e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2005
|
or
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the transition period
from
to
|
Commission File
Number 000-27969
Immersion Corporation
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
94-3180138
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
801 Fox Lane
San Jose, California 95131
(Address of principal executive
offices, zip code)
(408) 467-1900
(Registrant’s telephone
number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
None
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
Common Stock, $0.001 par value
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer or a non-accelerated
filer (as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Act).
Large accelerated
filer o Accelerated
filer þ Non-accelerated
filer o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the
Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock
held by non-affiliates of the registrant on June 30, 2005,
the last business day of the registrant’s most recently
completed second fiscal quarter, was $89,325,651 (based on the
closing sales price of the registrant’s common stock on
that date). Shares of the registrant’s common stock held by
each officer and director and each person whom owns 5% or more
of the outstanding common stock of the registrant have been
excluded in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates.
This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a
conclusive determination for other purposes. Number of shares of
common stock outstanding at February 24, 2006: 24,404,338
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the definitive Proxy Statements for the 2006 Annual
Meeting are incorporated by reference into Part III hereof.
IMMERSION
CORPORATION
2005
FORM 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Forward-looking
Statements
In addition to historical information, this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of
Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended. These forward-looking statements involve many risks and
uncertainties, including those identified in the section of this
report entitled “Risk Factors,” which could cause
actual results to differ from those discussed in the
forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements in this
report are identified by words such as “believes,”
“anticipates,” “expects,”
“intends,” “may,” “will,” and
other similar expressions. However, these words are not the only
way we identify forward-looking statements. In addition, any
statements which refer to expectations, projections, or other
characterizations of future events or circumstances, are
forward-looking statements. Our forward-looking statements
include our projections about our business under Item 1,
“Business,” and our statements regarding our future
financial performance, which are contained in Item 7,
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations.” We caution you not to
place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which
speak only as of the date of this report, and we undertake no
obligation to release the results of any revisions to these
forward-looking statements which could occur after the filing of
this report. You are urged to review carefully and consider our
various disclosures in this report and in our other reports
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”) that attempt to advise you of the risks and
factors that may affect our business.
PART I
Overview
Immersion Corporation was founded in 1993, and we consummated
our initial public offering on November 12, 1999. Our
common stock trades on the Nasdaq Stock Market under the symbol
IMMR. Immersion Corporation is a leading provider of haptic
technologies that allow people to use their sense of touch more
fully when operating a wide variety of digital devices. To
achieve this heightened interactivity, we develop and
manufacture or license a wide range of hardware and software
technologies and products. While we believe that our
technologies are broadly applicable, we are currently focusing
our marketing and business development activities on the
following target application areas: automotive, consumer,
entertainment, industrial, medical simulation, mobile
communications, and three-dimensional design and simulation. We
manage these application areas under two operating and
reportable segments: 1) Immersion Computing, Entertainment,
and Industrial and 2) Immersion Medical.
In markets where our touch technologies are a small piece of a
larger system, such as mobile phones and controls for automotive
interfaces, we license our technologies or software products to
manufacturers who integrate them into their products and sell
the end product(s) under their own brand names. In some markets,
we have brand visibility on consumer packaging, end-user
documentation, and in software applications. In other markets,
such as medical simulation, touchscreen input devices, and
three-dimensional computer-aided design, we manufacture and sell
products under our own Immersion brand name, through direct
sales, distributors, and value-added resellers. In all market
areas, we also engage in development projects for third parties
and government agencies from time to time.
Our objective is to drive adoption of our touch technologies
across markets and applications to improve the user experience
with digital devices and systems. We and our wholly owned
subsidiaries hold more than 500 issued or pending patents in the
U.S. and other countries, covering various aspects of hardware
and software technologies.
Haptics
and Its Benefits
The science of haptics refers to tactile and kinesthetic
information that supplies a tangible representation of the
environment to the human sensory system. The term “force
feedback” has often been used to mean haptics in general,
though haptics is actually comprised of two types of sensing and
two types of technologies. Tactile sensing refers to an
awareness through stimulation of the skin, which can be accessed
through vibro-tactile technologies.
3
Kinesthetic sensing refers to an awareness through the position
of body parts and their movement, which can be accessed using
force feedback technologies. Without our perception of haptic
information, it would be hard to believe that something is
tangible. Unlike sight and hearing, which are mainly input
systems, touch is bi-directional, allowing us to both feel (take
in information) and manipulate (have an effect on something).
All human senses are complementary, contributing to our
perception of the environment. Without one of them, our
perception would change — and without touch, any
motor action, such as typing, peeling an orange, or opening a
door would be extremely difficult. A person’s sense of
touch and the haptic information it interprets is a critical
part of our interactions with the world.
In the world of computers and digital devices and controls,
haptic feedback is often lost. To replace the lost sensation of
touch, input/output devices can create the physical forces,
known as haptic feedback, force feedback, touch feedback, or
tactile feedback. These forces are exerted by actuators, usually
motors, which are built into consumer devices such as joysticks,
steering wheels, gamepads, and mobile phones. Actuators can also
be designed into more sophisticated devices used in automotive,
industrial, medical, or retail kiosk and
point-of-sale
systems, such as digital switches, rotary controls, and
touchscreens. Our programmable haptic technologies embedded in
touch-enabled devices can give users the physical sensations of
interacting with rough textures, smooth surfaces, viscous
liquids, compliant springs, solid barriers, deep or shallow
detents, jarring vibrations, heavy masses, and rumbling engines.
As a user operates a touch-enabled device, such as a joystick,
motors within the device apply computer-modulated forces that
resist, assist, and enhance the manipulations. These forces are
generated based on software algorithms and mathematical models
built to produce appropriate sensations. For example, when
simulating the feel of interacting with a solid wall or barrier,
a computer program can signal motors within a force feedback
joystick to apply forces that emulate the impenetrability of the
wall. The harder the user pushes, the harder the motors push
back. When simulating the placement of cardiac pacing leads, a
computer program can signal actuators to apply forces that would
be encountered when navigating coronary pacing leads through a
beating heart. These forces can be synchronized with appropriate
simulations of an electrocardiogram, blood pressure, heart rate,
and fluoroscopy displays. When simulating the feel of pressing a
button, a computer program can signal actuators attached to a
touchscreen to apply forces that emulate the button’s
particular press and release characteristics. Even though the
user touches a screen that is flat, our technology delivers the
perception that the button is pushed inward.
For mobile phones, our software can control the motor used in
substantially all phone models, thereby enhancing the
output — from a simple on-off buzz to a rich
palette of tactile communications. Our programmable haptic
system can be used, for example, to advise users of the identity
of an incoming caller, supply vibrations signifying an emotion
in a text message, provide a tactile alert, and aid in general
navigation and operation. Ringtones can also be haptically
enhanced, allowing users to feel the beat of a particular song.
Mobile games are made more engaging and enjoyable by adding
vibro-tactile effects to particular events such as explosions,
car crashes, and bowling strikes.
The mathematical models that control motors may be simple
modulating forces based on a function of time. These forces can
produce jolts and vibrations for example. More complex forces
can emulate surfaces, textures, springs, and damping. All forces
can be synchronized with audio, video, or application program
logic. For example, a series of individual simulated forces can
be combined to give the seamless feel of a complex interaction,
like driving a sports car, which might include the centrifugal
forces in the steering wheel, the vibration of the road surface,
the revving of the engine, and the bass beat of a song.
We believe the programmability of our haptic products is a key
differentiator over purely electro-mechanical systems and can
drive the further adoption of digital devices. A programmable
device can supply a tactile response appropriate to the context
of operation for systems and devices of many types. These
tactile cues can help users operate more intuitively or realize
a more enjoyable or natural experience. Used in combination with
sight and sound cues, touch feedback adds a compelling,
engaging, multimodal aspect to the user interface. Our haptic
products and technologies can also add a tactile quality to
interactions that have been devoid of tactile confirmation, such
as when using a touchpad or touchscreen. The confirmation and
navigational cues obtained by programmable haptics can aid in
performance and accuracy and increase user satisfaction. The
addition of programmable haptics
4
can help in the conversion from purely mechanical rotary
controls to digital devices or from a mechanical keyboard,
switch, or button interface to an electronic touchscreen.
Programmability also supplies more flexibility in terms of the
types of responses that are possible (such as nonlinear or
dynamic qualities), in upgradeability, in consistent performance
that will not degrade over time, and in the potential for
personalized settings.
Multiple mechanical controls can be consolidated into one
versatile programmable control, which can save space and improve
ergonomics. Conversely, one programmable control device can be
implemented as many different types of controls with
context-appropriate touch feedback, which can simplify inventory.
Industry
Background
Haptic systems were first used in applications like military
flight simulators. In the 1960s, combat pilots honed their
flight skills in training simulators that replicated the feel of
flying actual planes. Motors and actuators pushed, pulled, and
shook the flight yoke, throttle, rudder pedals, and cockpit
shell, reproducing many of the tactile and kinesthetic cues of
real flight. Though advanced for their time, these systems were
limited by the then available technology and were therefore
relatively crude and low fidelity by today’s standards.
