XML 47 R18.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
Note 14 - Commitments and Contingencies
6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2012
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]
14. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Leases  — The Company leases administrative and sales offices and certain equipment under noncancelable operating leases, which contain various renewal options and, in some cases, require payment of common area costs, taxes and utilities. These operating leases expire at various times through 2018. Rent expense was $0.5 million and $0.6 million for the three months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Rent expense was $1.2 million for both the six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011. During the three months ended June 30, 2012, the Company entered into a lease agreement to extend the lease period of a portion of its San Jose, California office facilities through 2018.

Future minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating leases at June 30, 2012 are as follows (in thousands):

Year Ending June 30,
     
2012 (remaining six months)
 
$
1,284
 
2013
   
1,551
 
2014
   
1,617
 
2015
   
1,501
 
2016
   
1,505
 
Thereafter
   
2,371
 
Total future minimum lease payments
 
$
9,829
 

The operating lease obligations have been reduced by future minimum sublease rental income of $0.3 million in the remaining six months of 2012 and $0.4 million in 2013, respectively.

Litigation  — From time to time, the Company is subject to various claims and legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business. Although the Company currently believes that the ultimate outcome of any of these claims and proceedings, individually and in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on its financial position or overall trends in results of operations, litigation is subject to inherent uncertainty. If an unfavorable ruling occurs in any of the legal proceedings described below, our financial position and results of operations and cash flows could be negatively affected. The Company accrues for losses related to litigation when a potential loss is probable and the loss can be reasonably estimated in accordance with FASB requirements. With respect to each of the matters below, the Company has determined a potential loss is not probable at this time and, accordingly, no amount has been accrued at June 30, 2012. As the Company continues to monitor these matters, however, the Company's determination could change and the Company may decide a different reserve is appropriate in the future.

Philip Steven Melman filed a complaint against the Company and the Company's Chief Executive Officer on December 7, 2009 in the Superior Court for Santa Clara County. In the complaint, Mr. Melman alleges wrongful discharge based on discrimination, fraud, breach of contract and similar theories, in connection with the termination of Mr. Melman's employment with the Company. The complaint seeks compensatory and punitive damages, any other available remedies, as well as attorney's fees and costs. On August 15, 2011, the court issued a definitive ruling granting the Company’s motion for summary judgment, which final order for this ruling was entered by the court on November 9, 2011. On March 20, 2012, Mr. Melman filed an opening brief with the Court of Appeals for Santa Clara County appealing this ruling. The Company believes the appeal is without merit and intend to vigorously oppose it.

Global Software Services, Inc., a Palestinian corporation (“GSSI”), filed a complaint against the Company on February 16, 2010 in the Superior Court for Santa Clara County. In the complaint, GSSI alleged that the Company failed to pay GSSI amounts owed under a Professional Services Agreement pursuant to which GSSI was providing software-related development and support services to the Company. In addition, GSSI alleged that the Company interfered with GSSI’s business relationships and employee relationships, and engaged in unfair business practices in violation of Business & Professions Code Section 17200. The complaint sought compensatory and punitive damages, disgorgement and restitution, injunctive relief and any other available equitable remedies, as well as attorney's fees and costs. On December 2, 2010, the court dismissed GSSI's action with prejudice. On April 14, 2011, Global Software Systems, LLC ("GSS LLC") filed a Notice of Motion to Intervene in the same matter. On May 4, 2011, Andre Hawit, chief executive officer of GSSI and president of GSS LLC, filed a complaint (as a cross-cross complainant) against the Company, the Company's Chief Executive Officer and an employee in the same matter before the Superior Court for Santa Clara County. Both Mr. Hawit and GSS LLC were pursuing claims arising in connection with the subject matter of the lawsuit originally filed by GSSI. Specifically, Mr. Hawit's cross-cross complaint alleged that the Company interfered with his economic relationship with GSSI and that the Company engaged in unfair business practices in violation of Business and Professions Code Section 17200. He sought compensatory damages, punitive damages, restitution and attorney fees and costs. GSS LLC alleged that it was an assignee of the rights of GSSI and that the court should grant it relief from the default judgment entered against GSSI and permit it to pursue those claims as an assignee. In August 2011, the court denied all previously filed motions to set aside the dismissal and for GSS LLC to intervene in the action. GSSI and Mr. Hawit filed a notice that they intended to appeal these rulings. On March 26, 2012, the court dismissed the appeals by GSSI and Mr. Hawit, which orders were entered on April 5, 2012.  On April 5, 2012, the court dismissed with prejudice Mr. Hawit’s complaints against the Company, the Company's Chief Executive Officer and the employee, which orders were entered by the court on May 2, 2012.