Autodesk 2009 Annual Report Download - page 102

expiration dates ranging from December 2009 to November 2012. We and our foreign subsidiaries lease
additional space in various locations throughout the world for local sales, product development and technical
support personnel.
In January 2009 we announced a restructuring plan to reduce annual operating expenses. As part of that
plan, we expect to consolidate or abandon approximately 180,000 square feet of leased office space in up to 27
locations that have been included in the totals disclosed above.
All facilities are in good condition and are operating at capacities averaging 71% occupancy worldwide as
of January 31, 2009. We believe that our existing facilities and offices are adequate to meet our requirements for
the foreseeable future. See Note 6, “Commitments and Contingencies,” in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements for more information about our lease commitments.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007, three stockholder derivative lawsuits were filed against Autodesk
and certain of the Company’s current and former directors and officers relating to its historical stock option
practices and related accounting: on November 20, 2006, the Company and certain of its current and former
members of the Board were sued in U.S. Federal District Court for the Northern District of California in a
stockholder derivative action, entitled “Giles v. Bartz, et al.,” Case No. C06-8175 (the “Giles Case”). On
December 29, 2006, the Company, certain of its current and former members of the Board, and certain current
and past executive officers were sued in United States Federal District Court for the Northern District of
California in a stockholder derivative action, entitled “Campion v. Sutton, et al.,” Case No. C06-07967. The
Campion lawsuit was consolidated into the Giles Case and later voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff on
January 31, 2007. On January 9, 2007, the Company, certain of its current and former members of the Board, and
certain current and former executive officers were sued in the Superior Court for the State of California, County
of Marin in a stockholder derivative action, entitled “Koerner v. Bartz, et al.,” Case No. CV-070112 (the
“Koerner Case”). The plaintiff in the Giles Case filed an amended complaint on December 3, 2007, and the
plaintiff in the Koerner Case filed an amended complaint on December 7, 2007. The Koerner Case has been
stayed pending the outcome of the Giles Case. On February 10, 2009, the court in the Giles Case entered
judgment against the plaintiff and dismissed the case. The plaintiff in the Giles Case did not appeal the judgment.
These actions are in the preliminary stages of the litigation and Autodesk cannot determine the final financial
impact of these matters based on the facts known at this time. However, it is possible that an unfavorable
resolution of the matters could occur and materially affect its future results of operations, cash flows or financial
position in a particular period.
In connection with our anti-piracy program, designed to enforce copyright protection of its software and
conducted both internally and through the Business Software Alliance (“BSA”), from time to time we undertakes
litigation against alleged copyright infringers or provides information to criminal justice authorities to conduct
actions against alleged copyright infringers. Such lawsuits have led to counter claims alleging improper use of
litigation or violation of other local law.
In addition, we are involved in legal proceedings from time to time arising from the normal course of
business activities including claims of alleged infringement of intellectual property rights, commercial,
employment, piracy prosecution and other matters. In our opinion, resolution of pending matters is not expected
to have a material adverse impact on its consolidated results of operations, cash flows or its financial position.
However, it is possible that an unfavorable resolution of one or more such proceedings could in the future
materially affect its future results of operations, cash flows or financial position in a particular period.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the quarter ended January 31, 2009.
24