They also cost at least hundreds of thousands, if not millions
of dollars, and therefore were not within the grasp of consumers
or even most businesses.
By the late 1970s and early 1980s, computing power reached the
point where rich color graphics and high-quality audio were
possible. Computers evolved from primitive command-prompt,
text-based systems with monochrome displays to powerful systems
capable of rendering colorful graphics and animations and of
playing music and sound effects. These advancements spawned
entirely new businesses in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
To the consumer, this multimedia revolution opened new
possibilities. Flight simulation moved from a professional
pilot-only activity to a PC-based hobby for millions of real and
aspiring pilots. The graphics and sound these hobbyists
experienced were far superior to what the combat pilots in the
1960s had in their expensive flight simulator systems.
The multimedia revolution also made the medical simulation
business possible. By the 1990s, high-end workstations enabled
renderings of the human anatomy to be displayed with never
before possible realism. Companies were founded to harness this
new technology and turn it into safer and more effective
teaching aides for medical personnel.
However, the multimedia revolution also highlighted a
shortcoming in simulation products. Even though medical graphics
and animations looked incredibly realistic, they could not
possibly convey what it actually feels like to break through a
venal wall with a needle or cut through the tissue surrounding
the gall bladder. In the case of flight simulation, graphics and
sound could not possibly convey what it actually feels like to
fight the flight yoke or flight stick out of a steep dive or
through a sharply banked turn. Only hands-on experience provided
this critical component of learning.
So by the mid 1990s, these new industrial and consumer
multimedia products were in need of enhanced haptic technology
that could provide the sensations similar to an actual hands-on
experience. We were founded in 1993 to bring the critical sense
of touch back into the user’s experience. By combining
1) the basic concepts used in the military flight
simulators of the 1960s,
2) state-of-the-art
advancements in robotic controls, 3) advancements in the
understanding of how the human sense of touch works, and
4) advancements in computing power, we were able to
significantly reduce the cost and size of haptic solutions while
increasing the quality of the simulated forces. Some of our
early technology was used in the world’s first consumer
force feedback peripherals for computer video games, such as
flight sticks and steering wheels. These products not only
looked and sounded more realistic, they allowed users to feel
haptic effects that simulated, for example, textures, bouncing
and hitting a ball, and vibrations from gun fire. In addition,
with our technology, sophisticated medical simulators offered
medical professionals the ability to practice and enhance their
surgical and other procedural skills in a way not previously
possible.
Continued advancements in size, power, and cost reductions have
pushed the adoption of haptics technology even further into
those industries, as well as into new ones. Our
TouchSense®
technology is now incorporated into
5
computer and console gaming systems, and in products such as
gamepads, joysticks, and steering wheels for Sony’s
PlayStation and PlayStation 2, Microsoft’s Xbox and
Xbox 360, Nintendo’s GameCube, and the PC and Apple
Macintosh computer. Furthermore, more than 1,300 Immersion
Medical simulators have been deployed at hospitals and medical
schools throughout the United States and abroad, including Beth
Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN),
Northwestern University, Rush University Medical Center,
St. Mary’s Hospital (London), and Stanford University.
Over the past few years, the ever-increasing demands of
connectivity, interactivity, and functionality have driven
advancements in mobile phone capabilities. Improvements focused
on processing power, data communications bandwidth, operating
system sophistication, and memory, as well as user interface
design, high-resolution color displays, stereo speakers, and
motor and case design. As a result, our TouchSense software and
technology used in the gaming market is now being deployed as
VibeTonz®
software products for mobile phone handsets.
Although the first touchscreens were introduced in the early
1970s, their broad acceptance and proliferation didn’t
occur until the mid to late 1990s. Since their introduction,
advancements in computing power, operating systems, graphical
user interfaces, and multimedia software, combined with gradual
cost reductions, have today made the touchscreen the user
interface device of choice for many applications. In 2005, we
announced a TouchSense technology solution to enable enhanced
tactile cues for providing a more intuitive, personal, and
natural experience for the user. Instead of just feeling the
passive touchscreen surface, users perceive that buttons press
and release, just as physical buttons and switches do, creating
a class of products we call active touchscreens.
Our haptic technologies are also now used by corporate
industrial designers and by researchers from the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Stanford
University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
Automobiles manufactured by BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Rolls Royce, and
Volkswagen use programmable haptic controls powered by Immersion
technology. In addition, we offer 3D capture and interaction
products to help game developers, mechanical designers,
animators, and other professionals reduce production time and
streamline the workflow process. Today, we believe that as
computing power increases and pushes multimedia capabilities
into new areas, even more opportunities will be created for our
programmable haptic technologies.
Our
Solutions
Our goal is to change the way people interact with digital
devices by engaging their sense of touch. Core competencies
include our understanding of how interactions should feel and
our knowledge of how to use technology to achieve that feeling.
Our strength in both of these areas has resulted in many novel
applications.
We believe that our touch-enabled products and technologies give
users a more complete, intuitive, enjoyable, and realistic
experience. Our patented designs include software elements such
as real-time software algorithms and authoring tools, and
specialized hardware elements, such as motors, sensors,
transmissions, and control electronics. Together, these software
and hardware elements enable tactile sensations that are
context-appropriate within the application.
We have developed haptic systems for many types of hardware
input/output devices such as computer mice, joysticks, mobile
phones, rotary devices, touchscreens, and flexible and rigid
endoscopy devices for medical simulations.
We have developed many mechanisms to convey forces to the
user’s hands or body. These include vibro-tactile
actuators, direct drive or cable driven mechanisms, and other
proprietary devices that supply textures and vibration,
resistance, and damping forces to the user.
To develop our real-time electronic actuator controllers, we had
to address challenges such as size, accuracy, resolution,
frequency, latency requirements, power consumption, and cost.
Our control solutions include both closed-loop and open-loop
control schemes. In closed-loop control, the firmware reads
inputs from the input/output devices, and then calculates and
applies the output forces in real time based upon the input
data. In open-loop control, a triggering event will activate the
firmware to calculate and send the output signal to the actuator
in real time.
6
We have developed many software solutions for various operating
systems and computing platforms including mobile handset
operating systems. Our inventions include many generations of
authoring tools for creating, visualizing, modifying, archiving,
and experiencing haptic feedback.
Licensed
Solutions
In markets where our touch technology is a small piece of a
larger system (such as mobile phones and controls for automotive
interfaces), we license our technologies or software products to
manufacturers who integrate them into their products sold under
their own brand names.
We offer our expertise to our licensees to help them design and
integrate touch effects into their products. This expertise
includes turn-key engineering and integration services,
authoring tools, application programming interfaces, and the
development of hardware and software technologies that are
compatible with industry standards.
Turn-key Engineering and Integration
Services. We offer engineering assistance
including technical and design assistance and integration
services that allows our licensees to incorporate our
touch-enabling products and technologies into their products at
a reasonable cost and in a shortened time frame. This allows
them to get to market quickly by using our years of haptic
development expertise. We offer product development solutions
including product software libraries, design, prototype
creation, technology transfer, component sourcing,
development/integration kits, sample source code, comprehensive
documentation, and other engineering services. In addition, we
ensure a quality end-user experience by offering testing and
certification services to a number of licensees.
Authoring Tools. We license authoring tools
that enable software developers to quickly design and
incorporate custom touch feedback into their own applications.
Authoring tools allow designers to create, modify, experience,
and save or restore haptic effects for a haptic device. The
tools are the equivalent of a computer-aided design application
for haptics. Our authoring tools support vibro-tactile haptic
devices (such as mobile phones and vibro-tactile gaming
peripherals), as well as kinesthetic haptic devices (such as
rotary devices, joysticks, and medical training systems).
Various haptic effect parameters can be defined and modified and
the result immediately experienced. Our authoring tools run on
mainstream operating systems such as Microsoft Windows.
Application Programming Interfaces
(“APIs”). Our APIs provide
haptic-effect generation capability. This allows designers and
programmers to focus on adding haptic effects to their
applications instead of struggling with the mechanics of
programming real-time algorithms and handling communications
between computers and devices. Some of our haptic APIs are
device independent (for example, they work with scroll wheels,
rotary knobs, 2D joysticks, and other devices) to allow
flexibility and reusability. Others are crafted to meet the
needs of a particular customer or industry.
Compatible with Industry Standards. We have
designed our hardware and software technologies for our
licensees to be compatible with industry hardware and software
standards. Our consumer technologies operate across multiple
platforms and comply with such standards as Microsoft’s
entertainment application programming interface DirectX and a
standard communications interface, Universal Serial Bus
(“USB”). Our APIs are supported on Windows and
Macintosh platforms and are capable of being ported onto other
operating systems such as for mobile phones, automobiles, and
industrial controls. Software plug-ins and API extensions are
available for several platforms so that programmers can add our
touch technology into their applications. Most of our software
technology has been designed to be platform independent. Our
software supports many operating systems including Windows,
Windows CE, BREW/REX (from QUALCOMM), Java (J2SE), VxWorks, and
Linux, and many communication protocols including USB, CAN Bus,
and serial.
