The Company determines if an arrangement is a lease at inception by assessing whether there is an identified asset and whether the contract conveys the right to control the use of the identified asset in exchange for consideration over a period of time. The Company recognizes right-of-use assets (“ROU assets”) and lease liabilities for office buildings and certain equipment with lease terms of 1 year to 10 years, some of which include options to extend and/or terminate the leases. Any short-term leases defined as twelve months or less or month-to-month leases were excluded and continue to be expensed each month. Total costs associated with these short-term leases is immaterial to all periods presented.

The Company aggregates all lease and non-lease components for each class of underlying assets into a single lease component and variable charges for common area maintenance and other variable costs are recognized as expense as incurred. Total variable costs associated with leases for the three and six months ended June 30, 2021 were immaterial. The Company had an immaterial amount of financing leases as of June 30, 2021.

The Company occupies approximately 121,541 square feet of office, engineering, and research and development space in Carlsbad, California. On December 4, 2019, the Company entered into a new 10-year operating lease that commenced on February 1, 2021 and will terminate on January 31, 2031, subject to two sixty-month options to renew which were not reasonably certain to be exercised. The Company recognized a $21.1 million ROU asset and $21.5 million lease liability on the condensed consolidated balance sheet upon taking control of the premises on the lease commencement date. Base rent under the building lease for the first twelve months of the term will be $0.2 million per month subject to full abatement during months two through ten, and thereafter will increase annually by 3.0% throughout the remainder of the lease.

On April 9, 2021, the Company entered into a new 7-year operating lease agreement for a new distribution center which consists of approximately 75,643 square feet of office and warehouse space in Memphis, Tennessee. The term of the new lease commenced on May 1, 2021 and will terminate on May 1, 2028, subject to two thirty-six-month options to renew which were not reasonably certain to be exercised. The Company recognized a $1.7 million ROU asset and lease liability upon taking control of the premises on the lease

commencement date. The Company is expected to occupy a proportionate share of the building upon commencement of the lease on May 1, 2021 and is expected to occupy 100% of the premises beginning in November 2022. Base rent under the new building lease will be commensurate with the Company’s proportionate share of occupancy of the new building and will increase annually by 3.0% throughout the remainder of the lease.

Future minimum annual lease payments under such leases are as follows as of June 30, 2021 (in thousands):

Remainder of 2021	$	857
2022		4,340
2023		4,546
2024		4,583
2025		4,617
Thereafter		22,614
Total undiscounted lease payments		41,557
Less: imputed interest		(13,367	)
Operating lease liability		28,190
Less: current portion of operating lease liability		(2,777	)
Operating lease liability, less current portion	$	25,413

The Company’s weighted-average remaining lease term and weighted-average discount rate as of June 30, 2021 and December 31, 2020 are as follows:

June 30,

2021

December 31,

2020

Weighted-average remaining lease term (years)

9.04

0.7

Weighted-average discount rate

8.5

10.5

Information related to the Company’s operating leases is as follows (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2021		2020		2021		2020
Rent expense	$	1,119	$	331	$	2,202	$	658
Cash paid for amounts included in measurement of lease liabilities	$	495	$	372	$	875	$	741

The Company entered into a distribution agreement with a third-party provider in January 2020 in which the Company is obligated to certain minimum purchase requirements related to inventory and equipment leases. As of June 30, 2021, the minimum purchase commitment required by the Company under the agreement was $1.8 million to be paid over a three-year period. The Company recognized an ROU asset in the amount of $0.5 million related to the leased assets within the agreement which is being amortized into rent expense through the lease term. The Company recognized $0.1 million and $0.2 million of rent expense pertaining to these assets for the three and six months ended June 30, 2021, respectively, and did not recognize any rent expense pertaining to these assets for the three and six months ended June 30, 2020. The ROU asset related to the leased assets within the agreement on the Company’s condensed consolidated balance sheet was $0.4 million as of June 30, 2021.

With the acquisition of EOS, the company assumed its inventory purchase commitment agreement with a third-party supplier. EOS is obligated to certain minimum purchase commitment requirements through December 2025. As of June 30, 2021, the remaining minimum purchase commitment required by EOS under the agreement was $28.8 million.

The Company is and may become involved in various legal proceedings arising from its business activities. While management is not aware of any litigation matter that in and of itself would have a material adverse impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial position, litigation is inherently unpredictable, and depending on the nature and timing of a proceeding, an unfavorable resolution could materially affect the Company’s future consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial position in a particular period. The Company assesses contingencies to determine the degree of probability and range of

possible loss for potential accrual or disclosure in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. An estimated loss contingency is accrued in the Company’s consolidated financial statements if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because litigation is inherently unpredictable and unfavorable resolutions could occur, assessing contingencies is highly subjective and requires judgments about future events. When evaluating contingencies, the Company may be unable to provide a meaningful estimate due to a number of factors, including the procedural status of the matter in question, the presence of complex or novel legal theories, and/or the ongoing discovery and development of information important to the matters. In addition, damage amounts claimed in litigation against the Company may be unsupported, exaggerated or unrelated to reasonably possible outcomes, and as such are not meaningful indicators of the Company’s potential liability.

In February 2018, NuVasive, Inc. filed suit against the Company in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California (NuVasive, Inc. v. Alphatec Holdings, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:18-cv-00347-CAB-MDD (S.D. Cal.)), alleging that certain of the Company’s products (including components of its Battalion™ Lateral System), infringe, or contribute to the infringement of, U.S. Patent Nos. 7,819,801, 8,355,780, 8,439,832, 8,753,270, 9,833,227 (entitled “Surgical access system and related methods”), U.S. Patent No. 8,361,156 (entitled “Systems and methods for spinal fusion”), and U.S. Design Patent Nos. D652,519 (“Dilator”) and D750,252 (“Intervertebral Implant”). NuVasive seeks unspecified monetary damages and an injunction against future purported infringement.

