TeleNav 2015 Annual Report Download - page 41

Table of Contents
operations pursuant to a lease expiring in September 2017, and approximately 19,000 square feet in Cluj, Romania, for research and
development operations pursuant to leases that expire in December 2015 and July 2016. We lease approximately 12,000 square feet in Culver
City, California for research and development and sales and marketing operations. We also lease office space of less than 5,000 square feet each
in Northlake, Washington; Reston, Virginia; Southfield, Michigan; Boston, Massachusetts; Chicago, Illinois; New York, New York; Atlanta,
Georgia; San Francisco, California; Berlin, Germany and Tokyo, Japan for our sales, marketing and business development personnel located in
those areas. We believe our current facilities will be adequate or that additional space will be available on commercially reasonable terms for the
foreseeable future.
From time to time, we may be subject to legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business. We have received, and may in the
future continue to receive, claims from third parties asserting infringement of their intellectual property rights. Future litigation may be necessary
to defend ourselves and our customers by determining the scope, enforceability and validity of third party proprietary rights or to establish our
proprietary rights. From time to time we also may be subject to claims from our third party content providers that we owe them additional
royalties and interest, which claims may result in litigation if we and the third party content provider are unable to resolve the matter. There can
be no assurance with respect to the outcome of any current or future litigation brought against us or pursuant to which we have indemnification
obligations and the outcome could have a material adverse impact on our business, operating results and financial condition.
On December 31, 2009, Vehicle IP, LLC, or Vehicle IP, filed a patent infringement lawsuit against us in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Delaware, seeking monetary damages, fees and expenses and other relief. Verizon Wireless, or Verizon, was named as a co-
defendant
in the Vehicle IP litigation based on the VZ Navigator product and has demanded that we indemnify and defend Verizon against Vehicle IP. At
this time, we have not agreed to defend or indemnify Verizon. AT&T was also named as a co-defendant in the Vehicle IP litigation based on the
AT&T Navigator and Telenav Track products. AT&T has tendered the defense of the litigation to us and we are defending the case on behalf of
AT&T. After the district court issued its claim construction ruling the parties agreed to focus on early summary judgment motions, the
defendants filed motions for summary judgment of noninfringement. On April 10, 2013 the district court granted AT&T and our motion for
summary judgment of noninfringement. Plaintiff appealed the district court's claim construction and summary judgment rulings to the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On November 18, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the district court's claim
construction and overturned the district court's grant of summary judgment of noninfringement. The case has been sent back to the U.S. District
Court for the District of Delaware and trial is currently scheduled for February 2017. Due to the uncertainties related to litigation, we are unable
to evaluate the likelihood of either a favorable or unfavorable outcome. We believe that it is reasonably possible that we will incur a loss;
however, we cannot currently estimate a range of any possible losses we may experience in connection with this case. Accordingly, we are
unable at this time to estimate the effects of this lawsuit on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.
On April 30, 2010, Traffic Information, LLC, or Traffic Information, filed a patent infringement lawsuit against us in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Texas, seeking monetary damages, fees and expenses, and other relief. The patent at issue was subject to
reexamination by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or PTO and the reexamined claims were found invalid. Plaintiff appealed this finding
and on May 30, 2013, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, or PTAB, confirmed the invalidity of these claims. Plaintiff filed a request for
reconsideration of this decision with the PTAB, which was denied on January 13, 2014. Traffic Information filed an appeal with the U.S.
Appeals Court for the Federal Circuit, and on January 20, 2015, the court affirmed the PTO's finding of invalidity. On April 28, 2015, Traffic
Information filed a dismissal of all claims against us. On May 6, 2015, the District Court entered the dismissal.
On February 6, 2015, Location Services IP, LLC filed a complaint against AT&T, Inc. and Telenav, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Texas, alleging that the AT&T Navigator, Telenav GPS Plus, and Telenav Scout Mobile applications infringe four U.S.
patents. On April 16, 2015, Location Services IP LLC dismissed all claims against AT&T, Inc. and Telenav, Inc. and filed a new complaint
against AT&T Mobility, AT&T Services, Inc. and Telenav, Inc. in the same court, alleging that the AT&T Navigator, Telenav GPS Plus,
Telenav GPS Navigator, and Telenav Scout Mobile applications as well as AT&T Store Locator and the myAT&T Mobile Application infringe
the same four U.S. patents. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, fees and expenses and injunctive relief. AT&T has requested
that we defend and indemnify them in this matter as it relates to the AT&T Navigator product and we have agreed to do so. Due to the
preliminary status of the lawsuit and uncertainties related to litigation, we are unable to evaluate the likelihood of either a favorable or
unfavorable outcome. We believe that it is reasonably possible that we will incur a loss; however, we cannot currently estimate a range of any
possible losses we may experience in connection with this case. Accordingly, we are unable at this time to estimate the effects of this complaint
on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
30
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS