. Commitments and Contingencies

(a) Lease Commitments

As discussed in Note 3, the Company accounts for the leases of its corporate headquarters facilities as lease financing obligations. As of December 31, 2014, the future minimum lease payments for these lease financing obligations were as follows (in thousands):



2015	$	3,411
2016		3,486
2017		3,604
2018		3,735
2019		4,196
2020		651
Total payments	$	19,083
Amount representing interest		(2,962	)
Present value of future minimum lease payments	$	16,121
Lease financing obligations classified as current	$	2,459
Lease financing obligations classified as long-term	$	13,662

The Company also leases facilities under operating leases for its sales, marketing, and product development personnel located elsewhere within the United States and in several foreign countries throughout Europe and Asia, including a land lease for accounting purposes associated with the Company's corporate headquarters facilities. These operating leases expire on various dates through 2020, and in some instances are cancelable with advance notice. Lastly, the Company also leases certain equipment and, for some of its sales personnel, automobiles. These operating leases are generally less than five years in duration.

As of December 31, 2014, future minimum lease payments under all operating leases, including $4.1 million related to the land lease associated with the Company's corporate headquarters facilities (see Note 3), were as follows (in thousands):



2015	$	1,148
2016		911
2017		899
2018		817
2019		776
2020		194
Total payments	$	4,745

Although certain of the operating lease agreements provide for escalating rent payments over the term of the lease, rent expense under these agreements is recognized on a straight-line basis. As of December 31, 2014, the Company has accrued approximately $180,000 of deferred rent related to these agreements, of which approximately $32,000 is reflected in current liabilities while the remainder is reflected in other long-term liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet. As of December 31, 2013, the Company has accrued approximately $215,000 of deferred rent related to these agreements, of which approximately $35,000 is reflected in current liabilities while the remainder is reflected in other long-term liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.

As discussed in Note 5 - Discontinued Operations, in conjunction with the sale of its Grid division, the Company entered into a sublease with S&T for a portion of its corporate headquarters facility. As of December 31, 2014, the minimum sublease rental payments S&T is required to make during the remaining 36 month term of the sublease total approximately $1.9 million.

The components of net rent expense for all operating leases for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013, and 2012, were as follows (in thousands):



	Year ended 31 December
	2014			2013			2012
Rent expense	$	1,483		$	1,527		$	1,682
Sublease rentals	(202		)	—			—
Rent expense included in discontinued operations	(160		)	(145		)	—
Rent expense, net	$	1,121		$	1,382		$	1,682

(b) Royalties

The Company has certain royalty commitments associated with the shipment and licensing of certain of its products. Royalty expense is generally based on a dollar amount per unit shipped or a percentage of the underlying revenue. Royalty expense, which is recorded as a component of cost of revenues in the Company's Consolidated Statements of Operations, was approximately $500,000, $418,000, and $508,000 for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013, and 2012, respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2014, and 2013, royalty expense reported in discontinued operations was approximately $1,000 and $52,000, respectively

The Company will continue to be obligated for royalty payments in the future associated with the shipment and licensing of certain of its products. The Company is currently unable to estimate the maximum amount of these future royalties. However, such amounts will continue to be dependent on the number of units shipped or the amount of revenue generated from these products.

In the normal course of business, the Company provides indemnifications of varying scope to its customers against claims of intellectual property infringement made by third parties arising from the use of its products. Historically, costs related to these indemnification provisions have not been significant. However, the Company is unable to estimate the maximum potential impact of these indemnification provisions on its future results of operations.

As permitted under Delaware law, the Company has entered into agreements whereby it indemnifies its officers and directors for certain events or occurrences while the officer or director is, or was serving, at the Company's request in such capacity. The indemnification period covers all pertinent events and occurrences during the officer's or director's lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited. However, the Company has directors and officers insurance coverage that would enable it to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. The Company believes the estimated fair value of these indemnification agreements in excess of the applicable insurance coverage is minimal, if any.

(d) Taxes

The Company conducts operations in many tax jurisdictions throughout the world. In many of these jurisdictions, non-income based taxes such as property taxes, sales and use taxes, and value-added taxes are assessed on the Company's operations in that particular location. While the Company strives to ensure compliance with these various non-income based tax filing requirements, there have been instances where potential non-compliance exposures have been identified. In accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the Company makes a provision for these exposures when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the exposure can be reasonably estimated. To date, such provisions have been immaterial, and the Company believes that, as of December 31, 2014, it has adequately provided for such contingencies. However, it is possible that the Company's results of operations, cash flows, and financial position could be harmed if one or more non-compliance tax exposures are asserted by any of the jurisdictions where the Company conducts its operations.

(e) Legal Actions

In April 2009, the Company received notice that the receiver for two companies that filed for the Italian law equivalent of bankruptcy protection in May 2004, Finmek Manufacturing SpA and Finmek Access SpA (collectively, the “Finmek Companies”), had filed a lawsuit under an Italian “claw back” law in Padua, Italy against the Company, seeking the return of approximately $16.7 million in payments received by the Company in the ordinary course of business for components sold by the Company to the Finmek Companies prior to the bankruptcy filing. The Finmek Companies were among Enel’s third party meters manufacturers, and from time to time through January 2004, the Company sold components to the Finmek Companies that were incorporated into the electricity meters that were manufactured by the Finmek Companies and sold to Enel SpA for the Enel Project. The Company believed that the Italian claw back law was not applicable to its transactions with the Finmek Companies, and the claims of the Finmek Companies’ receiver were without merit. However, it was subsequently brought to the Company's attention that a substantial percentage of claw back cases reviewed by the local courts, which are located in the jurisdiction in which the Finmek Companies were headquartered, were being decided in favor of the Finmek Companies. To avoid any possibility of an adverse ruling against the Company, as well as to limit administrative inconvenience and curtail litigation costs, in April 2013, with the consent of its Board of Directors, the Company decided to settle this matter. The Company reached an agreement with respect to a tentative financial settlement of $3.5 million and recognized a charge for this amount in the first quarter of 2013. This settlement was formalized and became effective in the fourth quarter of 2013. It was paid in two substantially equal installments, one in the fourth quarter of 2013 and the second in the fourth quarter of 2014. The Company did not admit that the Italian claw back law applied to its circumstances as part of this settlement.

From time to time, in the ordinary course of business, the Company may be subject to other legal proceedings, claims, investigations, and other proceedings, including claims of alleged infringement of third-party patents and other intellectual property rights, and commercial, employment, and other matters. In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, the Company makes a provision for a liability when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. These provisions are reviewed at least quarterly and adjusted to reflect the impacts of negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel, and other information and events pertaining to a particular case. While the Company believes it has adequately provided for such contingencies as of December 31, 2014, the amounts of which were immaterial, it is possible that the Company’s results of operations, cash flows, and financial position could be harmed by the resolution of any such outstanding claims.

Line of Credit

Until December 2014, the Company maintained a $5.0 million line of credit with its primary bank. The line of credit was secured by a collateral of the first priority on $6.3 million of the Company's investments placed in a separate account. In December 2014, the Company cancelled this line of credit. It continues to maintain an operating credit line of $1.0 million with its primary bank for company credit card purchases, as well as 1 standby letter of credit for $113,000. These lines of credit continue to be secured by a collateral of the first priority on $1.4 million of the Company's investments (presented as restricted investments in the Consolidated Balance Sheets). The restricted investments are classified as current assets due to the contractual duration of the undelying credit agreement. No amounts ever been drawn against the standby letters of credit issued by the bank.