Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2020

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments and ContingenciesLease and Other Commitments

The Company entered into various non-cancelable operating lease agreements for its facilities with remaining lease terms from less than one year to slightly over nine years. See Note 5 to these condensed consolidated financial statements for additional detail on the Company's operating and finance lease commitments.

In the three months ended March 31, 2020, the Company entered into several non-cancelable vendor agreements with terms up to two years for a total purchase commitment of $16.8 million.

Legal Matters

On April 30, 2015 and March 28, 2016, Telesign Corporation (“Telesign”) filed lawsuits (which were subsequently consolidated) against the Company in the United States District Court, Central District of California (“Telesign I/II”). Telesign alleges in Telesign I/II that the Company is infringing four U.S. patents that it holds: U.S. Patent No. 7,945,034 (“034”), U.S. Patent No. 8,462,920 (“920”), U.S. Patent No. 8,687,038 (“038”) and U.S. Patent No. 9,300,792 (“792”). The consolidated Telesign I/II actions have been transferred to the United States District Court, Northern District. The patent infringement allegations in the lawsuit relate to the Company's two-factor authentication use case, Authy, and an API tool to find information about a phone number. Telesign seeks, among other things, to enjoin the Company from allegedly infringing the patents, along with damages for lost profits and damages based on a reasonable royalty.

On March 8, 2017, in response to a petition by the Company, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Officer (“PTO”) issued an order instituting an inter partes review for the ‘792 patent. On March 6, 2018, the PTO found all claims challenged by the Company in the inter partes review unpatentable. Telesign did not appeal the PTO's decision and it is final. On October 19, 2018, the district court granted the Company's motion that all remaining asserted claims of the asserted patents are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and entered judgment in the Company's favor. On November 8, 2018, Telesign appealed the judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On January 9, 2020, the Federal Circuit Court affirmed the district court’s judgment. Telesign has not indicated whether it will seek a further appeal of the judgment. Based on, among other things, the district court’s judgment being affirmed on appeal in the Company’s favor, the Company does not believe a loss is probable or estimable.

On December 1, 2016, the Company filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Telesign in the United States District Court, Northern District of California (“Telesign III”), alleging infringement of United States Patent No. 8,306,021 (“021”), United States Patent No. 8,837,465 (“465”), United States Patent No. 8,755,376 (“376”), United States Patent No. 8,736,051 (“051”), United States Patent No. 8,737,962 (“962”), United States Patent No. 9,270,833 (“833”), and United States Patent No. 9,226,217 (“217”). Telesign filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on January 25, 2017. In two orders, issued on

March 31, 2017 and April 17, 2017, the court granted Telesign’s motion to dismiss with respect to the ‘962, ‘833, ‘051 and ‘217 patents, but denied Telesign’s motion to dismiss as to the ‘021, ‘465 and ‘376 patents. On August 23, 2017, Telesign petitioned the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“U.S. PTO”) for inter partes review of the ‘021, ‘465, and ‘376 patents. On March 9, 2018, the PTO denied Telesign’s petition for inter partes review of the ‘021 patent and granted Telesign’s petitions for inter partes review of the ‘465 and ‘376 patents. On March 6, 2019, the PTO found all claims challenged by Telesign in the inter partes review unpatentable. The Company has appealed the decisions to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Telesign III is currently stayed pending resolution of the inter partes reviews (and appeals from them) of the ‘465 and ‘376 patents. The Company is seeking a judgment of infringement, a judgment of willful infringement, monetary and injunctive relief, enhanced damages, and an award of costs and expenses against Telesign.

In addition to the litigation discussed above, from time to time, the Company may be subject to legal actions and claims in the ordinary course of business. The Company has received, and may in the future continue to receive, claims from third parties asserting, among other things, infringement of their intellectual property rights. Future litigation may be necessary to defend the Company, its partners and its customers by determining the scope, enforceability and validity of third-party proprietary rights, or to establish our proprietary rights. The results of any current or future litigation cannot be predicted with certainty, and regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on the Company because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources, and other factors.

Legal fees and other costs related to litigation and other legal proceedings are expensed as incurred and are included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations.

Indemnification Agreements

The Company has signed indemnification agreements with all of its board members and executive officers. The agreements indemnify the board members and executive officers from claims and expenses on actions brought against the individuals separately or jointly with the Company for certain indemnifiable events. Indemnifiable events generally mean any event or occurrence related to the fact that the board member or the executive officer was or is acting in his or her capacity as a board member or an executive officer for the Company or was or is acting or representing the interests of the Company.

In the ordinary course of business and in connection with our financing and business combinations transactions, the Company enters into contractual arrangements under which it agrees to provide indemnification of varying scope and terms to business partners, customers and other parties with respect to certain matters, including, but not limited to, losses arising out of the breach of such agreements, intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties and other liabilities relating to or arising from the Company’s various products, or its acts or omissions. In these circumstances, payment may be conditional on the other party making a claim pursuant to the procedures specified in the particular contract. Further, the Company’s obligations under these agreements may be limited in terms of time and/or amount, and in some instances, the Company may have recourse against third parties for certain payments. The terms of such obligations may vary.

As of March 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, no amounts were accrued.

ther Taxes

The Company conducts operations in many tax jurisdictions throughout the United States. In many of these jurisdictions, non-income-based taxes, such as sales, use, and telecommunications taxes are assessed on the Company’s operations. Prior to March 2017, the Company had not billed nor collected these taxes from its customers and, in accordance with U.S. GAAP, recorded a provision for its tax exposure in these jurisdictions when it was both probable that a liability had been incurred and the amount of the exposure could be reasonably estimated. These estimates included several key assumptions including, but not limited to, the taxability of the Company’s services, the jurisdictions in which its management believes it had nexus, and the sourcing of revenues to those jurisdictions. Starting in March 2017, the Company began collecting these taxes from customers in various jurisdiction and since then has expanded to most jurisdictions where these taxes are now being collected. Simultaneously, the Company continues to be in discussions with certain jurisdictions regarding its prior sales and other taxes, if any, that the Company may owe.

As of March 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, the liability recorded for these taxes was $27.5 million and $27.0 million, respectively.

In the event other jurisdictions challenge management’s assumptions and analysis, the actual exposure could differ materially from the current estimates.