XML 37 R15.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
Commitments And Contingencies
 9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2012
Commitments And Contingencies [Abstract]  
Commitments And Contingencies

8. Commitments and Contingencies

     We have entered into employment agreements, which provide severance benefits to several key employees. Commitments under these agreements totaled approximately $2,195,000 at September 30, 2012. Expense is not recognized until an employee is severed.

     On September 14, 2012, the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office ("PTO") issued an Order granting Syntroleum's August 17th request for inter partes reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 8,187,344 and also issued an Office Action initially rejecting all claims of the patent as obvious in view of the prior art. The '344 patent is the subject of a patent suit filed by Neste Oil Oyj against Syntroleum on May 29, 2012 in the District of Delaware. The '344 patent is related to and shares the same inventors as a prior Neste patent (U.S. Patent No. 7,279,018) and both are directed to a fuel composition for diesel engines. The PTO's recent Order is consistent with a prior finding on March 22, 2012 by the PTO's Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences affirming the Examiner's rejection of the '018 patent's claims because "the evidence of record as a whole supports the Examiner's conclusion that the fuel composition as claimed would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art . . .". Neste declined to appeal this ruling and on July 31, 2012, the PTO issued a Reexamination Certificate cancelling all claims of the '018 patent.

     Syntroleum's Answer and Counterclaims to Neste's First Amended Complaint regarding the '344 patent was filed on September 24th, wherein Syntroleum denied Neste's infringement allegations and asserted invalidity of the '344 patent on prior art and other grounds. Syntroleum's Motion to Stay the district court action in view of the PTO reexamination proceedings is pending. Syntroleum will continue to vigorously defend against the complaint's allegations in the district court and will also pursue invalidity of the '344 patent via the PTO reexamination proceedings, and is confident its position will be vindicated.