Manufactured
Product Solutions
We produce our products using both contracted and in-house
manufacturing capabilities. In some markets, we manufacture and
sell products under the Immersion brand name through a
combination of direct sales, distributors, and value-added
resellers. These products include:
|
|
|
|
•
|
medical simulation systems used for training medical
professionals in minimally invasive medical procedures including
vascular access, endoscopy, hysteroscopy, laparoscopy, and
endovascular;
|
7
|
|
|
|
•
|
components used in our touchscreen solution;
|
|
|
•
|
programmable rotary control modules for operating a wide range
of devices;
|
|
|
•
|
digitizers used to construct detailed 3D computer models and to
perform accurate part inspections;
|
|
|
•
|
a 3D interaction product line consisting of hand-centric
hardware and software solutions for animating hand movements and
allowing users to manipulate virtual objects with their
hands; and
|
|
|
•
|
electronics and force feedback devices for arcade games,
university research, and other industrial applications.
|
Our
Strategy
We intend to maintain and enhance our position as a leading
provider of touch-enabling technology by employing the following
strategies:
Pursue Royalty-based Licensing Model for High Volume
Applications of Our Technologies. We believe that
the most effective way to proliferate our touch-enabling
technologies, where touch is a small part of a larger system, is
to license and embed it in high volume applications. We have
licensed our intellectual property to numerous manufacturers of
joysticks, gamepads, and steering wheels, and to a manufacturer
of video console gaming systems, all of which are targeted at
consumers. In addition, our technologies have been licensed to
automotive manufacturers and automotive parts suppliers for use
in automotive controls. We have licensed our software products
that create touch feedback effects in mobile handsets to
manufacturers of mobile phones, wireless operators, and content
developers. We intend to expand the number and scope of our
licensing relationships in the future.
In general, our licenses permit manufacturers to produce only a
particular category of product within a specified field of use.
Our licensing model includes an up-front license fee
and/or a
per-unit royalty paid by the manufacturer that may be a fixed
fee or a percentage of the selling price of the final
touch-enabled product. In addition, our consumer-products’
licensees generally have branding obligations. The prominent
display of our TouchSense or VibeTonz technology logo on retail
packaging generates customer awareness for our technologies.
Pursue Product Sales in Lower-volume Applications through
Multiple Channels. For lower-volume emerging
applications of our technologies, such as medical simulation
systems, active touchscreens, and three-dimensional and design
products, our strategy is to manufacture and sell products
through direct sales, distributors, and value-added resellers.
The Immersion Computing, Entertainment, and Industrial segment
sells products that consist primarily of digitizers, such as the
MicroScribe®
line, specialized whole-hand sensing gloves and software, such
as the
CyberGlove® II
wireless glove,
CyberGrasp®
system, and
CyberForce®
armature that permit simulated interaction with
three-dimensional environments, and TouchSense components and
software for our touchscreen and rotary control solutions. Our
Immersion Medical segment currently sells medical simulation
devices that simulate intravenous catheterization, endovascular
interventions, and laparoscopic, hysteroscopic, and endoscopic
procedures.
Secure Licensees and Customers in New Markets for
Touch-enabling Technology and Software
Products. We believe that our touch-enabling
technologies can be used in virtually all areas of computing and
communication. We initially focused on computer gaming
applications for personal computers and dedicated game consoles,
an area in which key companies have accepted our technologies.
We have broadened our focus in additional applications including
automotive controls, industrial equipment controls,
touchscreens, and mobile phones, and secured several new
licensees in these areas. We intend to pursue additional
applications for our technologies.
Facilitate Development of Touch-enabled
Products. Our success depends on the development
of touch-enabled products by our licensees and customers. To
enable that development, we offer design packages that include
sample hardware, software, firmware, and related documentation,
and offer our technical expertise on a consulting basis. We will
continue to devote significant resources to facilitate the
development of touch-enabled products by our licensees and
customers.
Expand Software Support for Our Touch-enabling
Technologies. In addition to licensing our
intellectual property or software products and supporting
licensee product development efforts, we have focused on
expanding
8
software support for our touch-enabling technologies. For
example, we license authoring and programming tools to customers
in support of vibro-tactile haptic devices (such as mobile
phones, vibro-tactile gaming peripherals, and touchscreens) as
well as kinesthetic haptic devices (such as rotary devices,
joysticks, and steering wheels). Using our authoring tools,
various haptic-effect parameters can be defined and modified,
and the result can be immediately experienced on the target
device.
Our APIs provide an extensive haptic-generation capability and
allow designers and programmers to focus on enabling their
target applications with haptic effects instead of struggling
with the mechanics of programming real-time algorithms and
handling communications between computers and devices. One focus
of our marketing efforts is to promote the adoption of our
touch-enabling technologies by software developers in certain
markets. We have developed the VibeTonz Studio Software
Development Kit (“SDK”) and TouchSense SDK that
contain items such as programming or authoring tools,
documentation, tutorials, and software files containing sample
touch effects. Our software support staff also works closely
with developers to assist them in developing compelling
touch-enabled applications. We also worked closely with
Microsoft on the Microsoft DirectX Software Development Kit,
contributing to the API specification and offering our own
authoring tools, documentation, tutorials, and sample program to
supplement the DirectX SDK.
Expand Market Awareness. We promote adoption
of our touch-enabling technologies by increasing market
awareness as appropriate in our various market segments. We
believe that it is important to increase awareness among
potential customers and, in some markets, end users. As a part
of many of our consumer-product license agreements, we require
our licensees to use our trademarks and logos to create brand
awareness among consumers. To generate awareness of our
technologies and our licensees’ products, we participate in
industry tradeshows, maintain ongoing contact with industry
press, and provide product information on our Web site. To
generate increased awareness and sales leads, we execute
marketing campaigns specific to each market. These campaigns for
a specific market may include public relations, direct mail,
Internet marketing, advertising, tradeshows,
and/or
public speaking at industry events.
Develop and Protect Touch-enabling
Technology. Our success depends in part on our
ability to license and commercialize our intellectual property
and to continue to expand our intellectual property portfolio.
We devote substantial resources to research and development and
are engaged in projects focused on expanding the scope and
application of our technologies with particular emphasis on
mobile-phone, tactile-touchscreen, and medical-simulation
product offerings. We have also secured technology by
acquisition and may do so again in the future. We intend to
continue to invest in technology development and potential
acquisitions and to protect our intellectual property rights
across all of our businesses.
Immersion
Computing, Entertainment, and Industrial Segment
Products
and Markets
We initially licensed our intellectual property for
touch-enabling technologies for consumer gaming peripherals in
1996 under the I-FORCE trademark. We have transitioned our
branding to the TouchSense trademark, which extends beyond
gaming to other applications of our haptics-related products and
services.
Gaming
We have licensed our TouchSense intellectual property to
Microsoft for use in its products and to Apple Computer for use
in its Macintosh operating system. We have also licensed our
TouchSense intellectual property to over 20 gaming peripheral
manufacturers and distributors, including Logitech and Mad Catz,
to bring haptic technology to PC platforms including both
Microsoft Windows and Macintosh operating systems, as well as to
video game consoles, such as the Microsoft Xbox. For the years
ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, 11%, 10%, and 5%,
respectively, of total revenues were from Logitech.
Currently, there are consumer PC joysticks sold using TouchSense
technology, including the Wingman Force 3D Pro from Logitech;
the Cyborg evo Force from Saitek; and the Top Gun Afterburner
Force Feedback Joystick from ThrustMaster. There are also PC
steering wheel gaming peripherals licensed under the TouchSense
brand, including the MOMO Racing, NASCAR Racing, and Formula
Force GP from Logitech; the FGT
2-in-1 Force
9
Feedback from Guillemot; and the R440 Force Feedback Wheel from
Saitek. There are PC gamepads that use TouchSense technology,
including the Cordless Rumblepad 2 and Rumblepad 2 from
Logitech; the Dual Trigger
2-in-1
Rumble Force from ThrustMaster; and the P2500 from Saitek.
In the video game console peripheral market, we have licensed
our patents for use in hundreds of spinning-mass tactile
feedback devices from various manufacturers including Logitech,
Mad Catz, Intec, Joytech, Radica, NYKO, Saitek, Hori, Gemini,
and Griffin. These products are designed to work with one or
more video game consoles including the Xbox and Xbox 360 from
Microsoft; the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 from Sony; and the
GameCube and N64 from Nintendo.
For the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, 27%,
24%, and 16%, respectively, of our total revenues were PC and
console gaming revenues.
In the arcade entertainment market, our products include
steering wheel control electronics that provide industrial
strength and quality force feedback that enable very realistic
simulations. Our commercial-quality joystick provides a similar
user experience and has been used in theme-park attractions and
flight-training applications.
