AMD 2014 Annual Report Download - page 41

optional renewals. The lease for our principal administrative facilities in Austin, Texas expires in March 2025,
and provides for one 10-year optional renewal.
We also have approximately 360,000 square feet of building space that is currently vacant. We continue to
have lease obligations with respect to portions of this space that expire at various dates through 2022. We are
actively marketing portions of our vacant lease space for sublease.
We currently do not anticipate difficulty in either retaining occupancy of any of our facilities through lease
renewals prior to expiration or through month-to-month occupancy, or replacing them with equivalent facilities.
We believe that our existing facilities are suitable and adequate for our present purposes, and that, except as
discussed above, the productive capacity of such facilities is substantially being utilized or we have plans to
utilize it.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Securities Class Action
On January 15, 2014, a class action lawsuit captioned Hatamian v. AMD, et al., C.A. No. 3:14-cv-00226
was filed against us in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint
purports to assert claims against AMD and certain individual officers, collectively AMD, for alleged violations
of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), and Rule 10b-5 of the
Exchange Act. The plaintiffs seeks to represent a proposed class of all persons who purchased or otherwise
acquired our common stock during the period April 4, 2011 through October 18, 2012. The complaint seeks
damages allegedly caused by alleged materially misleading statements and/or material omissions by us and the
individual officers regarding our 32nm technology and “Llano” product, which statements and omissions, the
plaintiffs claim, allegedly operated to inflate artificially the price paid for our common stock during the
period. The complaint seeks unspecified compensatory damages, attorneys’ fees and costs. On July 7, 2014,
AMD filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims. Based upon information presently known to management, we
believe that the potential liability, if any, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, cash
flows or results of operations.
Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit
On March 20, 2014, a purported shareholder derivative lawsuit captioned Wessels v. Read, et al., Case No. 1:14-
cv-262486 was filed against AMD (as a nominal defendant only) and certain of our directors and officers in the
Santa Clara County Superior Court of the State of California. The complaint purports to assert claims against us
and certain individual directors and officers for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust
enrichment. The complaint seeks damages allegedly caused by alleged materially misleading statements and/or
material omissions by us and the individual directors and officers regarding our 32nm technology and “Llano”
product, which statements and omissions, the plaintiffs claim, allegedly operated to inflate artificially the price
paid for our common stock during the period. The shareholder derivative lawsuit is currently stayed pending a
decision on the motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit Hatamian v. AMD, et al. Based upon information
presently known to management, we believe that the potential liability, if any, will not have a material adverse
effect on our financial condition, cash flows or results of operations.
Environmental Matters
We are named as a responsible party on Superfund clean-up orders for three sites in Sunnyvale, California
that are on the National Priorities List. Since 1981, we have discovered hazardous material releases to the
groundwater from former underground tanks and proceeded to investigate and conduct remediation at these three
35