trademark, patent, or contractual right for a defined period. Under this guidance, we recognized the fair value of our contingent obligation to the funding source, as of the acquisition date, as long-term debt in our consolidated balance sheet. This initial fair value measurement is based on the perspective of a market participant and includes significant unobservable inputs which are classified as Level 3 inputs within the fair value hierarchy and are discussed further within Note 2. At each subsequent reporting period, we will measure the long-term debt at fair value based on the discounted expected future cash flows over the life of the obligation. Our repayment obligations are contingent upon future patent licensing fee revenues generated from the licensing programs.

Under ASC 470, amounts recorded as debt shall be amortized under the interest method. The Company made an accounting policy election to utilize the prospective method when there is a change in the estimated future cash flows, whereby a new effective interest rate is determined based on the revised estimate of remaining cash flows. The new rate is the discount rate that equates the present value of the revised estimate of remaining cash flows with the carrying amount of the debt, and it will be used to recognize interest expense for the remaining periods. Under this method, the effective interest rate is not constant, and any change in expected cash flows is recognized prospectively as an adjustment to the effective yield. As of June 30, 2019, the total contingent funding liability remains $150,000 and the effective interest rate was approximately 12.8%. This rate represents the discount rate that equates the estimated future cash flows with the fair value of the debt and is used to compute the amount of interest to be recognized each period. Any future payments made to the funding source will decrease the long-term debt balance accordingly. For the period ended June 30, 2019, the amortization amount is deemed immaterial. 

NOTE 4 – DERIVATIVE LIABILITIES

Because there is not a fixed conversion price, remaining compliant with the authorized share requirement under the notes to Intelligent Partners is outside of the control of the Company. Because there is no set limit on the number of shares issuable under the notes if the notes become convertible, absent an increase in the stock price or an increase in authorized shares, there are potentially not enough authorized shares of common stock to satisfy the exercise of the Company’s options, thus the Company determined that certain options qualify as derivative liabilities under ASC Topic 815. On January 22, 2016, the Company reclassified all non-employee warrants and options as derivative liabilities and revalued them at their fair values at each balance sheet date. Any change in fair value was recorded as other income (expense) for each reporting period at each balance sheet date.

As of June 30, 2019, and December 31, 2018, the aggregate fair value of the outstanding derivative liability was approximately $1,100,000 and $540,000, respectively.

The Company estimated the fair value of the derivative liability using the Black-Scholes option pricing model using the following key assumptions during the period ended June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018:

The following schedule summarizes the valuation of financial instruments at fair value in the balance sheets as of June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018:

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of changes in the fair value of derivative liabilities classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy:

NOTE 5 – STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

No options were granted during six months ended June 30, 2019.

A summary of the status of the Company’s stock options and changes is set forth below:

Intangible assets are comprised of patents with estimated useful lives. The intangible assets at June 30, 2019 represent:

The Company amortizes the costs of intangible assets over their estimated useful lives on a straight-line basis. Costs incurred to acquire patents, including legal costs, are also capitalized as long-lived assets and amortized on a straight-line basis with the associated patent. Amortization of patents is included as a selling, general and administrative expense in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.

The Company assesses intangible assets for any impairment to the carrying values. As of June 30, 2019, and December 31, 2018, management concluded that there was no impairment to the acquired assets. At June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, the book value of the Company’s intellectual property was $3,035,200 and $2,045,618, respectively. 

Amortization expense for patents comprised $248,636 and $437,720 for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and the year ended December 31, 2018, respectively. Future amortization of intangible assets is as follows:

Pursuant to the securities purchase agreement dated October 22, 2015 between the Company and United Wireless, more fully described in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018, 15% of the net monetization proceeds from the patents acquired in October 2015 will be paid to Intelligent Partners, as transferee of United Wireless. This monetization obligation was recognized as a discount to the loan and will be amortized over the life of the loan using the effective interest method. In addition, the Company entered into a monetization agreement with United Wireless pursuant to which the Company agreed to pay United Wireless 7.5% of the net monetization proceeds from the patents acquired by CXT in July 2017. This obligation was recorded as an expense and is reflected in interest expense during the third quarter of 2017.

