In March 2018, the Company entered into a lease for office space located in Mountain View, California. In June 2020, the Company extended the term of the lease to June 30, 2023. The Company is using the facility for office, manufacturing and research and development purposes. In connection with the lease, the Company recognized an operating lease right-of-use asset of $1.7 million as of March 31, 2021 and an aggregate lease liability of $1.7 million on its condensed consolidated balance sheet. The remaining lease term is two years and three months.

In January 2021, the Company entered into a lease for office and research and development located in Milpitas, California. The lease term commenced in March 2021 and ends in April 2026. In connection with the lease, the Company recognized an operating lease right-of-use asset of

$4.7 million as of March 31, 2021, and an aggregate lease liability of $4.6 million on its condensed consolidated balance sheet. The remaining lease term is six years and one month.

The weighted average incremental borrowing rate used to measure the operating lease liability is 5.25%. Operating lease cost for three months ended March 31, 2021, was $0.3 million and rent expense for the three months ended March 31, 2020, was $0.2 million.

The following is a maturity analysis of the annual undiscounted cash flows reconciled to the carrying value of the operating lease liabilities as of March 31, 2021 (in thousands):


	Operating Leases
Remainder of 2021	$	1,083
2022		1,775
2023		1,436
2024		1,097
2025		1,130
Thereafter		384
Total minimum lease payments		6,906
Less: imputed interest		(764	)
Total lease liability	$	6,142

From time to time, the Company is involved in actions, claims, suits and other proceedings in the ordinary course of business, including assertions by third parties relating to intellectual property infringement, breaches of contract or warranties or employment-related matters. When it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, the Company records a liability for such loss contingencies. The Company’s estimates regarding potential losses and materiality are based on the Company’s judgment and assessment of the claims utilizing currently available information. Although the Company will continue to reassess its reserves and estimates based on future developments, the Company’s objective assessment of the legal merits of such claims may not always be predictive of the outcome and actual results may vary from the Company’s current estimates.

On December 23, 2020, an alleged stockholder of IPV, filed a lawsuit against IPV, its directors, WLLY Merger Sub Corp. and Aeva, Inc. in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, captioned Quarles v. InterPrivate Acquisition Corp. The complaint alleged that InterPrivate’s directors caused materially misleading and incomplete information to be disseminated to IPV's public stockholders and that IPV, WLLY Merger Sub Corp. and the Company aided and abetted the directors’ breach of their fiduciary duties. The complaint sought, among other things, (1) injunctive relief enjoining IPV, its directors, WLLY Merger Sub Corp. and Aeva, Inc. and persons acting in concert with them from proceeding with, consummating or closing the Business Combination; (2) rescission of the consummation of the Business Combination if consummated or rescissory damages; (3) injunctive relief directing the defendants to disseminate a registration statement that does not omit material information or contain alleged untrue statements of material fact; (4) declaratory judgment that the individual defendants violated their fiduciary duties; (5) an award of plaintiff’s expenses and attorney’s fees; and (6) other equitable relief. This matter has been voluntarily dismissed against all parties.

On January 20, 2021, Michael Anello, an alleged stockholder of the Company, filed a lawsuit against the Company and its directors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, captioned Anello v. InterPrivate Acquisition Corp., et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-00505. The complaint alleged that the Company’s directors authorized the filing of a materially incomplete and misleading registration statement on Form S-4 with the SEC in violation of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and in breach of the directors’ duty of disclosure. The complaint alleged that the registration statement on Form S-4 contains materially incomplete and misleading information concerning, among other things, certain financial information and any conflicts of interest of the Company’s financial advisors. The complaint sought, among other things, (1) injunctive relief enjoining the Company, its directors and persons acting in concert with them from proceeding with the special meeting or consummating the Business Combination; (2) damages; (3) an award of plaintiff’s expenses and attorney’s and expert fees; and (4)other equitable relief. This matter has been voluntarily dismissed without prejudice against all parties.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company is not subject to potential obligations under guarantees that fall within the scope of FASB ASC Guarantees, (Topic 460), except for standard indemnification provisions that are contained within many of the Company’s customer agreements and give rise only to disclosure requirements prescribed by Topic 460. Indemnification provisions contained within the Company’s customer agreements are generally consistent with those prevalent in the Company’s industry. The Company has not incurred any obligations under customer indemnification provisions and does not expect to incur significant obligations in the future. Accordingly, the Company does not maintain accruals for potential customer indemnification obligations.