Note 10. Commitments and contingencies

Leases

The Company leases various facilities under noncancelable operating leases. As of March 31, 2013, the future minimum commitments under all operating leases are as follows (in thousands):

2013 (remaining 9 months)	$	1,593
2014		1,385
2015		1,188
2016		666
2017		500
Thereafter		968
	$	6,300

Rent expense under the Company’s operating leases was $0.6 million and $0.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Litigation

From time to time, the Company is subject to various claims and legal proceedings, either asserted or unasserted, that arise in the ordinary course of business. The Company accrues for legal contingencies if the Company can estimate the potential liability and if the Company believes it is more likely than not that the case will be ruled against it. If a legal claim for which the Company did not accrue is resolved against it, the Company would record the expense in the period in which the ruling was made. The Company does not believe that the ultimate amount of liability, if any, for any pending claims of any type (alone or combined) will materially affect the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The ultimate outcome of any litigation is uncertain, however, and unfavorable outcomes could have a material negative impact on the Company’s financial condition and operating results. Regardless of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on the Company because of defense costs, negative publicity, diversion of management resources and other factors.

On January 5, 2010, Finisar Corporation, or Finisar, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Source Photonics, Inc., MRV Communications, Inc., Oplink Communications, Inc. and the Company, or collectively, the co-defendants. In the complaint, Finisar alleged infringement of certain of its U.S. patents arising from the codefendants’ respective manufacture, importation, use, sale of or offer to sell certain optical transceiver products. Finisar sought to recover unspecified damages, up to treble the amount of actual damages, together with attorneys’ fees, interest and costs. Finisar alleged that at least some of the patents asserted are a part of certain digital diagnostic standards for optoelectronics transceivers, and, therefore, are being utilized in such digital diagnostic standards. On March 23, 2010, the Company filed an answer to the complaint and counterclaims, asserting two claims of patent infringement and additional claims asserting that Finisar has violated state and federal competition laws and violated its obligations to license on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms. On May 5, 2010, the court dismissed without prejudice all co-defendants (including the Company) except Source Photonics, Inc., on grounds that such claims should have been asserted in four separate lawsuits, one against each defendant. This dismissal without prejudice does not prevent Finisar from bringing a new similar lawsuit against the Company. The Company and Finisar had agreed to suspend their respective claims for a 90 day period and not to refile the originally asserted claims against each other until one or more specified events occur resulting in the partial or complete resolution of the litigation between Source Photonics and Finisar. On September 10, 2010, Source Photonics and Finisar settled their lawsuit, commencing the suspension period, which ended in December 2010. On January 18, 2011, the Company and Finisar again agreed to suspend their respective claims and not to refile the originally asserted claims against each other until at least 90 days after one or more specified events occur resulting in the partial or complete resolution of litigation involving the same Finisar patents between Oplink Communications, Inc. and Finisar. This tolling period expired on April 30, 2012. On May 3, 2012 the Company and Finisar agreed to further toll their respective claims until the refiling of certain of the previously asserted claims from this dispute. As a result, Finisar is permitted to bring a new lawsuit against the Company if it chooses to do so, and the Company may bring new claims against Finisar upon seven days written notice prior to filing such claims. The Company is currently unable to predict the outcome of this dispute and therefore cannot determine the likelihood of loss nor estimate a range of possible loss.

Indemnifications

In the normal course of business, the Company enters into agreements that contain a variety of representations and warranties and provide for general indemnification. The Company’s exposure under these agreements is unknown because it involves claims that may be made against the Company in the future, but have not yet been made. To date, the Company has not paid any claims or been required to defend any action related to its indemnification obligations. However, the Company may record charges in the future as a result of these indemnification obligations. As of March 31, 2013, the Company does not have any material indemnification claims that were probable or reasonably possible.

Purchase obligations

The Company has purchase obligations with certain suppliers for the purchase of goods and services entered in the ordinary course of business. As of March 31, 2013, total outstanding purchase obligations were $26.2 million, primarily due within the next 12 months.

Other contingencies

In connection with the Company’s acquisition of Santur that the Company completed in October 2011, the Company may be required to pay up to an additional $7.5 million in cash as further consideration for the business acquisition, contingent upon Santur’s gross profit performance during 2012. The fair value of the contingent consideration is re-measured each reporting period and any changes in the fair value of the contingent consideration are recognized as a gain or loss in the consolidated statements of operations. As of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the Company estimated the fair value of the contingent consideration was $1.0 million and $1.0 million, respectively, and has included this liability within accrued and other current liabilities in its condensed consolidated balance sheets. The Company classifies this liability within level 3 as it is valued using significant unobservable inputs. To estimate the fair value, the Company used Santur’s gross profit as defined in the acquisition agreement and an estimated discount rate. Although the Company believes the fair value of the contingent consideration is in accordance with the terms of the Santur acquisition agreements, the selling parties dispute the final amount to be paid. Any adjustment to the fair value of the contingent consideration may impact the results of operations in the period the adjustment is made.