The Company granted Intellectual Ventures a security interest in the patents assigned to the Company as security for the payment of the balance of the purchase price. The security interest of Intellectual Ventures is senior to the security interest of United Wireless in the proceeds derived from such patents. 

The balance of the purchase price of the patents is reflected as follows:

Because the non-current minimum payment obligations of $2,100,000 are due over the next three and a quarter years, the Company imputed interest of 10% and the interest will be accreted up to the maturity date. 

NOTE 8 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

The Company has at various times entered into transactions with related parties, including officers, directors and major stockholders, wherein these parties have provided services, advanced or loaned money, or both, to the Company which was needed to support its daily operations. The Company discloses all related party transactions.

See Notes 3 and 6 in connection with transactions with United Wireless. During periods ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, the Company incurred interest expense on the Company’s 10% notes issued to United Wireless pursuant to the securities purchase agreement dated October 22, 2015 more fully described in the Company’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2018. The interest expense was approximately $116,500 and $232,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2019, respectively and $103,000 and $202,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2018, respectively. On each of September 30, 2017 and 2018, accrued interest was added to the principal amount of the note. Subsequent to September 30, 2018, the Company is to pay interest quarterly. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2019 the Company paid approximately $115,000 and 233,000 in interest, respectively.

See Note 9 with respect to the employment agreement with the Company’s president and chief executive officer.

During the three and six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, the Company contracted with an entity owned by the chief technology officer for the provision of information technology services to the Company. The cost of such services was approximately $90 and $235 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2019, respectively, and approximately $190 and $420 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2018, respectively.

NOTE 9 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Employment Agreements

Pursuant to a restated employment agreement, dated November 30, 2014, with the Company’s president and chief executive officer, the Company agreed to employ him as president and chief executive officer for a term of three years, commencing January 1, 2014, and continuing on a year-to-year basis unless terminated by either party on not less than 90 days’ notice prior to the expiration of the initial term or any one-year extension. The agreement provides for an initial annual salary of $252,000, which may be increased, but not decreased, by the board or the compensation committee. In March 2016, the Company’s board of directors increased the chief executive officer’s annual salary to $300,000, effective January 1, 2016. The chief executive officer is entitled to a bonus if the Company meets or exceeds performance criteria established by the compensation committee. In August 2016, the Company’s board of directors approved annual bonus compensation equal to 30% of the amount by which our consolidated income before income taxes exceeds $500,000, but, if the Company is subject to the limitation on deductibility of executive compensation pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, the bonus cannot exceed the amount which would be deductible pursuant to Section 162(m). The chief executive officer is also eligible to participate in any executive incentive plans which the Company may adopt. 

Inventor Royalties, Contingent Litigation Funding Fees and Contingent Legal Expenses

In connection with the investment in certain patents and patent rights, certain of the Company’s operating subsidiaries executed agreements which grant to the former owners of the respective patents or patent rights, the right to receive inventor royalties based on future net revenues (as defined in the respective agreements) generated as a result of licensing and otherwise enforcing the respective patents or patent portfolios. 

The Company’s operating subsidiaries may engage third party funding sources to provide funding for patent licensing and enforcement. The agreements with the third party funding sources may provide that the funding source receive a portion of any negotiated fees, settlements or judgments. In certain instances, these third party funding sources are entitled to receive a significant percentage of any proceeds realized until the third party funder has recouped agreed upon amounts based on formulas set forth in the underlying funding agreement, which may reduce or delay and proceeds due to the Company.

The Company’s operating subsidiaries may retain the services of law firms in connection with their licensing and enforcement activities. These law firms may be retained on a contingent fee basis whereby the law firms are paid on a scaled percentage of any negotiated fees, settlements or judgments awarded based on how and when the fees, settlements or judgments are obtained. 

