Commitments and Contingencies | Note 11–Commitments and Contingencies Legal Proceedings MSA Joint Venture On November 10, 2015, MSA received a final decision by the Department of Energy ("DoE") contracting officer for the Mission Support Contract concluding that certain payments to MSA by the DoE for the performance of IT services by Lockheed Martin Services, Inc. ("LMSI") under a subcontract to MSA constituted alleged affiliate fees in violation of Federal Acquisition Regulations ("FAR"). Lockheed Martin Integrated Technology LLC (now known as Leidos Integrated Technology LLC) is a member entity of MSA. Subsequent to the contracting officer's final decision, MSA, LMSI, and Lockheed Martin Corporation received notice from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Washington that the U.S. government had initiated a False Claims Act investigation into the facts surrounding this dispute. On February 8, 2019, the Department of Justice filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington against MSA, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Lockheed Martin Services, Inc. and a Lockheed Martin employee ("Defendants"). The complaint alleges violations of the False Claims Act, the Anti-Kickback Act and breach of contract with the DoE, among other things. On January 13, 2020, the Defendants' motions to dismiss were granted in part and denied in part. Litigation will proceed for the False Claims Act and other common law claims, although the Anti-Kickback Act claim has been dismissed with prejudice. The U.S. Attorney's office had previously advised that a parallel criminal investigation was open, although no subjects or targets of the investigation had been identified. The U.S. Attorney's office has informed MSA that it has closed the criminal investigation. Since this issue first was raised by the DoE, MSA has asserted that the IT services performed by LMSI under a fixed-price/fixed-unit rate subcontract approved by the DoE meet the definition of a "commercial item" under the FAR and any profits earned on that subcontract are permissible. MSA filed an appeal of the contracting officer's decision with the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals ("CBCA"), which was stayed pending resolution of the False Claims Act matter. Subsequent to the filing of MSA's appeal, the contracting officer demanded that MSA reimburse the DoE in the amount of $64 million, which was his estimate of the profits earned during the period from 2010 to 2014 by LMSI. The DoE has deferred collection of $32 million of that demand, pending resolution of the appeal and without prejudice to MSA's position that it is not liable for any of the DoE's $64 million reimbursement claim. On December 10, 2019, MSA received a second final decision by the DoE contracting officer, estimating approximately $29 million in alleged unallowable profit and associated general and administrative costs during the period from 2015 to 2016 by LMSI. MSA filed an appeal of the second contracting officer's decision, which has been consolidated with the prior proceeding before the CBCA and stayed pending resolution of the False Claims Act matter. The DoE and MSA also executed an agreement to defer the entire amount of the disallowed costs from the second contracting officer's final decision until the CBCA proceedings are finally resolved. Leidos has agreed to indemnify Jacobs Group, LLC and Centerra Group, LLC for any liability MSA incurs in this matter. Under the terms of the Separation Agreement, Lockheed Martin agreed to indemnify Leidos for 100% of any damages in excess of $38 million up to $64 million, and 50% of any damages in excess of $64 million, with respect to claims asserted against MSA related to this matter. On April 5, 2021, MSA finalized the settlement of the False Claims Act litigation in the Eastern District of Washington and the related contract claim at the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals. Under the settlement of the False Claims Act litigation, MSA and Lockheed Martin will each pay $3 million to the government. Under the settlement of the contract claim, DoE will pay MSA approximately $37 million. Both agreements contain customary terms and conditions including appropriate waivers and releases (except for criminal liability) and no admission of wrongdoing. There remain other outstanding matters in dispute between DoE and MSA as the two parties work to close out the Mission Support Contract. As of April 2, 2021, we believe we have adequately reserved for any potential liabilities related to these disputes. Class Action Lawsuit On March 2, 2021, Leidos and certain current officers of Leidos were named as defendants in a putative class action securities lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder relating to alleged misstatements or omissions in Leidos' public filings with the SEC and other public statements during the period from May 4, 2020 to February 23, 2021 relating, among other things, to Leidos' acquisition of the SD&A Businesses. The plaintiff seeks to recover from the Company and the individual defendants an unspecified amount of damages at this time. We