In the casino and bar-top amusement market, in 2005 we signed an
agreement with 3M Touch Systems that allows manufacture and
distribution of its MicroTouch touch screens with our TouchSense
technology.
Mobility
We have developed the VibeTonz System, an integrated,
programmable vibro-tactile application development and runtime
environment for handset OEMs, mobile operators, and application
developers. The VibeTonz System enables mobile handset users to
send and receive a wide range of vibro-tactile haptic effects
independently from or in synchronicity with audio, video, and
application program content. The VibeTonz System consists of
VibeTonz Mobile Player, a lightweight and powerful vibration
playback system that is embedded in the phone, and VibeTonz
Studio SDK, including a PC-based composition tool for
creating VibeTonz effects for inclusion in content and
applications such as ringtones, games, and user interface
enhancements.
In 2005, our Mobility business achieved many milestones towards
greater market acceptance of our products:
|
|
|
|
•
|
Samsung launched four VibeTonz-enabled phones in 2005. By the
end of 2005, six wireless operators that serve a total of
approximately 140 million subscribers worldwide offered a
VibeTonz-enabled phone. These included SK Telecom and Korea
Telecom Freetel, the number one and two operators in Korea, and
Verizon Wireless, MetroPCS, Sprint Nextel, and Alltel in the
U.S. The phones ranged from models targeted at the youth
and mobile gaming segments to a mid-market phone supplying
VibeTonz-enhanced usability features such as ringers, alerts,
and a call dropped cue.
|
|
|
•
|
We signed license agreements with mobile content providers AG
Interactive, Pulse Interactive, Indiagames, I-play, and
Superscape. Several companies including Verizon, Samsung, SK
Telecom, and Alltel, began selling VibeTonz-enhanced
downloadable games.
|
|
|
•
|
SKY Teletech in South Korea became the second handset
manufacturer to sign a multiyear, worldwide license agreement
for the VibeTonz System.
|
|
|
•
|
We joined the Symbian Platinum Partner Program to help simplify
and speed the integration of the VibeTonz System on mobile
phones that use the Symbian OS.
|
Automotive
In recent years there has been a proliferation of automotive
sub-systems, which are directly accessed by drivers and
passengers. These include telephone, navigation, climate
controls, personal comfort, and audio, video, and satellite
radio entertainment systems. As a result, there has been an
increase in the number of physical control devices in the
automotive center console, creating space and driver distraction
problems.
We have developed TouchSense technology for both rotary controls
and touchscreens appropriate for use in automobiles. TouchSense
rotary technology can consolidate the control of multiple
systems into a single module
10
that provides the appropriate feel for each function. This
allows the driver convenient access to many systems and supplies
context-sensitive cues for operation. TouchSense touchscreen
technology provides tactile feedback for an otherwise
unresponsive surface. Programmable haptic touchscreen, touch
surface, and rotary controls of many types can be used to
provide a space-saving, aesthetic look and a confirming response
for the driver that can help reduce glance time.
We are also conducting various funded development efforts and
providing tools and evaluation licenses to several major
automobile manufacturers and suppliers who have expressed
interest in touch-enabled automobile controls.
BMW was the first automobile manufacturer to license our
TouchSense rotary technology for use in controls starting with
its 2002 7 Series sedan model. BMW has also included our
technology in the Rolls Royce and in some models of its 5 Series
and 6 Series starting in 2003. Siemens VDO Automotive has
licensed our technology for use in the high-end Volkswagen
Phaeton sedan. ALPS Electric, also a licensee, has produced a
haptic rotary control that has been included in the new
Mercedes-Benz S class sedan currently being sold.
In 2005, Methode Electronics, Inc., a global designer and
manufacturer of electronic component and subsystem devices,
licensed a broad range of TouchSense technology for use in
products sold to automotive OEMs and their suppliers.
Europe’s largest automaker, Volkswagen, also licensed
TouchSense technology for use in its vehicles.
For the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, 8%,
8%, and 6%, respectively, of our total revenues were Automotive
revenues.
3D and
Mechanical CAD Design
Our three-dimensional and mechanical computer-aided design
products allow users to create three-dimensional computer models
directly from physical objects and also to precisely measure
manufactured parts. These products include the MicroScribe
product line, which contains sensor and microprocessor
technologies that allow users to measure or digitize physical
objects simply by tracing their contours with a stylus.
Third-party software records the three-dimensional measurements
or geometry of the object and reproduces it on the screen as a
three-dimensional computer model. In another application,
third-party software compares the desired dimensions to
three-dimensional measurements of an actual part to determine if
it is within tolerance. Taken together, these capabilities
support high-accuracy parts inspection, reverse engineering,
game development, animation, and filmmaking applications.
We manufacture and sell the CyberGlove system, a fully
instrumented glove that accurately measures the movement of a
user’s hand and, used in conjunction with our software,
maps the movement to a graphical hand on the computer screen. In
2005, we released a new wireless version of the CyberGlove
system. Users can “reach in and manipulate” digital
objects similar to physical objects. The
CyberTouchtm
system is a CyberGlove product with a vibro-tactile feedback
option that provides users with appropriate feedback when
individual fingers contact digital objects. The CyberGrasp
system is an option for the CyberGlove product that adds
kinesthetic force feedback to the fingertips. With a CyberGrasp
system, users can actually feel the shape and malleability of 3D
graphical objects being held in the fingertips and manipulated
on the screen. The CyberForce product is an enhanced, grounded,
force feedback product. Incorporating our TouchSense
technologies, a CyberForce system allows users to experience
sensations similar to the CyberGrasp, but with whole-arm,
whole-hand, as well as fingertip interactions.
Our software products for our whole-hand interfaces include
VirtualHand®
SDK, VirtualHand for MotionBuilder, and VirtualHand for V5.
VirtualHand SDK is a software toolkit that helps users integrate
our whole-hand glove-based interface products into specific
applications. VirtualHand for MotionBuilder lets users acquire,
edit, and blend motion animation in Alias’ MotionBuilder
real-time capture software. VirtualHand for V5 leverages our
relationship with Dassault Systemes by bringing our glove-based
products directly into the CATIA V5 and ENOVIA V5
environments, allowing for real-time interaction with digital
prototypes for the evaluation of ergonomics, assembly, and
maintainability of products. Users may develop multiple
digital-design iterations to replace the need for physical
prototypes, thereby reducing costs and time to market.
11
In addition to these 3D products, we manufacture and sell
specialized products such as computer peripherals that are not
touch-enabled, but incorporate related advanced computer
peripheral technologies. These specialized peripherals include
the
SoftMouse®,
a high performance, nonhaptic mouse optimized for use in
geographic information systems and mapmaking.
For the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, 17%,
19%, and 25%, respectively, of our total revenues were 3D and
mechanical CAD design revenues.
Sales
and Distribution
Sales of these products generally do not experience seasonal
fluctuations, except for royalties from gaming peripherals,
which tend to be significantly higher during the year-end
holiday shopping season. However, there may be variations in the
timing of revenue recognition from development contracts
depending on numerous factors including contract milestones and
operations scheduling. Our products incorporate readily
available commercial components. There are no unusual working
capital requirements in the Computing, Entertainment, and
Industrial segment. See “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”
as well as the notes to the consolidated financial statements
for revenue information for the past three years.
In the PC and video console gaming, mobility, and automotive
markets, we establish licensing relationships through our
business development efforts.
In mobility, sales relationships must be established with
operators, handset manufacturers, and content developers
worldwide. We have signed license agreements with mobile handset
manufacturers for the incorporation of the VibeTonz System into
certain mobile phone handsets. We have established relationships
with CDMA platform developer QUALCOMM, Incorporated and with
smartphone operating system developer Symbian, Ltd. Discussions
are ongoing with other handset manufacturers, operators, and
content developers in the United States, Europe, and Asia.
We employ a direct sales force in the United States, Europe, and
Asia to license our VibeTonz software products. In gaming, our
sales force is also augmented through co-marketing arrangements.
As part of our strategy to increase our visibility and promote
our touch-enabling technology, our consumer-products license
agreements generally require our licensees to display the
TouchSense or VibeTonz technology logo on their end products.
We sell our touchscreen products to OEMs and system integrators,
such as 3M Touch Systems, Advanced Input Systems, and
StacoSwitch, using a worldwide direct sales force. In addition,
the technology is licensed to large customers in automotive and
other markets.
In the automotive market, we use a worldwide direct sales force
to work with vehicle manufacturers and component suppliers. We
have also licensed our technology to Methode and ALPS Electric,
leading automotive component suppliers, as part of our strategy
to speed adoption of our TouchSense technologies across the
automotive industry.
