Motorola 2010 Annual Report Download - page 34

26
Item 1B: Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
Item 2: Properties
Motorola Solutions’ principal executive offices are located at 1303 East Algonquin Road, Schaumburg, Illinois
60196. Motorola Solutions also operates manufacturing facilities and sales offices in other U.S. locations and in
many other countries. (See “Item 1: Business” for information regarding the location of the major facilities for each
of the Company’s business segments.)
As of December 31, 2010, the Company owned 22 facilities (manufacturing, sales, service and office), 12 of
which were located in the Americas Region (USA, Canada, Mexico, Central and South America) and 10 of which
were located in other countries. As of December 31, 2010, the Company leased 290 facilities, 132 of which were
located in the Americas Region and 158 of which were located in other countries. As of December 31, 2010, the
Company primarily utilized 9 major facilities for the manufacturing and distribution of its products, and these
facilities were located in: Hangzhou and Tianjin, China; Taipei, Taiwan; Chennai, India; Penang, Malaysia;
Schaumburg, Illinois; Jaguariuna, Brazil; Reynosa, Mexico; and Berlin, Germany.
Following the Separation of Motorola Mobility, as of January 4, 2011, we utilize 14 owned facilities
(manufacturing, sales, service and office), 7 of which are located in the Americas Region (USA, Canada, Mexico,
Central and South America) and 7 of which are located in other countries. The Company leases 237 facilities, 107
of which are located in the Americas region and 130 of which are located in other countries. The Company
primarily utilizes 3 major facilities for the manufacturing and distribution of its products, and these facilities are
located in: Penang, Malaysia; Reynosa, Mexico and Texas.
Motorola Solutions generally considers the productive capacity of the plants operated by each of its business
segments to be adequate and sufficient for the requirements of each business group. The extent of utilization of such
manufacturing facilities varies from plant to plant and from time to time during the year.
In 2010, a substantial portion of the Company’s products were manufactured in Asia, primarily China, either in
our own facilities or in the facilities of others who manufacture and assemble products for the Company. Following
the Separation of Motorola Mobility, as of January 4, 2011, the Company has a substantial portion of its products
manufactured in our own facilities in Mexico and Malaysia, as well as in facilities of others who manufacture and
assemble products for the Company. If manufacturing in either region was disrupted, the Company’s overall
productive capacity could be significantly reduced.
Item 3: Legal Proceedings
Howell v. Motorola, Inc., et al.
A class action, Howell v. Motorola, Inc., et al., was filed against Motorola and various of its directors, officers
and employees in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (“Illinois District Court”) on
July 21, 2003, alleging breach of fiduciary duty and violations of the Employment Retirement Income Security Act
(“ERISA”). The complaint alleged that the defendants had improperly permitted participants in the Motorola
401(k) Plan (the “Plan”) to purchase or hold shares of common stock of Motorola because the price of Motorola’s
stock was artificially inflated by a failure to disclose vendor financing to Telsim Mobil Telekomunikasyon
Hizmetleri A.S. (“Telsim”) in connection with the sale of telecommunications equipment by Motorola. Telsim had
subsequently defaulted on the payment of approximately $2 billion of such vendor financing, approximately half of
which the Company has recovered to date. The plaintiff sought to represent a class of participants in the Plan and
sought an unspecified amount of damages. On September 30, 2005, the Illinois District Court dismissed the second
amended complaint filed on October 15, 2004 (the “Howell Complaint”). Three new purported lead plaintiffs
subsequently intervened in the case, and filed a motion for class certification seeking to represent a class of Plan
participants. The class as certified includes all Plan participants for whose individual accounts the Plan purchased
and/or held shares of Motorola common stock from May 16, 2000 through May 14, 2001, with certain exclusions.
The court granted leave to defendants to appeal the class certification and granted leave to lead plaintiff Howell to
appeal an earlier dismissal of his individual claim. Each party filed those appeals. On June 17, 2009, the Illinois
District Court granted summary judgment in favor of all defendants on all counts. On June 25, 2009, the Seventh
Circuit Court of Appeals (the “Seventh Circuit”) dismissed as moot defendants’ class certification appeal and stayed