Commitments and Contingencies | Legal Proceedings In the ordinary course of business, the Company actively pursues legal remedies to enforce its intellectual property rights and to stop unauthorized use of our technology. From time to time, the Company may be involved in various claims and counterclaims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. There were no pending material claims or legal matters as of the date of this report other than the following matters: Guidance IP LLC v. T-Mobile Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-01066-RSM, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington On August 1, 2013, the Companys wholly owned subsidiary Guidance initiated litigation against T-Mobile Inc. (T-Mobile) in Guidance IP LLC v. T-Mobile Inc Spherix Incorporated v. VTech Telecommunications Ltd. et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-03494-M, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas On August 30, 2013, the Company initiated litigation against VTech Telecommunications Ltd. and VTech Communications, Inc. (collectively VTech) in Spherix Incorporated v. VTech Telecommunications Ltd. et al inter partes Markman Markman Spherix Incorporated v. Uniden Corporation et al. Markman Spherix Incorporated v. Uniden Corporation et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-03496-M, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas On August 30, 2013, the Company initiated litigation against Uniden Corporation and Uniden America Corporation (collectively Uniden) in Spherix Incorporated v. Uniden Corporation et al. inter partes Markman Spherix Incorporated v. VTech Telecommunications Ltd. et al. Markman Charter Communications, Inc., Wideopenwest Finance LLC a/k/a Wow! Internet, Cable & Phone, Knology, Inc., Cequel Communications, LLC, d/b/a Suddenlink Communications, and Cable One, Inc. v. Rockstar Consortium US LP, Bockstar Technologies LLC, Constellation Technologies LLC, and Spherix Incorporated. On January 17, 2014, an action was filed by several cable operators in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (No 1:99-mc-09999) against Rockstar, Bockstar Technologies LLC, Constellation Technologies LLC and the Company (collectively, the Defendants). The complaint was filed by Charter Communications, Inc., WideOpenWest Finance, LLC a/k/a WOW! Internet, Cable & Phone, Knology, Inc., Cequel Communications, LLC d/b/a Suddenlink Communications, and Cable One, Inc. (collectively, the Plaintiffs). Plaintiffs are in the communications, cable and/or wireline industries and allege that Rockstar has accused the Plaintiffs of practicing various communication and networking technologies (including many well-established technical standards), related to those industries. The complaint states that in many instances such technical standards are designed into the equipment Plaintiffs purchase from vendors, and must be implemented to interoperate with other communications providers and their end user customers. Rockstar owns (and since December 31, 2013, the Company owns) patents alleged to be infringed by Plaintiffs activities. The relief sought against the Company is principally for a declaratory judgment that Plaintiffs do not infringe the patents, requiring that the Plaintiffs be granted a patent license, that the Company has misused the patents and it and the other Defendants have waived and are estopped from enforcing the patents in the marketplace, that the Company is liable to Plaintiffs for entering into an illegal conspiracy, and assessing corresponding damages, for direct and consequential damages, attorneys fees and costs. On June 11, 2014, the Company and the Plaintiffs filed a joint stipulation of dismissal in the action filed on January 17, 2014. As a result, the Plaintiffs allegations against the Company are dismissed without prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs. The Plaintiffs and the Company also agreed, with respect to all patents owned by the Company as of the date of the filing, to negotiate in good faith prior to bringing any action concerning these patents or bringing an action for infringement of these patents. The parties agreed that any further actions related to these patents will be brought solely in Delaware. Spherix Incorporated v. Cisco Systems Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-00393-SLR, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware On March 28, 2014, the Company initiated litigation against Cisco Systems Inc. (Cisco) in Spherix Incorporated v. Cisco Systems Inc. Bockstar Technologies LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. inter partes Bockstar Markman Spherix Incorporated v. Juniper Networks, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-00578-SLR, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware On May 2, 2014, the Company initiated litigation against Juniper Networks, Inc. (Juniper) in Spherix Incorporated v. Juniper Networks, Inc. Markman Bockstar Technologies LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Case No. 1:13-cv-02020-SLR-SRF, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware On June 6, 2014, Defendant Cisco filed an amended complaint and counterclaim in which it added counterclaims against the Company in Bockstar Technologies LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. Spherix Incorporated v. Cisco Systems Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-00393-SLR NNPT, LLC v. Huawei Investment & Holding Co., Ltd. et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-00677-JRG-RSP, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas On June 9, 2014, NNPT initiated litigation against Futurewei Technologies, Inc., Huawei Device (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd., Huawei Device USA Inc., Huawei Investment & Holding Co., Ltd., Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Huawei Technologies Cooperatif U.A., and Huawei Technologies USA Inc. (collectively Huawei), in NNPT, LLC v. Huawei Investment & Holding Co., Ltd. et al. Markman Markman inter partes Markman Markman Spherix Incorporated v. Verizon Services Corp. et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-00721-GBL-TCB, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia On June 11, 2014, the Company initiated litigation against Verizon Services Corp.; Verizon South Inc.; Verizon Virginia LLC; Verizon Communications Inc.; Verizon Federal Inc.; Verizon Business Network Services Inc.; and MCI Communications Services, Inc. (collectively, Verizon) in Spherix Incorporated v. Verizon Services Corp. et al. Markman Markman Markman inter partes Spherix Incorporated v. Verizon Services Corp. et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-0576-GBL-IDD, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia On May 1, 2015, the Company initiated litigation against Verizon Services Corp.; Verizon South Inc.; Verizon Virginia LLC; Verizon Communications Inc.; Verizon Federal Inc.; Verizon Business Network Services Inc.; MCI Communications Services, Inc.; Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless; and Cisco Systems, Inc. (collectively, Defendants) in Spherix Incorporated v. Verizon Services Corp. et al. Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Spherix Incorporated, 1:14-cv-00393-SLR-SRF, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware On June 30, 2015, Cisco Systems, Inc. initiated litigation against the Company in United States District Court for the District of Delaware, requesting a declaration of non-infringement U.S. Patent No. RE45,598, which was issued on June 30, 2015, and, with respect to that patent, alleging breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing implied in contract and promissory estoppel. Currently, the Companys deadline to move, answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint is August 20, 2015. Counterclaims In the ordinary course of business, the Company, along with the Companys wholly-owned subsidiaries, will initiate litigation against parties whom the Company believe have infringed on intellectual property rights and technologies. The initiation of such litigation exposes us to potential counterclaims initiated by the defendants. Currently, as stated above, defendants in the cases Spherix Incorporated v. VTech Telecommunications Ltd. Spherix Incorporated v. Uniden Corporation; Spherix Incorporated v. Cisco Systems Inc., and NNPT, LLC v. Huawei Investment & Holding Co., Ltd. et al. |