The MicroScribe product line, along with first- and third-party
hardware accessories and companion software, is sold through an
international network of over 75 resellers. In addition to
direct sales, our 3D whole-hand interaction products are
distributed, sold, and supported by a growing worldwide network
of over 20 international and domestic resellers. We have
marketing relationships or contracts with leading 3D CAD/CAM and
interaction companies, including Dassault Systemes, a worldwide
leader in product lifecycle management software.
Competition
With respect to touch-enabled consumer products, we are aware of
several companies that claim to possess touch feedback
technology applicable to the consumer market, but we do not
consider these products to be significant competition. In
addition, we are aware of several companies that currently
market unlicensed touch feedback products in consumer markets.
We are engaged in litigation with two of these companies, Sony
Computer Entertainment, Inc. and Sony Computer Entertainment of
America, Inc., regarding infringement of our patents.
Several companies also currently market touch feedback products
that are competitive to ours in nonconsumer markets. These
companies could also shift their focus to the consumer market.
In addition, our licensees or other
12
companies may develop products that compete with products
employing our touch-enabling technologies, but are based on
alternative technologies, or develop technologies that are
similar or superior to our technologies, duplicate our
technologies, or design around our patents. Many of our
licensees, including Microsoft, Logitech, Samsung, and others
have greater financial and technical resources upon which to
draw in attempting to develop computer peripheral or mobile
phone technologies that do not make use of our touch-enabling
technologies.
With respect to our MicroScribe product line, we believe the G2
model, aimed primarily at the design, animation, and reverse
engineering markets, competes favorably with other digitizing
technologies, such as laser scanning and sonic systems, and with
other articulated arm models, which are all of higher accuracy
and higher price than these markets generally require. The
MicroScribe MX model, aimed at high-accuracy manufactured parts
inspection and reverse engineering markets, competes favorably
on price to other coordinated measurement machine
(CMM) models manufactured by Faro Technologies and Romer
CimCore which is a part of Hexagon AB. It also competes
favorably with these competitors for many types of projects
where accuracy measurement tolerances are greater than
0.004-inch.
SensAble Technologies currently sells high-end 3D sculpting and
design products that employ haptics. We believe that
SensAble’s products compete on some level with our 3D
interaction products. Competitors to our CyberGlove data glove
include Fifth Dimension Technologies, Phoenix Technologies, and
Measurand.
For licensed applications, our competitive position is partially
dependent on the competitive positions of our licensees that pay
a per-unit royalty. Our licensees’ markets are highly
competitive. We believe that the principal competitive factors
in our licensees’ markets include price, performance,
user-centric design,
ease-of-use,
quality, and timeliness of products, as well as the
manufacturer’s responsiveness, capacity, technical
abilities, established customer relationships, retail shelf
space, advertising, promotional programs, and brand recognition.
Touch-related benefits in some of these markets may be viewed
simply as enhancements and compete with nontouch-enabled
technologies.
Our failure to obtain or maintain adequate protection for our
intellectual property rights for any reason could hurt our
competitive position. There is no guarantee that patents will be
issued from the patent applications that we have filed or may
file. Our issued patents may be challenged, invalidated, or
circumvented, and claims of our patents may not be of sufficient
scope or strength, or issued in the proper geographic regions,
to provide meaningful protection or any commercial advantage.
Immersion
Medical
Products
and Markets
We have developed numerous simulation technologies that can be
used for medical training and testing. By enabling a medical
simulator to more fully engage users’ sense of touch, our
technologies can support realistic simulations that are
effective in teaching medical students, doctors, and other
health professionals what it feels like to perform a given
procedure. The use of our simulators allows these professionals
to perfect their practice in an environment that poses no risks
to patients, where mistakes have no dire consequences, and where
animal or cadaver use is minimized. We partner with leading
medical technology companies, such as Medtronic Inc. and Terumo
Cardiovascular Systems Corporation, to develop products that
closely simulate not only the look, but also the feel, of
performing actual medical procedures.
We have five medical simulation product lines: the
CathSim®
AccuTouch®
System, which simulates vascular access procedures such as
intravenous catheterization and phlebotomy; the Endoscopy
AccuTouch System, which simulates endoscopy procedures,
including bronchoscopy and lower and upper GI endoscopic
procedures; the Endovascular AccuTouch System, which simulates
endovascular interventions, including cardiac pacing,
angiography, angioplasty, and carotid and coronary stent
placement; the Laparoscopy AccuTouch System, consisting of
simulation hardware that can be integrated with third-party
software for laparoscopic surgical procedure simulation; and the
Hysteroscopy AccuTouch System, which simulates hysteroscopy
procedures. These systems are used for training and educational
purposes to enable health professionals to feel simulated forces
that they would experience during actual medical procedures,
such as encountering an unexpected obstruction in an artery. The
13
systems provide a realistic training environment augmented by
real-time graphics that include anatomic models developed from
actual patient data and high-fidelity sound that includes
simulated patient responses.
All our AccuTouch products, except for the laparoscopic system,
are comprised of a hardware system, an interface device, and
software modules that include several cases of increasing
difficulty, allowing users to develop their skills by
experiencing a broad range of pathologies in differing
anatomical conditions.
We design each product line to maximize the number of procedures
that can be simulated with minimal additional customer hardware
investment. These systems then enable potential additional sales
of software to the installed base of hardware systems. We
believe the relatively low price of our software modules
provides an opportunity for repeat sales. We currently have over
25 various software modules available that replicate such
medical procedures as intravenous catheterization, peripherally
inserted central catheters (PICC), bronchoscopy, colonoscopy,
cardiac pacing, carotid and coronary angioplasty, and
hysteroscopy.
For the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, 11%,
17%, and 18%, respectively, of our total revenues were from
Medtronic.
Sales
and Distribution
Sales of these products may experience seasonal fluctuations
related to teaching hospitals’ summer residency programs.
In addition, there may be variations in timing of revenue
recognition from the sale of systems with upgrade rights and
from development contracts. The latter may depend on numerous
factors including contract milestones and timing of work
performed against the contract. Most raw materials used in the
manufacturing of our products are readily available commercial
components. There are no unusual working capital requirements in
the Medical segment. See “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”
as well as the notes to the consolidated financial statements
for revenue information for the past three years.
With respect to medical simulation products, we employ a direct
sales force in the U.S. that markets simulation systems to
hospitals, colleges and universities, nursing schools, medical
schools, emergency medical technician training programs, the
military, medical device companies, and other organizations
involved in procedural medicine. We have eight regional medical
sales representatives in the United States. We also have one
independent sales representative in Europe and 28 resellers
outside the U.S.
For the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, 40%,
42%, and 47%, respectively, of our total revenues were Medical
revenues.
Competition
There are several companies that currently sell simulation
products to medical customers. Some simulators target the same
minimally invasive procedures as do ours, while others sell
mannequin-based systems for emergency response training. All
simulators compete at some level for the same funding in medical
institutions. Competitors include Simbionix USA Corporation,
Mentice Corporation, Laerdal Medical AS, Medical Education
Technologies, Inc., and Medical Simulation Corporation. The
principal competitive factors are the type of medical procedure
being simulated, technological sophistication, and price. We
believe we compete favorably on all three.
Research
and Development
Our success depends on our ability to invent, improve, and
reduce the costs of our technologies in a timely manner, produce
our products cost effectively, and interact with our licensees
who are integrating our technologies and licensed software into
theirs.
Immersion Engineering. We have assembled a
team of highly skilled engineers and scientists who possess
experience in the disciplines required for touch-enabling
technology development, including mechanical engineering,
electrical engineering, firmware, control system, computer
science, and haptic content design. For medical simulations, we
have assembled a unique team of experts who are skilled at
modeling the anatomy and physiology of various medical cases,
creating graphical renderings, designing haptic feedback, and
devising advanced control algorithms to simulate realistic
navigation for medical procedures, such as through the
body’s blood vessels.
14
Licensee Interaction. In order to increase the
successful design and adoption of our technology or software
products in a licensee’s product, we make efforts to ensure
clear communication between us and our customers. Typically,
collaborative development efforts are structured using a
four-phase approach including Product Definition, Concept
Development, Detail Design, and Production Design phases. At the
conclusion of each phase, a review meeting is held with team
members from both companies to examine what was discovered and
the conclusions that were reached during that portion of the
project. These reviews provide an excellent opportunity to
reassess the project direction and product viability prior to
entering subsequent phases. The continuation of our development
effort is contingent upon successful completion of prior phases.
This method ensures that the customer’s financial risk is
minimized and that project deliverables remain consistent with
the goals established in the Product Definition phase.
The four-phase design process is typically used for designing
new systems when the solution is not known beforehand. For
software product solutions, the integration of our products (for
example, firmware for mobile phones) requires a straightforward
approach, providing integration kits that include comprehensive
documentation, libraries, and source code. We work with the
customer to guarantee conformance to a standard and to ensure
that third-party developers can expect a consistent set of
haptically enabled devices in the field.