Depending on the amount of any recovery, it is possible that all the proceeds from a specific settlement may be paid to the funding source and legal counsel.

The economic terms of the inventor agreements, funding agreements and contingent legal fee arrangements associated with the patent portfolios owned or controlled by the Company’s operating subsidiaries, if any, including royalty rates, proceeds sharing rates, contingent fee rates and other terms, vary across the patent portfolios owned or controlled by the operating subsidiaries. Inventor royalties, payments to noncontrolling interests, payments to third party funding providers and contingent legal fees expenses fluctuate period to period, based on the amount of revenues recognized each period, the terms and conditions of revenue agreements executed each period and the mix of specific patent portfolios with varying economic terms and obligations generating revenues each period. Inventor royalties, payments to third party funding sources and contingent legal fees expenses will continue to fluctuate and may continue to vary significantly period to period, based primarily on these factors. 

In March 2014, the Company entered into a funding agreement whereby a third party agreed to provide funds to the Company to enable the Company to implement a structured licensing program, including litigation if necessary, for 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 for the Mobile Data portfolio, 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. In June and August 2016, Quest Licensing Corporation entered into a settlement agreement with SunGard Data Systems Inc. and FactSet Research Systems Inc. On January 19, 2017, the court in the Mobile Data Portfolio litigation granted the remaining 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. As of the date of filing the third party litigation has advanced approximately $3,000,000 in litigation fees, costs and expenses. Under the terms of the funding agreement, the third party funder is entitled to a priority return of funds advanced from any proceeds recovered. The Company’s management fees and management support services expenses relate to this agreement.

In December 2018, we entered into a funding agreement whereby a third party agreed to provide funds to us to enable us to support our structured licensing programs for the CMOS and M-RED portfolios. Under the funding agreement, the third party receives an interest in the proceeds from the programs, and we have no other obligation to the third party. As of December 31, 2018, the third party funding source advanced $150,000 for costs and expenses, and has no further obligation to provide additional funds. Under the terms of the funding agreement, the third party funder is entitled to a priority return of funds advanced from net proceeds recovered. 

On April 11, 2019, Quest NetTech Corporation merged with Wynn Technologies, Inc. with Quest NetTech Corporation being the surviving entity. Pursuant to the merger agreement, we issued to Mr. Li a 35% interest in Quest NetTech Corporation and Mr. Li is entitled to receive 40% of the net licensing revenues generated by Quest NetTech Corporation from the Financial Data Portfolio.

Patent Enforcement and Other Litigation

Certain of the Company’s operating subsidiaries are engaged in litigation to enforce their patents and patent rights. In connection with these patent enforcement actions, it is possible that a defendant may request and/or a court may rule that an operating subsidiary has 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 the Company or its operating subsidiaries or award attorney’s fees and/or expenses to a defendant(s), which could be material, and if required to be paid by the Company or its operating subsidiaries, could materially harm the Company’s operating results and financial position and could result in a default under the Company’s notes to Intelligent Partners. Since the operating subsidiaries do not have any assets other than the patents, and the Company does not have any available financial resources to pay any judgment which a defendant may obtain against a subsidiary, such a judgement may result in the bankruptcy of the subsidiary and/or the loss of the patents, which are the subsidiaries’ only assets.

On January 19, 2017, the court in the Mobile Data Portfolio litigation granted the 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. 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.” Such a motion, if granted, would result in a judgment against Quest Licensing Corporation, which does not have the financial resources to enable it to pay any judgment which may be rendered against it, and, the defendants may seek to enforce their judgment by seeking to foreclose on the patents owned by the subsidiary or seek to force the subsidiary into bankruptcy and purchase the patents in the bankruptcy proceeding, either of which could result in a default under the Company’s agreement with United Wireless. The possible amount of any judgment cannot be estimated and the funding source for the litigation will not provide the Company with funds to pay an adverse judgment. 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 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. On March 27, 2019 the court in the Mobile Data Portfolio litigation denied the defendants’ motion for attorney fees under Section 285 of the Patent Act.