XML 31 R17.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.10.0.1
Commitments and Contingent Liabilities
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingent Liabilities

NOTE 9 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES

 

a. Lease commitments:

 

  1) The Subsidiary has a lease agreement for a facility in Israel, which expires on December 31, 2020 with an option to extend the agreement for two additional years until December 31, 2022 under the terms stipulated in the agreement.

 

Rent expense included in the consolidated statements of operations totaled approximately $330,000 and $379,000 for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.

 

As of December 31, 2018, the aggregate future minimum lease obligations for office rent under non-cancelable operating lease agreements are as follows:

 

    ($ in thousands)  
Year Ended December 31:        
2019   $ 300  
2020     300  
    $ 600  

 

  2) The Company leases its motor vehicles under operating lease agreements. As of December 31, 2018, the aggregate non-cancelable future minimum lease obligations for motor vehicles were approximately $7,000.

 

  b. Litigation:

 

The Company received written communication from a distributor to provide unspecified compensation for pre-paid goods subject to the voluntary field action (from April 2014). After considering the views of its legal counsel as well as other factors, the Company’s management believes that there is a reasonably possible likelihood of a loss from any related future proceedings would range from a minimal amount up to 1,075,000 Euros.

 

On April 26, 2016 the Company received a suit seeking damages from the Company amounting to $2.2 million in cash and unspecified compensation in equity in connection with certain finders’ fees. By Order dated February 23, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted our motion to dismiss the suit in its entirety. On January 23, 2018, the clerk entered judgment dismissing the complaint consistent with the District court’s order. The Claimants have not appealed the District Court’s judgement, and the time in which to do so has expired. Accordingly, this matter is now closed.

 

In July 2016, a service provider filed a suit seeking damages from the Company’s subsidiary amounting to $1,967,822. The Company’s management, after considering the views of its legal counsel as well as other factors, is of the opinion that a loss to the Company is neither probable nor in an amount or range of loss that is estimable.