Qualcomm 2011 Annual Report Download - page 27

November 9, 2011. On October 18, 2011, the subsidiary submitted to the DoT a letter accepting the DoT
’s offer, requesting issuance of a license
as soon as possible after certain requirements are met, and stating that upon issuance of the license, our three other subsidiaries would merge into
the subsidiary that had been granted a license. On October 19, 2011, the DoT filed a reply to our September 27, 2011 petition with the TDSAT.
In its reply, the DoT stated that upon issuance of a license, our subsidiary could apply for assignment of the spectrum, and at that time, the DoT
would decide whether to grant the requested assignment and whether our applications for licenses were timely filed in accordance with its rules.
On October 20, 2011, the TDSAT conducted a second hearing on our case. At the conclusion of the hearing, the TDSAT ordered the DoT to
clarify the aforementioned statements in its October 19, 2011 reply in light of its October 10, 2011 offer. The TDSAT scheduled another hearing
for November 8, 2011. If we do not ultimately prevail, our subsidiary may not receive a license or an assignment of the spectrum that we won in
the auction; and in either of those events, our payment for the spectrum may not be returned.
Also in connection with the BWA spectrum acquisition, each of the subsidiaries entered into loan agreements with multiple banks that define
certain events as events of default, including, among other things, if certain government authorizations are revoked, terminated, withdrawn,
suspended, modified or withheld. If the DoT’s rejection of our license applications were to be considered an event of default, the bank lenders
could declare the loans due and payable immediately. We have received waivers from each of the bank lenders related to this matter until at least
April 1, 2012, conditioned upon our continuing to pursue our legal rights in this matter, and agreeing that any default will be deemed cured under
certain circumstances, including if one of the relevant subsidiaries is granted the license and the other three are pursuing a merger into the
subsidiary that has been offered a license.
Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance, public disclosure and health care may create uncertainty
regarding compliance matters. New or changed laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations in many cases, and their
application in practice may evolve over time. As a result, our efforts to comply may fail, particularly if there is ambiguity as to how they should
be applied in practice. Evolving interpretations of new or changed legal requirements may cause us to incur higher costs as we revise current
practices, policies and/or procedures and may divert management time and attention to compliance activities.
We may not be able to attract and retain qualified employees.
Our future success depends largely upon the continued service of our board members, executive officers and other key management and
technical personnel. Our success also depends on our ability to continue to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel. In addition,
implementing our product and business strategy requires specialized engineering and other talent, and our revenues are highly dependent on
technological and product innovations. The market for such specialized engineering and other talented employees in our industry is extremely
competitive. In addition, existing immigration laws make it more difficult for us to recruit and retain highly skilled foreign national graduates of
universities in the United States, making the pool of available talent even smaller. Key employees represent a significant asset, and the
competition for these employees is intense in our industry. We continue to anticipate increases in human resource needs, particularly in
engineering. If we are unable to attract and retain the qualified employees that we need, our business may be harmed.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
22