Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies	5. Commitments and Contingencies The Company’s contractual obligations were presented in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the previous annual reporting period ended June 30, 2014. There have been no material changes outside of the ordinary course of business in those obligations during the nine months ended March 31, 2015. Litigation From time to time, the Company is involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of its business. The Company records a provision for a loss when it believes that it is both probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. Currently, management believes the Company does not have any probable and estimable losses related to any current legal proceedings and claims. Although occasional adverse decisions or settlements may occur, except as described in the matters below, management does not believe that an adverse determination with respect to any of these claims would individually or in the aggregate materially and adversely affect the Company’s financial condition or operating results. For certain legal proceedings, management believes that there is a reasonable possibility that material losses may be incurred; however, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate a range of reasonably possible losses with respect to these matters. Litigation is inherently unpredictable and is subject to significant uncertainties, some of which are beyond the Company’s control. Should any of these estimates and assumptions change or prove to have been incorrect, the Company could incur significant charges related to legal matters that could have a material impact on its results of operations, financial position and cash flows. Rotary Systems On April 28, 2011, a former supplier to TomoTherapy, Rotary Systems Incorporated (“Rotary Systems”), filed suit in Minnesota state court, Tenth Judicial District, Anoka County, against TomoTherapy alleging misappropriation of trade secrets, as well as several other counts alleging various theories of injury. Rotary Systems alleges TomoTherapy misappropriated Rotary Systems’ trade secrets pertaining to a component previously purchased from Rotary Systems, which component TomoTherapy now purchases from a different supplier. The suit alleges TomoTherapy improperly supplied the alleged trade secrets to its present supplier, Dynamic Sealing Technologies Inc. (also a named defendant in the suit). Rotary Systems has made an unspecified claim for damages of greater than $50,000. TomoTherapy moved to dismiss the case and, on August 29, 2011, the court granted the motion to dismiss with respect to all counts other than the count alleging misappropriation of trade secrets. On May 21, 2012, the court gave Rotary Systems sixty days to identify the alleged trade secrets with specificity or face dismissal of its claim with prejudice. The court held a hearing on September 20, 2012 to review Rotary Systems’ amended complaint. TomoTherapy filed a motion for summary judgment on the trade secret claim, the court ruled in favor of TomoTherapy on December 5, 2013, and Rotary Systems appealed. On December 22, 2014, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s dismissal of Rotary Systems’ trade secrets claim and remanded it to the district court but affirmed the dismissal of Rotary Systems’ other claims. Sarif Biomedical Patent Litigation On January 28, 2013, Sarif Biomedical filed a patent infringement complaint against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The complaint alleges the Company’s CyberKnife System directly infringes U.S. Patent No. 5,755,725 and seeks unspecified monetary damages for the alleged infringement. Accuray filed an answer to the complaint in March 2013. The parties have exchanged initial discovery requests and responses. The court issued a scheduling order on April 29, 2014. Accuray made its first document production on May 30, 2014. On January 7, 2015, the parties entered into a written settlement agreement resolving the lawsuit. This settlement didn’t have a material impact on the results of operations for the three or nine months ended March 31, 2015. On January 13, 2015, the court entered an order dismissing the case and all claims with prejudice. Cowealth Medical On February 27, 2014, Cowealth Medical Holding Co., Ltd. (“Cowealth”), Accuray’s former distributor in China, submitted a request for binding arbitration with the International Chamber of Commerce International Court of Arbitration (“ICC”) alleging, among other matters, that Accuray breached its distributor agreement with Cowealth by wrongfully terminating Cowealth as its distributor and misappropriated certain of Cowealth’s confidential information. Cowealth is seeking damages of approximately $170.0 million and injunctive relief. Accuray has filed counterclaims for damages of approximately $35.0 million. Accuray’s answer and counterclaim were submitted to the ICC on May 12, 2014, and Cowealth served its reply on June 27, 2014. A hearing was held in Hong Kong between January 26, 2015 and February 6, 2015. The parties filed closing submissions and reply closing submissions in March 2015. The Company expects the arbitrator to render a decision sometime between October 2015 and February 2016. We are unable to predict the outcome of this lawsuit and therefore cannot determine the likelihood of loss nor estimate a range of possible loss. Software License Indemnity Under the terms of the Company’s software license agreements with its customers, the Company agrees that in the event the software sold infringes upon any patent, copyright, trademark, or any other proprietary right of a third party, it will indemnify its customer licensees against any loss, expense, or liability from any damages that may be awarded against its customer. The Company includes this infringement indemnification in all of its software license agreements and selected managed services arrangements. In the event the customer cannot use the software or service due to infringement and the Company cannot obtain the right to use, replace or modify the license or service in a commercially feasible manner so that it no longer infringes, then the Company may terminate the license and provide the customer a refund of the fees paid by the customer for the infringing license or service. The Company has not recorded any liability associated with this indemnification, as it is not aware of any pending or threatened actions that represent probable losses as of March 31, 2015.

