Commitments and Contingencies
|9 Months Ended|
Sep. 30, 2021
|Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]|
|Commitments and Contingencies||
9. Commitments and Contingencies
In the ordinary course of business, the Company enters into non-cancelable leases to purchase equipment and for its facilities, including related party leases (see Note 10 – Transactions with Related Parties). Leases are accounted for as operating leases or finance leases, in accordance with ASC 842, Leases.
The Company leases office space in Miami, Florida and research and development laboratory space in Bothell, Washington under operating leases that expire on August 31, 2024 and January 31, 2024, respectively. For operating leases, the weighted average discount rate is 7.20% and the weighted average remaining lease term is 2.5 years.
The following table summarizes the Company’s maturities of operating lease liabilities, by year and in aggregate, as of September 30, 2021 (in thousands):
Schedule of Maturities of Lease Liabilities
The operating lease liabilities summarized above do not include variable common area maintenance (CAM) charges, which are contractual liabilities under the Company’s Bothell, Washington lease. CAM charges for the Bothell, Washington facility are calculated annually based on actual common expenses for the building incurred by the lessor and proportionately billed to tenants based on leased square footage. For nine months ended September 30, 2021 and 2020, approximately $58,000 and $54,000 of variable lease expense (CAM) was included in general and administrative operating expenses on the condensed consolidated statements of operations, respectively.
The minimum lease payments above include the amounts that would be paid if the Company maintains its Bothell lease for the five-year term, starting February 2019. The Company has the right to terminate this lease after three years on January 31, 2022, by giving prior notice at least nine months before the early termination date and by paying a termination fee equal to the sum of unamortized leasing commissions and reimbursement for tenant improvements provided by the landlord amortized at 8.0% over the extended term.
On September 1, 2021, the Company entered into a three-year lease extension with a limited liability company controlled by Dr. Phillip Frost, a director and a principal stockholder of the Company (see Note 10 – Transactions with Related Parties). On an annualized basis, straight-line rent expense is approximately $62,000, including fixed and estimable fees and taxes.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2021 and 2020, operating lease expense, excluding short-term leases, finance leases and CAM charges, totaled approximately $172,000 and $171,000, respectively, of which $44,000 in the period was to a related party.
In November 2018, the Company entered into lease agreements to acquire lab equipment with 36 monthly payments of $1,000 payable through November 21, 2021. In April, 2020, the Company entered into lease agreements to acquire lab equipment with 36 monthly payments of $2,000 payable through March 31, 2023. For finance leases, the weighted average discount rate is 8.0% and the weighted average remaining lease term is 1.4 years.
The following table summarizes the Company’s maturities of finance lease liabilities, by year and in aggregate, as of September 30, 2021 (in thousands):
Schedule of Maturities of Finance Lease
The leased lab equipment is depreciable over five years and is presented net of accumulated depreciation on the condensed consolidated balance sheets under property and equipment. As of September 30, 2021, total right-of-use lab equipment net of depreciation recognized under finance leases is $74,000 and depreciation expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2021 was $18,000. As of December 31, 2020, total right-of-use assets lab equipment exchanged for finance lease liabilities was $211,000 and accumulated depreciation for lab equipment under finance leases was $119,000.
Liberty Insurance Underwriters Inc. filed suit against us in federal court in Delaware seeking a declaratory judgment that there was no insurance coverage for any settlement, judgment, or defense costs in the class and derivative litigation, that the monies totaling approximately $1 million it paid to the Company in connection with the SEC investigation were not covered by insurance, and for recoupment of the monies already paid. We have retained counsel to defend us which has filed an answer to the complaint denying its material allegations, as well as a counterclaim against Liberty for breach of contract, declaratory judgment, bad faith and violation of the Washington State Consumer Protection Act, alleging among other things that Liberty wrongfully denied the Company’s claims for coverage of the class and derivative litigations, and seeking money damages. The case has been set for trial in July, 2022.
In November 2017, Lee Pederson, a former Biozone lawyer, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Minnesota against co-defendants the Company, Dr. Phillip Frost, OPKO Health, Inc. and Brian Keller alleging that defendants engaged in wrongful conduct related to Biozone, including causing Biozone to enter into an allegedly improper licensing agreement and engaged in alleged market manipulation (“Pederson I”). On September 13, 2018, the United States District Court granted the Company and its co-defendants’ motion to dismiss Pederson’s amended complaint in Pederson I for lack of personal jurisdiction in Minnesota. On October 11, 2018, Pederson filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The plaintiff’s appeal was denied and the dismissal of Pederson I affirmed in March 2020. Meanwhile, in July 2019, Lee Pederson had filed another lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Minnesota against co-defendants the Company, Dr. Frost, and Daniel Fisher (“Pederson II”). In his complaint in Pederson II, Pederson alleges tortious interference by the Company and Dr. Frost with an alleged collaboration agreement between Mr. Pederson and Mr. Fisher. In Pederson II, Mr. Pederson seeks damages in the amount of $800,000 or such other amount as may be determined at trial. Pederson II had previously been stayed by the court, pending disposition of Pederson I. With that first lawsuit having been dismissed and appeal denied, the stay was lifted in Pederson II, and the Company and all other defendants in that case filed Motions to Dismiss the (then amended) complaint. On November 19, 2020 the Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal of Pederson II, and further recommended that Pederson be restricted from filing any other actions in the District of Minnesota against defendants on the same or similar allegations as those in Pederson II, and on January 4, 2021 the District Court Judge adopted those recommendations and ordered dismissal of Pederson II. On February 1, 2021 Pederson filed a Notice of Appeal from the order of dismissal of Pederson II in the Eighth Circuit, and that appeal remains pending.
In a complaint dated September 13, 2021 filed by Pederson in Minnesota State Court captioned Lee Pederson v. Harvey Kesner, Barry Honig, Michael Brauser, Steven Rubin, Jane Hsiao, Brian Keller and Opko Health, Inc., Pederson asserts similar claims to those Pederson asserted in Pederson II, against the individuals so named as defendants as set forth in the immediately above-mentioned caption. The Company is not named as a defendant in the September 13th filing; however, the Company is repeatedly mentioned in that lawsuit as allegedly participating with the individuals so named as defendants. Mr. Rubin is a director of the Company and Dr. Hsiao is a former director. The Company understands that defendant Opko Health, Inc. is defending them. The Company has previously entered into Indemnification Agreements with each of Mr. Rubin and Dr. Hsiao.
While the Company intends to defend itself vigorously from the claims in the aforementioned disputes, it is unable to predict the outcome of these legal proceedings. Any potential loss as a result of these legal proceedings cannot be reasonably estimated. As a result, the Company has not recorded a loss contingency for any of the aforementioned claims.
Our administrative and finance activities are fully functional out of our Miami, Florida location and our research laboratory in Bothell, Washington remains open for essential operations while meeting COVID-19 quarantine challenges. Our scientists are also able to continue working remotely and we remain committed to meeting our corporate and development milestones throughout the year. We have experienced delays in our supply chain and with service partners as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, including recent raw material and test animal shortages affecting our research and development efforts. Also because of the unknown impact from the COVID-19 pandemic, it may have unanticipated material adverse effects on us in a number of ways including:
The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.
Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef