Commitments and Contingencies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2019

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments and Contingencies

Contingencies

In March 2012, Trans Ova was named as a defendant in a licensing and patent infringement suit brought by XY, LLC ("XY") alleging that certain of Trans Ova's sale of semen-sorting products and services breached a 2004 licensing agreement and infringed on patents related to semen sorting that XY allegedly owned. Trans Ova filed a number of counterclaims in the case. The matter proceeded to a jury trial in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado in January 2016. The jury determined that XY and Trans Ova had each breached the licensing agreement and that Trans Ova had infringed XY's patents. In April 2016, the court issued its post-trial order, awarding $528 in damages to Trans Ova and $6,066 in damages to XY. The order also provided Trans Ova with the ability to continue to practice XY's technology, subject to an ongoing royalty obligation of 12.5% of gross proceeds on Trans Ova's standard sorted semen products, plus a 2% enhancement on those products utilizing "reverse-sorted semen", or semen that is frozen before being sorted. In addition, the court assigned a $5.00 minimum royalty for a straw of sexed semen. Both parties appealed the district court's order. In May 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied Trans Ova's appeal of its claims for antitrust, breach of contract and patent invalidity (except as to one patent, for which the Federal Circuit affirmed invalidity in a separate, same-day ruling in a third-party case). The Federal Circuit remanded the district court's calculation of the ongoing royalty and instructed the district court to re-calculate the ongoing royalty in light of post-verdict economic factors. In March 2019, the district court clarified the royalty base and reset the royalty rates consistent with the Federal Circuit's opinion. The district court increased the royalty rate on Trans Ova's standard sorted semen products to 18.75%. For the reverse-sort enhancement, however, it applied a weighted, blended royalty of 12.63% to Trans Ova's entire in vitro fertilization service cycle that utilizes reverse-sorted semen. The district court also changed the minimum royalty for a straw of sexed semen to $6.25 for a 2-million cell straw (prorated appropriately for straws of higher cell counts), and assigned a minimum royalty for a sexed embryo at $6.25 per embryo. The new royalty rates were made retroactive to February 2016 (the end date of the trial).

Since the inception of the 2004 licensing agreement, Trans Ova has remitted payments to XY pursuant to the terms of that agreement, or pursuant to the terms of the district court's April 2016 post-trial order and its March 2019 post-remand order, and has recorded these payments in cost of services in the consolidated statements of operations for the respective periods. For the period from inception of the 2004 licensing agreement through the district court's April 2016 order, aggregate royalty and license payments were $3,170, of which $2,759 had not yet been deposited by XY. In 2016, the Company recorded the expense

of $4,228, representing the excess of the net damages awarded to XY, including prejudgment interest, over the liability previously recorded by Trans Ova for uncashed checks previously remitted to XY. In August 2016, Trans Ova deposited the net damages amount, including prejudgment interest, into the district court's registry, to be held until the appeals process was complete and final judgment amounts were determined. These amounts were included in restricted cash and other accrued liabilities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2018. After the appeal, the district court subsequently released the funds held in its registry to XY in January 2019. As for post-trial damages, Trans Ova continued to remit payment to XY every quarter based on the original ongoing royalty rates set by the district court, though XY refused to cash those checks.

Under the district court's March 2019 post-remand order clarifying the royalty base and resetting the royalty rates, Trans Ova recalculated royalties owed from February 2016 through the first quarter of 2019, plus any applicable pre- and post-judgment interest, and remitted that payment, totaling $5,801, to XY in May 2019. In June 2019, XY deposited the $5,801 into the district court's registry while the parties resolve two separate disputes over the appropriate calculation of royalties. In the first dispute, XY filed a motion claiming over $1,000 in additional back royalties. Trans Ova contested XY's motion. On February 6, 2020, the district court denied XY's motion without prejudice, holding that XY failed to satisfy its obligation under the court's local rules to meaningfully confer with Trans Ova before filing its motion. The district court held that, if XY chooses to re-file its motion, it must include a substantial certificate of conferral demonstrating that it seriously and in good faith tried to resolve its disputes with Trans Ova. In the second dispute, Trans Ova moved for partial relief from judgment after XY's last patent covering standard sorting expired in December 2019. Trans Ova is seeking an appropriate reduction in its royalty obligation in light of the fact that XY's only non-expired patents are limited to reverse sorting. Trans Ova's motion is pending before the court.

During the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company recorded additional royalty expense of $383 based on the recalculation of royalties owed XY from February 2016 through December 2018. This amount is included in selling, general and administrative expenses on the accompanying consolidated statement of operations.

In December 2016, XY filed a complaint for patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and various state law claims against Trans Ova in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas in Waco, Texas. Since the claims in the 2016 complaint directly relate to the parties' other litigation, Trans Ova filed and was granted a motion to transfer the case to Colorado district court. That court subsequently dismissed nine of the complaint's twelve counts, including all five non-patent counts and four patent counts. The court subsequently dismissed a fifth patent count after ruling that the patent was invalid, leaving only two patent counts left in the case. In February 2019, a Wisconsin district court invalidated one of the two remaining patents, which XY had asserted against another competitor. That ruling prompted the Colorado district court to stay the two remaining patent counts and enter final judgment against XY's ten other dismissed counts. The 2016 litigation is administratively closed, pending XY's appeal to the Federal Circuit, wherein XY is appealing the district court's dismissal of four of its patent causes of action. XY is not appealing one of the five dismissed patent counts or any of the dismissed non-patent causes of action. The Federal Circuit hearing is scheduled for March 5, 2020. Separately, after initially appealing the Wisconsin court's invalidation of the sixth patent, XY subsequently withdrew its appeal.

Trans Ova shall continue to utilize the technology consistent with the determinations of the court proceedings. Nonetheless, these disputes remain subject to a number of uncertainties, including the outcome of appellate proceedings, the possibility of further claims by XY, and the impact of these matters on Trans Ova's ability to utilize the technology. Trans Ova and the Company could elect to enter into a settlement agreement in order to avoid the further costs and uncertainties of litigation.

In October 2018, the Company received a subpoena from the Division of Enforcement of the SEC informing the Company of a non-public, fact-finding investigation concerning the Company's disclosures regarding its methane bioconversion platform. The Company has produced documents to, and met with, the staff of the SEC and is voluntarily cooperating with their investigation. In November 2019, the staff of the SEC informed the Company that its investigative work was largely completed. The Company and the staff of the SEC are currently in discussions, and there can be no assurance regarding the ultimate outcome of the investigation.

The Company has previously entered into strategic collaborations, including ECCs and JVs, to fund and develop products enabled by its technologies. These relationships involve complex interests, and the Company's interests may diverge with those of its collaborators, which can occur as a result of operations under those collaborations, business or technological developments, or as the Company transitions away from, or terminates, strategic collaborations. The Company has had, and has, disagreements and disputes with certain collaborators and JV partners, including Harvest, the IEP Investors, and the IEPII Investors. While the Company believes it has the right to payment with respect to work performed for all of its collaborations and JVs, consistent with its policy for accounting for accounts receivable, the Company has fully reserved the amount of any disputed accounts receivable that remained outstanding as of December 31, 2019. These disagreements and disputes may result

in litigation, unfavorable settlements or concessions by the Company, adverse regulatory action, or management distraction, any of which could harm the Company's business or results of operations.

The Company may become subject to other claims, assessments and governmental investigations from time to time in the ordinary course of business. Such matters are subject to many uncertainties and outcomes are not predictable with assurance. The Company accrues liabilities for such matters when it is probable that future expenditures will be made and such expenditures can be reasonably estimated. As of December 31, 2019, the Company does not believe that any such matters, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.