COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2020
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	12. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES The Company had purchase commitments aggregating approximately $62.2 million at September 30, 2020, which represented commitments made by the Company and its subsidiaries to various suppliers of raw materials for the production of its products. These obligations vary in terms, but are generally satisfied within one year. The Company had contractual obligations aggregating approximately $142.2 million at September 30, 2020, which related primarily to sponsorships and other marketing activities. In February 2018, the working capital line limit for the Company’s credit facility with HSBC Bank (China) Company Limited, Shanghai Branch, was increased from $9.0 million to $15.0 million. At September 30, 2020, the interest rate on borrowings under the line of credit was 5.5%. As of September 30, 2020, the Company had no amounts outstanding on this line of credit. Litigation — From time to time in the normal course of business, the Company is named in litigation, including labor and employment matters, personal injury matters, consumer class actions, intellectual property matters and claims from prior distributors. Although it is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome of such litigation, based on the facts known to the Company, management believes that such litigation in aggregate will likely not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. On September 18, 2020, a derivative complaint was filed on purported behalf of the Company in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The action is styled Falat v. Sacks, et al., 8:20-cv-01782, and asserts claims against certain officers, directors, and employees of the Company, including Rodney C. Sacks, Hilton H. Schlosberg, Guy P. Carling, Thomas J. Kelly, Emelie C. Tirre, Mark J. Hall, Kathleen E. Ciaramello, Gary P. Fayard, Jeanne P. Jackson, Steven G. Pizula, Benjamin M. Polk, Sydney Selati and Mark S. Vidergauz (collectively, the "Individual Defendants"). The Company is named as a nominal defendant. The derivative complaint alleges, among other things, that the Individual Defendants breached their fiduciary duties to the Company by allowing others to cause, or themselves causing, the Company to hide discrimination and failing to ensure sufficient diversity, including by permitting conduct to occur that was inconsistent with statements made in the Company's policies and disclosures, and failing to ensure the Company's compliance with laws regarding diversity and anti-discrimination. The complaint also asserts claims for abuse of control, unjust enrichment and violation of Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). The complaint seeks from the Individual Defendants an unspecified amount of damages, restitution, punitive damages and costs to be paid to the Company, and seeks to require the Company to adopt corporate governance reforms, and other equitable relief. The Company believes that the action should be dismissed because the plaintiff failed to make a demand on the Company as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1 or to show that demand would have been futile. The Company also understands that the Individual Defendants intend to file a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim, among other reasons. While the Company continues to evaluate these claims, management believes that such litigation will likely not have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial position or results of operations. The Company evaluates, on a quarterly basis, developments in legal proceedings and other matters that could cause an increase or decrease in the amount of the liability that is accrued, if any, or in the amount of any related insurance reimbursements recorded. As of September 30, 2020, the Company’s condensed consolidated balance sheet included accrued loss contingencies of approximately $16.6 million.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2020

12. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

The Company had purchase commitments aggregating approximately $62.2 million at September 30, 2020, which represented commitments made by the Company and its subsidiaries to various suppliers of raw materials for the production of its products. These obligations vary in terms, but are generally satisfied within one year.

The Company had contractual obligations aggregating approximately $142.2 million at September 30, 2020, which related primarily to sponsorships and other marketing activities.

In February 2018, the working capital line limit for the Company’s credit facility with HSBC Bank (China) Company Limited, Shanghai Branch, was increased from $9.0 million to $15.0 million. At September 30, 2020, the interest rate on borrowings under the line of credit was 5.5%. As of September 30, 2020, the Company had no amounts outstanding on this line of credit.

Litigation — From time to time in the normal course of business, the Company is named in litigation, including labor and employment matters, personal injury matters, consumer class actions, intellectual property matters and claims from prior distributors. Although it is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome of such litigation, based on the facts known to the Company, management believes that such litigation in aggregate will likely not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

On September 18, 2020, a derivative complaint was filed on purported behalf of the Company in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The action is styled Falat v. Sacks, et al., 8:20-cv-01782, and asserts claims against certain officers, directors, and employees of the Company, including Rodney C. Sacks, Hilton H. Schlosberg, Guy P. Carling, Thomas J. Kelly, Emelie C. Tirre, Mark J. Hall, Kathleen E. Ciaramello, Gary P. Fayard, Jeanne P. Jackson, Steven G. Pizula, Benjamin M. Polk, Sydney Selati and Mark S. Vidergauz (collectively, the "Individual Defendants"). The Company is named as a nominal defendant.

The derivative complaint alleges, among other things, that the Individual Defendants breached their fiduciary duties to the Company by allowing others to cause, or themselves causing, the Company to hide discrimination and failing to ensure sufficient diversity, including by permitting conduct to occur that was inconsistent with statements made in the Company's policies and disclosures, and failing to ensure the Company's compliance with laws regarding diversity and anti-discrimination. The complaint also asserts claims for abuse of control, unjust enrichment and violation of Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). The complaint seeks from the Individual Defendants an unspecified amount of damages, restitution, punitive damages and costs to be paid to the Company, and seeks to require the Company to adopt corporate governance reforms, and other equitable relief.

The Company believes that the action should be dismissed because the plaintiff failed to make a demand on the Company as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1 or to show that demand would have been futile. The Company also understands that the Individual Defendants intend to file a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim, among other reasons. While the Company continues to evaluate these claims, management believes that such litigation will likely not have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial position or results of operations.

The Company evaluates, on a quarterly basis, developments in legal proceedings and other matters that could cause an increase or decrease in the amount of the liability that is accrued, if any, or in the amount of any related insurance reimbursements recorded. As of September 30, 2020, the Company’s condensed consolidated balance sheet included accrued loss contingencies of approximately $16.6 million.