Our research and development efforts have been focused on
technology development, including hardware, software, control
algorithms, and design. We have entered into numerous contracts
with corporations and government agencies that help fund
advanced research and development. Our government contracts
permit us to retain ownership of the technology developed under
the contracts, provided that we supply the applicable government
agency a license to use the technology for noncommercial
purposes.
For the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, our
research and development expenses were $6.0 million,
$8.0 million, and $7.9 million, respectively.
Intellectual
Property
We believe that intellectual property protection is crucial to
our business. We rely on a combination of patents, copyrights,
trade secrets, trademarks, nondisclosure agreements with
employees and third-parties, licensing arrangements, and other
contractual agreements with third parties to protect our
intellectual property.
We and our wholly owned subsidiaries hold more than 500 issued
or pending patents in the U.S. and other countries covering
various aspects of our hardware and software technologies. Some
of our current U.S. patents begin to expire starting in
2007.
Where we feel it is appropriate, we will engage the legal system
to protect our intellectual property rights. For example, we
filed a complaint against Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. and
Sony Computer Entertainment of America, Inc. (collectively
“Sony Computer Entertainment”) on February 11,
2002 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
Court of California. On September 21, 2004, a jury returned
a verdict favorable to us in our patent infringement suit
against Sony Computer Entertainment. Judgment was entered in our
favor and we were awarded $82.0 million in past damages,
and pre-judgment interest in the amount of $8.7 million,
for a total of $90.7 million. Additionally, the Court
issued a permanent injunction (stayed pending appeal) against
the manufacture, use, sale, or import into the United States of
the infringing Sony PlayStation system. Sony Computer
Entertainment has appealed the judgment to the United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Due to the inherent
uncertainties of litigation, we cannot accurately predict the
ultimate outcome of this litigation. See Item 3.
“Legal Proceedings” for further details and discussion.
Investor
Information
You can access financial and other information in the Investor
Relations section of our Web site at www.immersion.com. We make
available, on our Web site, free of charge, copies of our annual
report on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K,
and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as
reasonably practicable after filing such material electronically
or otherwise furnishing it to the SEC.
15
The charters of our audit committee, our compensation committee,
and our nominating committee, and our code of Business Conduct
and Ethics (including code of ethics provisions that apply to
our principal executive officer, principal financial officer,
controller, and senior financial officers) are also available at
our Web site under “Corporate Governance.” These items
are also available to any stockholder who requests them by
calling +1 408.467.1900.
The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy,
and information statements, and other information regarding
issuers that file electronically with the SEC at
www.sec.gov.
Employees
As of December 31, 2005, we had 127 full-time and
6 part-time employees, including 42 in research and
development, 46 in sales and marketing, and 45 in legal,
finance, administration, and operations. As of that date, we
also had 6 independent contractors. None of our employees is
represented by a labor union, and we consider our employee
relations to be positive.
Executive
Officers
The following table sets forth information regarding our
executive officers as of March 1, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Position with the
Company
|
|
Age
|
|
Victor Viegas
|
|
President, Chief Executive
Officer, and Director
|
|
|
48
|
|
Stephen Ambler
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Vice
President, Finance
|
|
|
46
|
|
Richard Vogel
|
|
Senior Vice President and General
Manager, Immersion Medical
|
|
|
52
|
|
Michael Zuckerman
|
|
Senior Vice President and General
Manager, Industrial Business Group
|
|
|
49
|
|
Mr. Victor Viegas has served as our Chief Executive
Officer, President, and member of the Board of Directors since
October 2002. From February 2002 to February 2005, he also
served as President, Chief Operating Officer, and Chief
Financial Officer having joined Immersion in August 1999 as
Chief Financial Officer, Vice President, Finance. From June 1996
to August 1999, he served as Vice President, Finance and
Administration and Chief Financial Officer of Macrovision
Corporation, a developer and licensor of video and software copy
protection technologies. From October 1986 to June 1996, he
served as Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer
of Balco Incorporated, a manufacturer of advanced automotive
service equipment. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree in
Accounting and a Master of Business Administration degree from
Santa Clara University. Mr. Viegas is also a Certified
Public Accountant in the State of California.
Mr. Stephen Ambler joined Immersion in February 2005 as
Chief Financial Officer and Vice President, Finance responsible
for finance, operations, and human resources. From April 2001 to
January 2005, Mr. Ambler served as Chief Financial Officer
and Vice President, Finance of Bam! Entertainment, Inc., a
producer of interactive video games. From April 1994 to March
2001, he served as Director of Finance and Administration for
Europe and then Chief Financial Officer, Secretary, and Senior
Vice President, Finance of Insignia Solutions PLC, a wireless
solutions software company. From December 1992 to March 1994, he
served as Financial Controller and Company Secretary for Ampex
Great Britain Limited, a producer of recording equipment and
magnetic tape for the television and defense industries. From
May 1988 to December 1992, he served as Financial Controller and
then Finance Director of Carlton Cabletime Limited, a supplier
of cable television equipment. Mr. Ambler holds a diploma
in Accounting Studies from Oxford Polytechnic in England and is
qualified as a Chartered Accountant in England and Wales.
Mr. Richard Vogel joined Immersion in March 2004 as Senior
Vice President and General Manager of our wholly owned
subsidiary, Immersion Medical, in Gaithersburg, Maryland. From
September 2000 to February 2004, Mr. Vogel served as
President and Chief Executive Officer of SpectraLife, a medical
device company specializing in products for the management of
diabetes. From July 1996 to August 2000, he served as Senior
Vice President and General Manager of the New Technologies
Division of Kinetic Concepts, Inc., a manufacturer of electronic
medical devices and specialty surfaces for surgery and wound
care. From November 1989 to February 1996, he served as Vice
President, European Operations and Chief Operating Officer of
Vestar, Inc. a biopharmaceutical company
16
specializing in anti-infectives and oncology products. From
August 1983 to November 1989, Mr. Vogel served in a variety
of general managerial positions of increasing responsibility for
the Lederle (pharmaceuticals) and Davis & Geck (medical
devices) divisions of the American Cyanamid Company.
Mr. Vogel holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Middlebury
College in Vermont and a Master of Business Administration
degree from the Harvard Business School.
Mr. Michael Zuckerman was appointed Senior Vice President
and General Manager for the Industrial business unit in October
2004. He joined Immersion as Senior Vice President of Marketing
in October 2003. From June 2000 to October 2003, he held various
positions including Vice President of Marketing at Verity Inc.,
a provider of intellectual capital management solutions. From
November 1998 to June 2000, he served as Director of Sales, then
Vice President of Marketing, and then Vice President of Sales
and Marketing at Sensar, Inc., a provider of network security
products. Before Sensar, Mr. Zuckerman worked for S.C.
Bernstein & Co., an investment management firm, from
December 1997 to November 1998. From January 1997 to December
1997 Mr. Zuckerman held the position of Chief Operating
Officer for LocalEyes Corporation, an Internet search and
directory service company. Prior to joining LocalEyes
Corporation, Mr. Zuckerman served as Vice President,
Development Operations for File Tek, Inc., a software company,
from January 1995 to December 1996. Mr. Zuckerman also held
other positions with File Tek, including Vice President, Sales
and Marketing. Mr. Zuckerman holds a Bachelor of Science
degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Maryland.
Item 1A. Risk
Factors
You should carefully consider the following risks and
uncertainties, as well as other information in this report and
our SEC filings, before you invest in our common stock.
Investing in our common stock involves risk. If any of the
following risks or uncertainties actually occur, our business,
financial condition, or results of operations could be
materially adversely affected. The following risks and
uncertainties are not the only ones facing us. Additional risks
and uncertainties of which we are unaware or that we currently
believe are immaterial could also materially adversely affect
our business, financial condition, or results of operations. In
any case, the trading price of our common stock could decline,
and you could lose all or part of your investment. See also the
Forward-looking Statements discussion in Item 7,
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations.”
Factors
That May Affect Future Results
Company
Risks
We had
an accumulated deficit of $127 million as of
December 31, 2005, have a history of losses, will
experience losses in the future, and may not achieve or maintain
profitability.
Since 1997, we have incurred losses in every fiscal quarter. We
will need to generate significant ongoing revenue to achieve and
maintain profitability. We anticipate that our expenses will
increase in the foreseeable future as we:
|
|
|
|
•
|
protect and enforce our intellectual property, including the
costs of our continuing litigation against Sony Computer
Entertainment;
|
|
|
•
|
continue to develop our technologies;
|
|
|
•
|
attempt to expand the market for touch-enabled technologies and
products;
|
|
|
•
|
increase our sales and marketing efforts; and
|
|
|
•
|
pursue strategic relationships.
|
If our revenues grow more slowly than we anticipate or if our
operating expenses exceed our expectations, we may not achieve
or maintain profitability.
17
Our
convertible debentures provide for various events of default and
change of control transactions that would entitle the selling
stockholders to require us to repay the entire amount owed in
cash. If an event of default or change of control occurs, we may
be unable to immediately repay the amount owed, and any
repayment may leave us with little or no working capital in our
business.
