COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES


a.	Purchase commitments:

The Company has contractual obligations to purchase goods from its contract manufacturer, Sanmina Corporation. Purchase obligations do not include contracts that may be canceled without penalty. As of June 30, 2017, non-cancelable outstanding obligations amounted to approximately $1.2 million.


b.	Royalties:

The Company’s research and development efforts are financed, in part, through funding from the Israel Innovation Authority, or the IIA (formerly known as the Israeli Office of the Chief Scientist in the Israel Ministry of Economy). During the six months ended June 30, 2017 the Company received $606 thousand from the IIA to fund its research and development efforts. Since the Company’s inception through June 30, 2017, the Company received funding from the IIA in the total amount of $1.3 million. Out of the $1.3 million in funding from the IIA, a total amount of $946 thousand were royalty bearing grants (as of June 30, 2017, the Company paid royalties to the IIA in the total amount of $50 thousand), while a total amount of $400 thousand was received in consideration of 5,237 convertible preferred A shares, which converted after our initial public offering in September 2014 into ordinary shares in a conversion ratio of 1 to 1. The Company is obligated to pay royalties to the IIA, amounting to 3%-3.5% of the sales of the products and other related revenues generated from such projects, up to 100% of the grants received. As of June 30, 2017, the contingent liability to the IIA amounted to $896 thousand.


c.	Liens:

As discussed in Note 6 to our audited consolidated financial statements included in the Company's annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, filed with the SEC on February 17, 2017, as amended on Form 10-K/A filed with the SEC on April 27, 2017 (the “2016 Form 10-K”), the Company is party to the Loan Agreement with Kreos pursuant to which Kreos extended a $20.0 million line of credit to the Company. In connection with the Loan Agreement, the Company granted Kreos a first priority security interest over all of its assets, including intellectual property and equity interests in its subsidiaries, subject to certain permitted security interests.

The Company's other long-term assets, which were in the amount of $855 thousand as of June 30, 2017, have been pledged as security in respect of a guarantee granted to a third party. Such deposit cannot be pledged to others or withdrawn without the consent of such third party.


d.	Legal Claims:

Occasionally the Company is involved in various claims, lawsuits, regulatory examinations, investigations and other legal matters arising, for the most part, in the ordinary course of business. The outcome of litigation and other legal matters is inherently uncertain. In making a determination regarding accruals, using available information, the Company evaluates the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome in legal or regulatory proceedings to which the Company is a party and records a loss contingency when it is probable a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Where the Company determines an unfavorable outcome is not probable or reasonably estimable, the Company does not accrue for any potential litigation loss. These subjective determinations are based on the status of such legal or regulatory proceedings, the merits of our defenses, and consultation with legal counsel. Actual outcomes of these legal and regulatory proceedings may materially differ from the Company’s current estimates. It is possible that resolution of one or more of the legal matters currently pending or threatened could result in losses material to the Company’s consolidated results of operations, liquidity or financial condition.

As set forth below, between September 2016 and January 2017, eight substantially similar putative securities class actions were filed against the Company. Four of these actions have been dismissed on procedural grounds, one was voluntarily dismissed and three are pending, including two actions which have been consolidated and one action brought by the plaintiffs whose actions were dismissed.


•	Dismissed Actions:

◦

On September 20, November 3, November 9, and November 10, 2016, respectively, four putative class actions on behalf of alleged shareholders that purchased or acquired the Company's ordinary shares pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement used in connection with the Company's IPO were commenced in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Mateo. The actions were filed against the Company, certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers, and the underwriters of the Company's IPO. We refer to these actions as the “California State Court Actions.” The complaints in the California State Court Actions asserted various claims under the Securities Act. Each of the California State Court Actions was dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction in January 2017.

◦

On January 24, 2017, a substantially similar class action was commenced in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case No. 4:17-cv-362) against the same defendants as in the California State Court Actions plus certain additional defendants. This action is referred to as the “California Federal Court Action.” On March 23, 2017, this case was voluntarily dismissed.


•	Pending Actions:

◦

On or about October 31, 2016, a class action with claims substantially similar to the California State Court Actions was commenced in the Massachusetts Superior Court, Suffolk County, by a different plaintiff (Civ. Action No. 16-3336), alleging claims under Section 11 of the Securities Act against the Company, certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers, and the underwriters of the Company's IPO, and alleging claims under Section 15 of the Securities Act against the Company and certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers.

◦

On or about November 30, 2016, a substantially similar class action was commenced in the Massachusetts Superior Court, Suffolk County, by a different plaintiff (Civ. Action No. 16-3670) alleging claims under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act against the same defendants as in the action commenced on October 31, 2016, and also alleging claims under Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act against the Company, certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers, and the underwriters of the Company's IPO. This action was ordered consolidated in the Massachusetts Superior Court, Suffolk County on January 9, 2017 with the action commenced on October 31, 2016, and the two actions are referred to as the “Consolidated Massachusetts State Court Actions”.

◦

On or about January 31, 2017, a substantially similar class action was commenced in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (Case No. 1:17-cv-10169) by four of the same plaintiffs who commenced the California State Court Actions, and two additional plaintiffs, alleging claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act against the Company, certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers, and the underwriters of the Company's IPO, and alleging claims under Section 15 of the Securities Act against certain of the Company's current and former directors and officers. This action is referred to as the “Massachusetts Federal Court Action.”

The plaintiffs in the Consolidated Massachusetts State Court Actions filed a consolidated amended complaint on March 20, 2017. The Company moved to dismiss the Consolidated Massachusetts State Court Actions on June 2, 2017.

The complaints in all of the actions listed above allege that the Company's registration statement used in connection with its IPO failed to disclose that the Company was unprepared or unable to comply with certain regulatory special controls and to provide the FDA with a postmarket surveillance study on the Company's ReWalk Personal device, and that, as a result of such alleged omission, the plaintiffs suffered damages. The Company believes that the allegations made in the complaints are without merit and intends to defend itself vigorously against the complaints relating to the three pending actions.

Based on information currently available and the early stage of the litigation, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate a possible loss or range of possible losses, if any, with regard to these lawsuits; therefore, no litigation reserve has been recorded in the Company's consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2017. The Company will continue to evaluate information as it becomes known and will record an estimate for losses at the time or times when it is probable that a loss will be incurred and the amount of the loss is reasonably estimable.