Commitments and Contingencies | Note 10: Commitments and Contingencies Purchase Commitments . As of April 30, 2020 and January 31, 2020, non-cancelable purchase commitments with the Company’s contract manufacturers and other parties were $5.9 million and $4.0 million, respectively. Legal Proceedings In addition to the litigation matters described below, from time to time, the Company may be involved in a variety of other claims, lawsuits, investigations, and proceedings relating to contractual disputes, intellectual property rights, employment matters, regulatory compliance matters, and other litigation matters relating to various claims that arise in the normal course of business. Defending such proceedings is costly and can impose a significant burden on management and employees, the Company may receive unfavorable preliminary or interim rulings in the course of litigation, and there can be no assurances that favorable final outcomes will be obtained. The Company determines whether an estimated loss from a contingency should be accrued by assessing whether a loss is deemed probable and can be reasonably estimated. The Company assesses its potential liability by analyzing specific litigation and regulatory matters using reasonably available information. The Company develops its views on estimated losses in consultation with inside and outside counsel, which involves a subjective analysis of potential results and outcomes, assuming various combinations of appropriate litigation and settlement strategies. Legal fees are expensed in the period in which they are incurred. As of April 30, 2020, the Company did not have any accrued liabilities recorded for loss contingencies in its consolidated financial statements . Deep Green Wireless Litigation On June 8, 2016, plaintiff Deep Green Wireless LLC (“Deep Green”) filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Ooma, Inc., alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. RE42,714 (the “Deep Green Wireless Patent”, and such litigation, the “Deep Green Wireless Litigation ”). The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, costs, attorneys’ fees and other appropriate relief. In February 2017, the Court granted the Company’s motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of California, which proceeding has been stayed pending the outcome of an inter partes review of the Deep Green Wireless Patent by the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). On December 17, 2018, the PTAB issued its final decision regarding the claims at issue in the Deep Green Wireless Litigation, in which it determined that all challenged claims of the are obvious and unpatentable. On February 19, 2019, the plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The matter was fully briefed and oral argument was held on February 7, 2020. On March 31, 2020, the Federal Circuit affirmed the final decision by the PTAB with respect to all asserted claims of the Deep Green Wireless Patent. On April 30, 2020, Deep Green filed a Combined Petition for Panel Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc in the Federal Circuit, and on June 2, 2020, the Federal Circuit denied Deep Green’s petition. Deep Green has 90 days to petition the Supreme Court to hear the case. Based on the Company’s current knowledge, the Company has determined that the amount of any material loss or range of any losses that is reasonably possible to result from the Deep Green Wireless Litigation is not estimable. Oregon Tax Litigation On August 30, 2016, the Oregon Department of Revenue (the “DOR”) issued tax assessments against the Company for the Oregon Emergency Communications Tax (the “Tax”), which the DOR alleges Ooma should have collected from its subscribers in Oregon and remitted to the DOR during the period between January 1, 2013 and March 31, 2016 (collectively, the “Assessments”). The Company believes that the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution bars the application of the Tax and the Assessments to the Company, since the Company has no employees, property or other indicia of a “substantial nexus” with the State of Oregon. On January 17, 2019, the Regular Division of the Oregon Tax Court heard oral arguments on the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment. On March 2, 2020, Oregon Tax Court issued a decision upholding the Assessments. On April 1, 2020, the Company filed a Notice of Appeal with the Supreme Court of the State of Oregon. However, litigation is unpredictable and there can be no assurances that the Company will obtain a favorable final outcome or that it will be able to avoid further unfavorable interim rulings in the course of litigation that may significantly add to the expense of its defense and could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources. Through January 31, 2020, the Company has recorded cumulative charges of $0.6 million as its best estimate of probable loss related to the Assessments. No additional charges were recorded during the three months ended April 30, 2020. Indemnification The Company enters into standard indemnification arrangements in the ordinary course of business. Pursuant to these arrangements, the Company indemnifies, holds harmless and agrees to reimburse the indemnified parties for losses suffered or incurred by the indemnified party, in connection with any trade secret, copyright, patent or other intellectual property infringement claim by any third party with respect to the Company’s technology. The term of these indemnification agreements is generally perpetual. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these agreements is not determinable because it involves claims that may be made against the Company in the future but have not yet been made. The Company has entered into indemnification agreements with its directors and officers that may require the Company to indemnify its directors and officers against liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers, other than liabilities arising from willful misconduct of the individual. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited; however, the Company has director and officer insurance coverage that reduces the Company’s exposure and enables the Company to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. To date the Company has not incurred costs to defend lawsuits or settle claims related to these indemnification agreements. No liability associated with such indemnifications has been recorded to date. |