Our convertible debentures provide for various events of
default, such as the termination of trading of our common stock
on the Nasdaq Stock Market and specified change of control
transactions. If an event of default or change of control occurs
prior to maturity, we may be required to redeem all or part of
the convertible debentures, including payment of applicable
interest and penalties. Some of the events of default include
matters over which we may have some, little, or no control. Many
other events of default are described in the agreements we
executed when we issued the convertible debentures. If an event
of default or a change of control occurs, we may be required to
repay the entire amount, plus liquidated damages, in cash. Any
such repayment could leave us with little or no working capital
for our business. We have not established a sinking fund for
payment of our outstanding convertible debentures, nor do we
anticipate doing so.
Our
current litigation against Sony Computer Entertainment and
others is expensive, disruptive, and time consuming, and will
continue to be, until resolved, and regardless of whether we are
ultimately successful, could adversely affect our
business.
Immersion Corporation vs. Microsoft Corporation, Sony
Computer Entertainment Inc. and Sony Computer Entertainment of
America, Inc.
On February 11, 2002, we filed a complaint against
Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”), Sony Computer
Entertainment, Inc., and Sony Computer Entertainment of America,
Inc. (collectively “Sony Computer Entertainment”) in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District Court of
California alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos.
5,889,672 and 6,275,213. The case was assigned to United States
District Judge Claudia Wilken. On April 4, 2002, Sony
Computer Entertainment and Microsoft answered the complaint by
denying the material allegations and alleging counterclaims
seeking a judicial declaration that the asserted patents were
invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed. Under the
counterclaims, the defendants were also seeking damages for
attorneys’ fees. On October 8, 2002, we filed an
amended complaint, withdrawing the claim under the
U.S. Patent No. 5,889,672 and adding claims under a
new patent, U.S. Patent No. 6,424,333.
On July 28, 2003, we announced that we had settled our
legal differences with Microsoft, and both parties agreed to
dismiss all claims and counterclaims relating to this matter as
well as assume financial responsibility for their respective
legal costs with respect to the lawsuit between us and Microsoft.
On August 16, 2004, the trial against Sony Computer
Entertainment commenced. On September 21, 2004, the jury
returned its verdict in favor of us. The jury found all the
asserted claims of the patents valid and infringed. The jury
awarded us damages in the amount of $82.0 million. On
January 10, 2005, the Court awarded us prejudgment interest
on the damages the jury awarded at the applicable prime rate.
The Court further ordered Sony Computer Entertainment to pay us
a compulsory license fee at the rate of 1.37%, the ratio of the
verdict amount to the amount of sales of infringing products,
effective as of July 1, 2004 and through the date of
Judgment. On February 9, 2005, the Court ordered that Sony
Computer Entertainment provide us with sales data 15 days
after the end of each quarter and clarifying that Sony Computer
Entertainment shall make the ordered payment 45 days after
the end of the applicable quarter. Sony Computer Entertainment
has made quarterly payments to us pursuant to the Court’s
orders. Although we have received payments, we may be required
to return them and any future payments based on the outcome of
the appeals process.
On February 9, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
Notice of Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit to appeal the Court’s January 10, 2005
order, and on February 10, 2005 Sony Computer Entertainment
filed an Amended Notice of Appeal to include an appeal from the
Court’s February 9, 2005 order.
On January 5 and 6, 2005, the Court held a bench trial on
Sony Computer Entertainment’s remaining allegations that
the ’333 patent was not enforceable due to alleged
inequitable conduct. On March 24, 2005, the Court resolved
this issue, entering a written order finding in favor of us. On
March 24, 2005, Judge Wilken also
18
entered judgment in our favor and awarded us $82.0 million
in past damages, and pre-judgment interest in the amount of
$8.7 million, for a total of $90.7 million. We were
also awarded certain court costs. Court costs do not include
attorneys’ fees.
Additionally, the Court issued a permanent injunction against
the manufacture, use, sale, or import into the United States of
the infringing Sony Computer Entertainment PlayStation system
consisting of the PlayStation consoles, Dual Shock controllers,
and the 47 games found by the jury to infringe our patents. The
Court stayed the permanent injunction pending appeal to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The
Court further ordered Sony Computer Entertainment to pay a
compulsory license fee at the rate of 1.37% for the duration of
the stay of the permanent injunction at the same rate and
conditions as previously awarded in its interim January 10,
2005 and February 9, 2005 Orders. On April 7, 2005
pursuant to a stipulation of the parties, the Court entered an
Amended Judgment to clarify that the Judgment in favor of us and
against Sony Computer Entertainment also encompassed Sony
Computer Entertainment’s counterclaims for declaratory
relief on invalidity and unenforceability, as well as
non-infringement.
Sony Computer Entertainment also filed further motions seeking
“judgment as a matter of a law” (JMOL) or for a new
trial, and a motion for a stay of an accounting and execution of
the Judgment. On May 17, 2005, Judge Wilken denied these
motions. On April 27, 2005, the Court granted Sony Computer
Entertainment’s request to approve a supersedeas bond,
secured by a cash deposit with the Court in the amount of
$102.5 million, to obtain a stay of enforcement of the
Court’s Amended Judgment pending appeal. On May 17,
2005, the Court issued a minute order stating that in lieu of
the supersedeas bond the Court would allow Sony Computer
Entertainment to place the funds on deposit with the Court in an
escrow account subject to acceptable escrow instructions. The
parties have negotiated an agreement pursuant to which the funds
on deposit with the Court may be deposited in an escrow account
at JP Morgan Chase.
On May 17, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
Request for Inter Partes Reexamination of the
‘333 Patent with the United States Patent and
Trademark Office. On May 19, 2005, Sony Computer
Entertainment filed a similar Request for reexamination of the
‘213 Patent. On July 6, 2005, we filed a Petition to
dismiss, stay or alternatively to suspend both of the requests
for reexamination, based at least on the grounds that a final
judgment has already been entered by a United States district
court, and that the PTO’s current inter partes
reexamination procedures deny due process of law. The PTO denied
the first petition, and we filed a second petition on
September 9, 2005. On November 17, 2005, the PTO
granted our petition, and suspended the inter partes
reexaminations until such time as the parallel court proceedings
warrant termination or resumption of the PTO examination and
prosecution proceedings. On December 13, 2005, Sony
Computer Entertainment filed a third petition requesting
permission to file an additional inter partes reexamination on
the claims of the ‘333 and ‘213 Patents for which
reexamination was not requested in Sony Computer
Entertainment’s original requests for reexamination; we
have opposed this petition. The PTO has not yet issued a
decision on Sony Computer Entertainment’s third petition.
Sony Computer Entertainment also filed ex parte reexamination
requests on the claims of the ‘333 and ‘213 Patents on
December 13, 2005.
On June 16, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
Notice of Appeal from the District Court Judgment to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The appeals of
the January and February orders regarding the compulsory license
have been consolidated with this appeal of the Judgment. Sony
Computer Entertainment’s Opening Brief was filed on
October 21, 2005; we filed an Opposition Brief on
December 5, 2005. Due to the cross appeal by Internet
Services LLC (“ISLLC”) (see below), the Federal
Circuit allowed us to file a Substitute Opposition Brief on
February 17, 2006 responding to the briefs filed by both
Sony Computer Entertainment and ISLLC. We expect the briefing
for the appeal to be concluded by all parties by the end of
March 2006.
On July 21, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
motion in the District Court before Judge Wilken seeking relief
from the final judgment under Rule 60(b) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure on the grounds of alleged fraud and
“newly discovered evidence” of purported prior art
which Sony Computer Entertainment contends we concealed and
withheld attributable to Mr. Craig Thorner, a named
inventor on three patents that Sony Computer Entertainment urged
as a basis for patent invalidity during the trial. We dispute
and intend to vigorously defend ourselves against these
allegations. Briefing is complete, and a hearing was held before
Judge Wilken on
19
January 20, 2006. On March 8, 2006, the Court denied
Sony Computer Entertainment’s motion pursuant to Rule 60(b)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in its entirety.
Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, we cannot
accurately predict how the Court of Appeals will decide the
appeal. We anticipate that the litigation will continue to be
costly, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to
recover the costs we incur in connection with the litigation. We
expense litigation costs as incurred and only accrue for costs
that have been incurred but not paid to the vendor as of the
financial statement date. The litigation has diverted, and is
likely to continue to divert, the efforts and attention of some
of our key management and personnel. As a result, until such
time as it is resolved, the litigation could adversely affect
our business. Further, any unfavorable outcome could adversely
affect our business.
In the event we settle our lawsuit with Sony Computer
Entertainment, we will be obligated to pay certain sums to
Microsoft as described in Note 9 to the consolidated
financial statements. If Sony Computer Entertainment ultimately
were successful on appeal or in the reexamination process, the
Judgment may be put at risk, assets relating to the patents in
the lawsuit may be impaired, and Sony Computer Entertainment may
seek additional relief, such as attorneys’ fees.