believe the suit lacks merit and we intend to vigorously defend against it. Other Contingencies VirnetX, Inc. ("VirnetX") On April 10, 2018, a jury trial concluded in an additional patent infringement case brought by VirnetX against Apple, referred to as the Apple II case, in which the jury returned a verdict against Apple for infringement and awarded VirnetX damages in the amount of over $502 million. On April 11, 2018, in a second phase of the Apple II trial, the jury found Apple's infringement to be willful. On August 30, 2018, the federal trial court in the Eastern District of Texas entered a final judgment and rulings on post-trial motions in the Apple II case. The court affirmed the jury’s verdict of over $502 million and granted VirnetX’s motions for supplemental damages, a sunset royalty and royalty rate of $1.20 per infringing device, along with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and costs. The court denied VirnetX’s motions for enhanced damages, attorneys’ fees and an injunction. The court also denied Apple’s motions for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial. An additional sum of over $93 million for costs and pre-judgment interest was subsequently agreed upon pursuant to a court order, bringing the total award to VirnetX in the Apple II case to over $595 million. Apple filed an appeal of the judgment in the Apple II case with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and on November 22, 2019, the Federal Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded the Apple II case back to the District Court. The Federal Circuit affirmed that Apple infringed two of the patents at issue in the case, and ruled that Apple is precluded from making certain patent invalidity arguments. However, the Federal Circuit reversed the judgment that Apple infringed two other patents at issue, vacated the prior damages awarded in the Apple II case, and remanded the Apple II case back to the District Court for further proceedings regarding damages. On April 23, 2020, the District Court ordered a new trial on damages in the Apple II case, which was delayed by the coronavirus pandemic and started on October 26, 2020. On October 30, 2020, the jury awarded VirnetX $503 million in damages and specified a royalty rate of $0.84 per infringing device. Apple is expected to appeal this decision. In January 2021, the District Court entered final judgment affirming the jury award and the parties separately agreed on additional costs and interest of over $75 million, subject to Apple's appeal. On February 4, 2021, Apple filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the Apple II case. Under our agreements with VirnetX, Leidos would receive 25% of the proceeds obtained by VirnetX after reduction for attorneys' fees and costs. However, the verdict in the Apple II case remains subject to the ongoing and potential future proceedings and appeals. In addition, the patents at issue in these cases are subject to U.S. Patent and Trademark Office post-grant inter partes review and/or reexamination proceedings and related appeals, which may result in all or part of these patents being invalidated or the claims of the patents being limited. Thus, no assurances can be given when or if we will receive any proceeds in connection with these jury awards. In addition, if Leidos receives any proceeds, we are required to pay a royalty to the customer who paid for the development of the technology. Government Investigations and Reviews We are routinely subject to investigations and reviews relating to compliance with various laws and regulations with respect to our role as a contractor to federal, state and local government customers and in connection with performing services in countries outside of the United States. Adverse findings could have a material effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows due to our reliance on government contracts. As of April 2, 2021, indirect cost audits by the Defense Contract Audit Agency remain open for fiscal 2016 and subsequent fiscal years. Although we have recorded contract revenues based upon an estimate of costs that we believe will be approved upon final audit or review, we cannot predict the outcome of any ongoing or future audits or reviews and adjustments, and if future adjustments exceed estimates, our profitability may be adversely affected. As of April 2, 2021, we believe we have adequately reserved for potential adjustments from audits or reviews of contract costs. Commitments We have outstanding letters of credit of $84 million as of April 2, 2021, principally related to performance guarantees on contracts. We also have outstanding surety bonds with a notional amount of $138 million, principally related to performance and subcontractor payment bonds on contracts. The value of the surety bonds may vary due to changes in the underlying project status and/or contractual modifications. As of April 2, 2021, the future expirations of the outstanding letters of credit and surety bonds were as follows: Fiscal year ending (in millions) 2021 (remainder of year) $ 104 2022 98 2023 2 2024 2 2025 2 2026 and thereafter 14 $ 222 |