Plantronics 2015 Annual Report Download - page 34

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 34 of the 2015 Plantronics annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 96

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
On October 12, 2012, GN Netcom, Inc. sued Plantronics, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, case number
1:12cv01318, alleging violations of the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, and Delaware common law. In its complaint, GN specifically
alleges four causes of action: Monopolization, Attempted Monopolization, Concerted Action in Restraint of Trade, and Tortious
Interference with Business Relations. GN claims that Plantronics dominates the market for headsets sold into contact centers in
the United States and that a critical channel for sales of headsets to contact centers is through a limited network of specialized
independent distributors (“SIDs”). GN asserts that Plantronics attracts SIDs through Plantronics Only Distributor Agreements
and the use of these agreements is allegedly illegal. Plantronics denies each of the allegations in the complaint and is vigorously
defending itself.
In addition, we are presently engaged in various legal actions arising in the normal course of business. We believe it is unlikely
that any of these actions will have a material adverse impact on our operating results; however, because of the inherent uncertainties
of litigation, the outcome of any of these actions could be unfavorable and could have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition, results of operations, or cash flows.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not applicable.
22