COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | Note 10 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Operating Leases The Company does not own any real property. The Company leases approximately 300 square feet of office space in Atlanta, Georgia, pursuant to a short-term lease as of January 2021. The Company currently pays base rent in the amount of $636 per month. Legal Proceedings Intel Matter As previously disclosed, the USPTO had declared an Interference between the Company’s Support Vector Machine – Recursive Feature Elimination (“SVM-RFE”) patent application and Intel Corporation’s (“Intel”) Patent No. 7,685,077, entitled “Recursive Feature Eliminating Method based on a Support Vector Machine”. On February 27, 2019, the USPTO ruled in favor of the Company on the SVM-RFE patent application. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the USPTO issued its decision, finding that HDC is entitled to claim exclusive ownership rights to the SVM-RFE technology as set forth in the SVM-RFE patent application that was filed to provoke the Interference. The decision ordered Intel Corporation’s Patent No. 7,685,077 to be cancelled. In September 2019, the USPTO issued U.S. Patent No. 10,402,685 (“SVM-RFE Patent”) for the Company’s patent application covering SVM-RFE. The Company is the sole owner of all patents related to SVM-RFE. As a result of the issuance of the SVM-RFE Patent, the Company now has the right to exclude others from developing, commercializing, or licensing this patented technology without the uncertainty of the Interference or concerns over the ownership of the SVM-RFE patents. Furthermore, the USPTO granted a Patent Term Adjustment (“PTA”) to the SVM-RFE Patent. The PTA is 1,785 days (almost 5 years), which is added to the normal 20-year-from-filing patent term. The USPTO granted this adjustment to offset delays that occurred within the USPTO during the examination process and interference proceedings. This means the SVM-RFE Patent term has been extended from August 7, 2020, to June 7, 2025. On July 23, 2020, the Company filed a patent infringement lawsuit (“Infringement Lawsuit”) against Intel pertaining to the Company’s SVM-RFE technology. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Waco Division (the “Court”). Subsequently, on October 19, 2020, Intel filed a motion to dismiss with the Court. On November 23, 2020, the Company filed a response in opposition of Intel’s motion to dismiss. On December 21, 2020, the Court approved a scheduling order (“Scheduling Order”) for the Infringement Lawsuit. One of the items in the Scheduling Order was the Markman Markman Markman Markman Once briefing concluded on May 18, 2021, HDC and Intel submitted a Joint Claim Construction Statement to the Court. Within that Joint Claim Construction Statement, the parties identified several claim terms (i.e., key words) that were still in dispute. During the Markman Markman On February 27, 2021, Intel filed a Petition for Inter Partes Legal fees for this matter were $ 116,000 0 205,000 0 Quirk and Bear Matter On February 7, 2020, two shareholders of the Company, William F. Quirk, Jr. (“Quirk”) and Cindy Bear (“Bear”), filed a complaint and motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in DeKalb County Superior Court. Among the items in the motion, Quirk and Bear requested to have a special meeting of the shareholders and Quirk and Bear alleged misconduct by the Company and its directors. At the time of the Quirk and Bear complaint, the Company had stated its intent to schedule a shareholder meeting no later than June 30, 2020, and in fact did hold the shareholder meeting on May 27, 2020. On March 2, 2020, Quirk and Bear filed a notice of dismissal in DeKalb County. Quirk and Bear subsequently filed a new lawsuit in Fulton County Superior Court based on substantially similar allegations and seeking similar relief. On March 4, 2020, the Fulton County court ordered a hearing on the emergency motion for a temporary restraining order against the Company for the following day. At the hearing on March 5, 2020, Quirk and Bear presented their version of the facts through affidavits submitted by both Quirk and Bear, arguing that the affidavits supported the emergency relief they sought. The judge denied the motion and did not enter a temporary restraining order. The court set an evidentiary hearing on Quirk and Bear’s motion for a preliminary injunction for March 27, 2020. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic and multiple requests by Quirk and Bear, the scheduling of the hearing was cancelled. Quirk and Bear did not attempt to reschedule it. On September 2, 2020, the Company moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that Quirk and Bear lacked standing and failed to state claims for relief. Facing the Company’s motion to dismiss, on September 23, 2020, Quirk voluntarily dismissed his claims against the Company. Because this was the second dismissal of these claims, that dismissal was with prejudice and constitutes an adjudication of the merits under O.C.G.A. § 9-11-41(a)(3). Bear remained a plaintiff in the case. Due to Bear’s refusal to participate in discovery and repeated violations of the Court’s orders, the Company filed a Motion for Involuntary Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint with Prejudice and Incorporated Memorandum of Law on March 2, 2021. Among the request in the motion, the Company asked the Court to award attorney’s fees and costs against Bear as a result of abusive litigation. Subsequently, the Court held a hearing regarding the Company’s motion on March 25, 2021. At that hearing, the Court ordered Bear to appear for her deposition to be taken remotely on March 31, 2021, and April 1, 2021. The Court warned Bear that her failure to appear at these depositions or to participate fully in them would result in the dismissal of the case with prejudice. Bear did not appear for the March 31, 2021, deposition. As a result, on April 6, 2021, the Court issued an Order Granting Motion for Involuntary Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint with Prejudice and Final Order and Judgment (the “Ruling”) against Bear. Among other findings in the Ruling, the Court found that Bear knowingly and willfully failed to participate in discovery and violated the Court’s orders. Consequently, the Court entered final judgment against Bear and in favor of the Company on all counts. In light of the Court’s ruling, the Company intends to seek reimbursement of its attorneys’ fees and costs against Bear for bringing the action. Legal fees for this matter were $ 0 32,000 43,000 184,000 Vennwest Matter On September 24, 2020, the Company accepted service of a lawsuit filed by Vennwest Global Technologies, Inc. (“Vennwest”), a company owned by shareholder Laurie Venning (“Venning”) from Alberta, Canada. The Vennwest lawsuit contains virtually identical claims against HDC that Quirk and Bear alleged. For this reason, the Company believes Venning, Quirk, Bear and others coordinated their irresponsible and costly attacks against the Company, its directors, and others. As Quirk’s dismissal and the Bear judgment reflects, the Company believes these claims are without merit and serve only to deplete the Company’s resources to the detriment of its shareholders. On November 2, 2020, the Company moved to dismiss the complaint or stay the action pending the conclusion of the Quirk and Bear case, on the grounds that the first-filed derivative case would serve as res judicata to preclude the later-filed case. On November 30, 2020, Vennwest filed its response, and on December 15, 2020, the Company filed its reply. On June 8, 2021, the judge ruled to allow the case to proceed, and the parties are now in discovery phase of the case. The Company will vigorously defend itself against these claims and evaluate all options against the plaintiffs including, but not limited to, pursuing counterclaims. Although the Company believes that it will ultimately be successful in its defense, there can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in its defense. Should Vennwest be successful, the outcome could have a material adverse effect on the Company. Legal fees for this matter were $ 0 20,000 0 |