Legal Proceedings	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Legal Proceedings [Abstract]
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	NOTE 13 – LEGAL PROCEEDINGS On January 6, 2017, the Company commenced an action in the Supreme Court of New York, County of New York, against RENS Technology, Inc. (“the Purchaser”), RENS Agriculture, the parent company of the Purchaser, and Ren Ren, a principal in both entities and a director of the Company, arising from the Purchaser’s breach of a Securities Purchase Agreement under which the Purchaser agreed to invest an aggregate of $20.25 million in the Company in exchange for an aggregate of 3,537,037 shares of common stock of the Company and warrants to purchase an aggregate of 884,259 shares of common stock. In addition to seeking compensatory, consequential and other damages in the action, the Company asked the Court to preliminarily restrain the Purchaser and its agents and representatives, including, but not limited to, RENS Agriculture and Ren Ren, from selling, transferring, conveying, assigning, hypothecating or encumbering 1,500,000 shares of common stock of the Company and a warrant permitting the purchase of 375,000 share at a price of $7.00 per share that the Purchaser had purchased under the Securities Purchase Agreement and, after the parties had an opportunity to submit opposition and reply papers in connection with the Company’s application, a preliminary injunction prohibiting the Purchaser from selling, transferring, conveying, assigning, hypothecating or encumbering the 1,500,000 shares and warrant during the pendency of the action and an order attaching the stock and warrant to satisfy any judgment entered in favor of the Company. On January 11, 2017, the Court granted the Company the preliminary restraints that it requested, which prevents RENS Technology, among others, from selling, transferring, conveying, assigning, hypothecating or encumbering the 1,500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock or the aforementioned warrant. The Court scheduled a hearing on February 14, 2017, at which time the Court heard oral argument on the application for a preliminary injunction and prejudgment attachment of the stock and warrants to satisfy any judgment entered in favor of the Company. Since then, RENS Technology filed a motion to dismiss the complaint which the Company has opposed. On April 11, 2017, the Court denied our application for a prejudgment attachment of the Purchaser’s acquired shares and warrant and a preliminary injunction in aid of the attachment to prevent a sale, transfer, or hypothecation of such securities, and vacating the preliminary restraints which it had previously entered. However, the Court noted that we had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of the breach of contract claim. An application by the Purchaser to dismiss the complaint and various pre-trial discovery applications by both parties was scheduled for oral argument, but we thereafter amended the complaint in August 2017. The amended complaint repeated most of the initial claims but added a number of additional claims against RENS Agriculture, Mr. Ren and two additional Chinese defendants, including a claim against RENS Agriculture for breaching the exclusive distribution agreement, as well as claims against all defendants for theft and misappropriation of our confidential proprietary information and trade secrets, breach of fiduciary duty and duty of loyalty, misappropriation of corporate opportunity, unfair competition and a number of other torts. We are seeking damages and injunctive relief. The Purchaser has filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint, which is still pending. On August 16, 2017, the Purchaser commenced an action in the District Court of Clark County in the State of Nevada against us and Joseph Mannello, our then interim Chief Executive Officer, alleging that Mr. Mannello had breached his fiduciary duties and was grossly negligent in managing our company. The action seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief from Mr. Mannello as well as the appointment of a receiver over us. Subsequently, the Purchaser submitted a petition to appoint a receiver and we and Mr. Mannello submitted a motion to dismiss the action, both of which are currently pending and are due to be heard in December 2017.

NOTE 13 – LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

On January 6, 2017, the Company commenced an action in the Supreme Court of New York, County of New York, against RENS Technology, Inc. (“the Purchaser”), RENS Agriculture, the parent company of the Purchaser, and Ren Ren, a principal in both entities and a director of the Company, arising from the Purchaser’s breach of a Securities Purchase Agreement under which the Purchaser agreed to invest an aggregate of $20.25 million in the Company in exchange for an aggregate of 3,537,037 shares of common stock of the Company and warrants to purchase an aggregate of 884,259 shares of common stock. In addition to seeking compensatory, consequential and other damages in the action, the Company asked the Court to preliminarily restrain the Purchaser and its agents and representatives, including, but not limited to, RENS Agriculture and Ren Ren, from selling, transferring, conveying, assigning, hypothecating or encumbering 1,500,000 shares of common stock of the Company and a warrant permitting the purchase of 375,000 share at a price of $7.00 per share that the Purchaser had purchased under the Securities Purchase Agreement and, after the parties had an opportunity to submit opposition and reply papers in connection with the Company’s application, a preliminary injunction prohibiting the Purchaser from selling, transferring, conveying, assigning, hypothecating or encumbering the 1,500,000 shares and warrant during the pendency of the action and an order attaching the stock and warrant to satisfy any judgment entered in favor of the Company.

On January 11, 2017, the Court granted the Company the preliminary restraints that it requested, which prevents RENS Technology, among others, from selling, transferring, conveying, assigning, hypothecating or encumbering the 1,500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock or the aforementioned warrant. The Court scheduled a hearing on February 14, 2017, at which time the Court heard oral argument on the application for a preliminary injunction and prejudgment attachment of the stock and warrants to satisfy any judgment entered in favor of the Company. Since then, RENS Technology filed a motion to dismiss the complaint which the Company has opposed.

On April 11, 2017, the Court denied our application for a prejudgment attachment of the Purchaser’s acquired shares and warrant and a preliminary injunction in aid of the attachment to prevent a sale, transfer, or hypothecation of such securities, and vacating the preliminary restraints which it had previously entered. However, the Court noted that we had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of the breach of contract claim. An application by the Purchaser to dismiss the complaint and various pre-trial discovery applications by both parties was scheduled for oral argument, but we thereafter amended the complaint in August 2017. The amended complaint repeated most of the initial claims but added a number of additional claims against RENS Agriculture, Mr. Ren and two additional Chinese defendants, including a claim against RENS Agriculture for breaching the exclusive distribution agreement, as well as claims against all defendants for theft and misappropriation of our confidential proprietary information and trade secrets, breach of fiduciary duty and duty of loyalty, misappropriation of corporate opportunity, unfair competition and a number of other torts. We are seeking damages and injunctive relief. The Purchaser has filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint, which is still pending.

On August 16, 2017, the Purchaser commenced an action in the District Court of Clark County in the State of Nevada against us and Joseph Mannello, our then interim Chief Executive Officer, alleging that Mr. Mannello had breached his fiduciary duties and was grossly negligent in managing our company. The action seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief from Mr. Mannello as well as the appointment of a receiver over us. Subsequently, the Purchaser submitted a petition to appoint a receiver and we and Mr. Mannello submitted a motion to dismiss the action, both of which are currently pending and are due to be heard in December 2017.