In March 2018, the Company moved to dismiss NuVasive’s claims of infringement of its design patents for failure to state a cognizable legal claim. In May 2018, the Court ruled that NuVasive failed to state a plausible claim for infringement of the asserted design patents and dismissed those claims with prejudice. The Company filed its answer, affirmative defenses and counterclaims to NuVasive’s remaining claims in May 2018.

Also in March 2018, NuVasive moved for a preliminary injunction. In March 2018, the Court denied that motion without prejudice for failure to comply with the Court’s chambers rules. In April 2018, NuVasive again moved for a preliminary injunction. In July 2018, after a hearing on the matter in June 2018, the Court denied that motion on the grounds that NuVasive failed to establish either likelihood of success on the merits or that it would suffer irreparable harm absent injunction.

In September 2018, NuVasive filed an Amended Complaint, asserting additional infringement claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,924,859, 9,974,531 and 8,187,334. The Company filed its answer, affirmative defenses and counterclaims to these claims in October 2018. Also in October 2018, NuVasive moved to dismiss the Company’s counterclaims that NuVasive intentionally had misled the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office as a means of obtaining certain patents asserted against the Company. In January 2019, the Court denied NuVasive’s motion as to all but one counterclaim, but granted the Company leave to amend that counterclaim to cure dismissal. The Company amended that counterclaim in February 2019 and, that same month, NuVasive again moved to dismiss it. In March 2019, the Court denied NuVasive’s motion. NuVasive filed its Answer to the amended counterclaim in April 2019.

In December 2018, the Company filed a petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) challenging the validity of certain claims of the ’156 and ’334 Patents. In July 2019, PTAB instituted Inter Partes Review of the validity of asserted claims of the two patents at issue and held a hearing on the matter in April 2020. In July 2020, the PTAB ruled that all challenged claims of the ‘156 Patent were valid (not unpatentable) and ruled that several challenged claims of the ‘334 Patent were invalid, while finding that other challenged claims of the ‘334 Patent valid. NuVasive and the Company have both appealed the PTAB’s written decision on the matter. The Company filed its Principal Brief on February 8, 2021. NuVasive filed its Principal Brief on April 21, 2021. The appeals are currently pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

In January 2020, NuVasive filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of infringement and validity of the ’832, ’780 and ’270 Patents and the Company filed a Motion for Summary Judgment of non-infringement of all asserted claims and of invalidity of the ’832 Patent and for dismissal of NuVasive’s claim for lost profits and its allegations of assignor estoppel. In April 2020, the Court granted NuVasive’s Motion as to the alleged infringement of the ’832 Patent only and denied NuVasive’s Motion in all other respects. Also, in April 2020, the Court granted the Company’s Motion as to dismissal of the allegations of assignor estoppel and denied the Company’s Motion in all other respects.

In November 2020, NuVasive filed a Motion to Strike the Company’s Invalidity Contentions concerning the ’156 and ’334 Implant Patents. In April 2021, the Court denied NuVasive’s motion.

In January 2021, NuVasive filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of infringement and validity of the ’156 and ’334 Implant Patents and the Company filed a Motion for Summary Judgment of invalidity of those same patents. These motions were argued to the Court on June 29, 2021 and are now pending before the Court. Trial has been set to begin December 6, 2021.

The Company believes that the allegations lack merit and intends to vigorously defend all claims asserted. A liability is recorded in the consolidated financial statements if it is believed to be probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. It is impossible at this time to assess whether the outcome of this proceeding will have a material adverse effect

on the Company’s consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial position. Therefore, in accordance with authoritative accounting guidance, the Company has not recorded any accrual for a contingent liability associated with this legal proceeding based on its belief that a liability, while possible, is not probable and any range of potential future charge cannot be reasonably estimated at this time.

In the normal course of business, the Company enters into agreements under which it occasionally indemnifies third-parties for intellectual property infringement claims or claims arising from breaches of representations or warranties. In addition, from time to time, the Company provides indemnity protection to third-parties for claims relating to past performance arising from undisclosed liabilities, product liabilities, environmental obligations, representations and warranties, and other claims. In these agreements, the scope and amount of remedy, or the period in which claims can be made, may be limited. It is not possible to determine the maximum potential amount of future payments, if any, due under these indemnities due to the conditional nature of the obligations and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each agreement.

In October 2017, NuVasive filed a lawsuit in Delaware Chancery Court against Mr. Miles, the Company’s Chairman and CEO, who was a former officer and board member of NuVasive. The Company itself was not initially a named defendant in this lawsuit; however, on June 28, 2018, NuVasive amended its complaint to add the Company as a defendant. On October 12, 2018, the Delaware Court ordered that NuVasive begin advancing legal fees for Mr. Miles’ defense in the lawsuit, as well as Mr. Miles’ legal fees incurred in pursuing advancement of his fees, pursuant to an indemnification agreement between NuVasive and Mr. Miles. As of June 30, 2021, the Company has not recorded any liability on the condensed consolidated balance sheet related to this matter.

The Company has entered into various intellectual property agreements requiring the payment of royalties based on the sale of products that utilize such intellectual property. These royalties primarily relate to products sold by Alphatec Spine and are based on fixed fees or are calculated either as a percentage of net sales or on a per-unit sold basis. Royalties are included on the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations as a component of cost of revenue. As of June 30, 2021, the Company is obligated to pay guaranteed minimum royalty payments under these agreements of approximately $3.4 million through 2026 and beyond.