5. Commitments and Contingencies

The Company’s contractual obligations were presented in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the previous annual reporting period ended June 30, 2014. There have been no material changes outside of the ordinary course of business in those obligations during the nine months ended March 31, 2015.

Litigation

From time to time, the Company is involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of its business. The Company records a provision for a loss when it believes that it is both probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. Currently, management believes the Company does not have any probable and estimable losses related to any current legal proceedings and claims. Although occasional adverse decisions or settlements may occur, except as described in the matters below, management does not believe that an adverse determination with respect to any of these claims would individually or in the aggregate materially and adversely affect the Company’s financial condition or operating results. For certain legal proceedings, management believes that there is a reasonable possibility that material losses may be incurred; however, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate a range of reasonably possible losses with respect to these matters. Litigation is inherently unpredictable and is subject to significant uncertainties, some of which are beyond the Company’s control. Should any of these estimates and assumptions change or prove to have been incorrect, the Company could incur significant charges related to legal matters that could have a material impact on its results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

Rotary Systems

On April 28, 2011, a former supplier to TomoTherapy, Rotary Systems Incorporated (“Rotary Systems”), filed suit in Minnesota state court, Tenth Judicial District, Anoka County, against TomoTherapy alleging misappropriation of trade secrets, as well as several other counts alleging various theories of injury. Rotary Systems alleges TomoTherapy misappropriated Rotary Systems’ trade secrets pertaining to a component previously purchased from Rotary Systems, which component TomoTherapy now purchases from a different supplier. The suit alleges TomoTherapy improperly supplied the alleged trade secrets to its present supplier, Dynamic Sealing Technologies Inc. (also a named defendant in the suit). Rotary Systems has made an unspecified claim for damages of greater than $50,000. TomoTherapy moved to dismiss the case and, on August 29, 2011, the court granted the motion to dismiss with respect to all counts other than the count alleging misappropriation of trade secrets. On May 21, 2012, the court gave Rotary Systems sixty days to identify the alleged trade secrets with specificity or face dismissal of its claim with prejudice. The court held a hearing on September 20, 2012 to review Rotary Systems’ amended complaint. TomoTherapy filed a motion for summary judgment on the trade secret claim, the court ruled in favor of TomoTherapy on December 5, 2013, and Rotary Systems appealed. On December 22, 2014, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s dismissal of Rotary Systems’ trade secrets claim and remanded it to the district court but affirmed the dismissal of Rotary Systems’ other claims.

Sarif Biomedical Patent Litigation

On January 28, 2013, Sarif Biomedical filed a patent infringement complaint against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The complaint alleges the Company’s CyberKnife System directly infringes U.S. Patent No. 5,755,725 and seeks unspecified monetary damages for the alleged infringement. Accuray filed an answer to the complaint in March 2013. The parties have exchanged initial discovery requests and responses. The court issued a scheduling order on April 29, 2014. Accuray made its first document production on May 30, 2014. On January 7, 2015, the parties entered into a written settlement agreement resolving the lawsuit. This settlement didn’t have a material impact on the results of operations for the three or nine months ended March 31, 2015. On January 13, 2015, the court entered an order dismissing the case and all claims with prejudice.

Cowealth Medical

On February 27, 2014, Cowealth Medical Holding Co., Ltd. (“Cowealth”), Accuray’s former distributor in China, submitted a request for binding arbitration with the International Chamber of Commerce International Court of Arbitration (“ICC”) alleging, among other matters, that Accuray breached its distributor agreement with Cowealth by wrongfully terminating Cowealth as its distributor and misappropriated certain of Cowealth’s confidential information. Cowealth is seeking damages of approximately $170.0 million and injunctive relief. Accuray has filed counterclaims for damages of approximately $35.0 million. Accuray’s answer and counterclaim were submitted to the ICC on May 12, 2014, and Cowealth served its reply on June 27, 2014. A hearing was held in Hong Kong between January 26, 2015 and February 6, 2015. The parties filed closing submissions and reply closing submissions in March 2015. The Company expects the arbitrator to render a decision sometime between October 2015 and February 2016. We are unable to predict the outcome of this lawsuit and therefore cannot determine the likelihood of loss nor estimate a range of possible loss.

Software License Indemnity

Under the terms of the Company’s software license agreements with its customers, the Company agrees that in the event the software sold infringes upon any patent, copyright, trademark, or any other proprietary right of a third party, it will indemnify its customer licensees against any loss, expense, or liability from any damages that may be awarded against its customer. The Company includes this infringement indemnification in all of its software license agreements and selected managed services arrangements. In the event the customer cannot use the software or service due to infringement and the Company cannot obtain the right to use, replace or modify the license or service in a commercially feasible manner so that it no longer infringes, then the Company may terminate the license and provide the customer a refund of the fees paid by the customer for the infringing license or service. The Company has not recorded any liability associated with this indemnification, as it is not aware of any pending or threatened actions that represent probable losses as of March 31, 2015.