Internet
Services LLC Litigation
On October 20, 2004, ISLLC, a Company licensee and
cross-claim defendant against whom Sony Computer Entertainment
had filed a claim seeking declaratory relief, filed claims
against us alleging that we breached a contract with ISLLC by
suing Sony Computer Entertainment for patent infringement
relating to haptically-enabled software whose topics or images
are allegedly age-restricted, for judicial apportionment of
damages awarded by the jury between ISLLC and us, and for a
judicial declaration with respect to ISLLC’s rights and
duties under agreements with us. On December 29, 2004, the
Court issued an order dismissing ISLLC’s claims against
Sony Computer Entertainment with prejudice and dismissing
ISLLC’s claims against us without prejudice to ISLLC filing
a new complaint “if it can do so in good faith without
contradicting, or repeating the deficiency of, its
complaint.”
On January 12, 2005, ISLLC filed Amended Cross-Claims and
Counterclaims against us that contained similar claims. ISLLC
also realleged counterclaims against Sony Computer
Entertainment. On January 28, 2005, we filed a motion to
dismiss ISLLC’s Amended Cross-Claims and a motion to strike
ISLLC’s Counterclaims against Sony Computer Entertainment.
On March 24, 2005 the Court issued an order dismissing
ISLLC’s claims with prejudice as to ISLLC’s claim
seeking a declaratory judgment that it is an exclusive licensee
under the ’213 and ’333 patents and as to ISLLC’s
claim seeking “judicial apportionment” of the damages
verdict in the Sony Computer Entertainment case. The
Court’s order further dismissed ISLLC’s claims without
prejudice as to ISLLC’s breach of contract and unjust
enrichment claims.
ISLLC filed a notice of appeal of those orders with the Federal
Circuit on April 18, 2005. ISLLC’s appeal has been
consolidated with Sony Computer Entertainment’s appeal.
ISLLC filed its Opening Brief in December 2005. As noted above,
the Federal Circuit allowed us to file a Substitute Opposition
Brief on February 17, 2006 responding to the briefs filed
by both Sony Computer Entertainment and ISLLC; we expect the
briefing for the appeal to be concluded by all parties by the
end of March 2006.
On February 8, 2006, ISLLC filed a lawsuit against us in
the Superior Court of Santa Clara County. ISLLC’s
complaint seeks a share of our Judgment and recovery against
Sony Computer Entertainment and of the Microsoft settlement
proceeds, and generally restates the claims already adjudicated
in District Court. Our response to the complaint is due on
March 16, 2006.
Litigation
regarding intellectual property rights could be expensive,
disruptive, and time consuming; could result in the impairment
or loss of portions of our intellectual property; and could
adversely affect our business.
Intellectual property litigation, whether brought by us or by
others against us, has been in the past, and could result in the
future, in the expenditure of significant financial resources
and the diversion of management’s time and efforts. From
time to time, we initiate claims against third parties that we
believe infringe our intellectual property
20
rights. We intend to enforce our intellectual property rights
vigorously and may initiate litigation against parties that we
believe are infringing our intellectual property rights if we
are unable to resolve matters satisfactorily through
negotiation. Litigation brought to protect and enforce our
intellectual property rights could be costly, time-consuming,
and distracting to management and could result in the impairment
or loss of portions of our intellectual property. In addition,
any litigation in which we are accused of infringement may cause
product shipment delays, require us to develop non-infringing
technologies, or require us to enter into royalty or license
agreements even before the issue of infringement has been
decided on the merits. If any litigation were not resolved in
our favor, we could become subject to substantial damage claims
from third parties and indemnification claims from our
licensees. We and our licensees could be enjoined from the
continued use of the technologies at issue without a royalty or
license agreement. Royalty or license agreements, if required,
might not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. If a
third party claiming infringement against us prevailed, and we
could not develop non-infringing technologies or license the
infringed or similar technologies on a timely and cost-effective
basis, our expenses would increase and our revenues could
decrease.
We attempt to avoid infringing known proprietary rights of third
parties. However, third parties may hold, or may in the future
be issued, patents that could be infringed by our products or
technologies. Any of these third parties might make a claim of
infringement against us with respect to the products that we
manufacture and the technologies that we license. From time to
time, we have received letters from companies, several of which
have significantly greater financial resources than we do,
asserting that some of our technologies, or those of our
licensees, infringe their intellectual property rights. Certain
of our licensees have received similar letters from these or
other companies. Such letters or subsequent litigation may
influence our licensees’ decisions whether to ship products
incorporating our technologies. In addition, such letters may
cause a dispute between our licensees and us over
indemnification for the infringement claim. Any of these
notices, or additional notices that we or our licensees could
receive in the future from these or other companies, could lead
to litigation against us, either regarding the infringement
claim or the indemnification claim.
We have acquired patents from third parties and also license
some technologies from third parties. We must rely upon the
owners of the patents or the technologies for information on the
origin and ownership of the acquired or licensed technologies.
As a result, our exposure to infringement claims may increase.
We generally obtain representations as to the origin and
ownership of acquired or licensed technologies and
indemnification to cover any breach of these representations.
However, representations may not be accurate and indemnification
may not provide adequate compensation for breach of the
representations. Intellectual property claims against our
licensees, or us, whether or not they have merit, could be
time-consuming to defend, cause product shipment delays, require
us to pay damages, harm existing license arrangements, or
require us or our licensees to cease utilizing the technologies
unless we can enter into royalty or licensing agreements.
Royalty or licensing agreements might not be available on terms
acceptable to us or at all. Furthermore, claims by third parties
against our licensees could also result in claims by our
licensees against us under the indemnification provisions of our
licensees’ agreements with us.
The
terms in our agreements may be construed by our licensees in a
manner that is inconsistent with the rights that we have granted
to other licensees, or in a manner that may require us to incur
substantial costs to resolve conflicts over license
terms.
We have entered into, and we expect to continue to enter into,
agreements pursuant to which our licensees are granted rights
under our technology and intellectual property. These rights may
be granted in certain fields of use, or with respect to certain
market sectors or product categories, and may include exclusive
rights or sublicensing rights. We refer to the license terms and
restrictions in our agreements, including, but not limited to,
field of use definitions, market sector, and product category
definitions, collectively as “License Provisions.”
Due to the continuing evolution of market sectors, product
categories, and licensee business models, and to the compromises
inherent in the drafting and negotiation of License Provisions,
our licensees may, at some time during the term of their
agreements with us, interpret License Provisions in their
agreements in a way that is different from our interpretation of
such License Provisions, or in a way that is in conflict with
the rights that we have granted to other licensees. Such
interpretations by our licensees may lead to (a) claims
that we have granted rights to one licensee which are
inconsistent with the rights that we have granted to another
licensee,
and/or
(b) claims by one licensee against another licensee that
may result in our incurring indemnification or other obligations
or liabilities.
21
In addition, after we enter into an agreement, it is possible
that markets
and/or
products, or legal
and/or
regulatory environments, will evolve in a manner that we did not
foresee or was not foreseeable at the time we entered into the
agreement. As a result, in the agreement, we may have granted
rights that will preclude or restrict our exploitation of
potentially lucrative new opportunities that arise after the
execution of the agreement.
Product
liability claims could be time-consuming and costly to defend
and could expose us to loss.
Our products or our licensees’ products may have flaws or
other defects that may lead to personal or other injury claims.
If products that we or our licensees sell cause personal injury,
financial loss, or other injury to our or our licensees’
customers, the customers or our licensees may seek damages or
other recovery from us. Any claims against us would be
time-consuming, expensive to defend, and distracting to
management, and could result in damages and injure our
reputation
and/or the
reputation of our products, or the reputation of our licensees
or their products. This damage could limit the market for our
and our licensees’ products and harm our results of
operations.
In the past, manufacturers of peripheral products including
certain gaming products such as joysticks, wheels, or gamepads,
have been subject to claims alleging that use of their products
has caused or contributed to various types of repetitive stress
injuries, including carpal tunnel syndrome. We have not
experienced any product liability claims to date. Although our
license agreements typically contain provisions designed to
limit our exposure to product liability claims, existing or
future laws or unfavorable judicial decisions could limit or
invalidate the provisions.
If the
settlement on our current class action lawsuit falls through,
the continuing lawsuit could be
expensive, disruptive, and time consuming to defend
against, and if we are not successful, could adversely affect
our business.
We are involved in legal proceedings relating to a class action
lawsuit filed on November 9, 2001, In re Immersion
Corporation Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation,
No. Civ. 01-9975 (S.D.N.Y.), related to In re Initial
Public Offering Securities Litigation, No. 21 MC 92
(S.D.N.Y.). The named defendants are Immersion and three of our
current or former officers or directors (the “Immersion
Defendants”) and certain underwriters of our
November 12, 1999 IPO. Subsequently, two of the individual
defendants stipulated to a dismissal without prejudice.
The operative amended complaint is brought on purported behalf
of all persons who purchased our common stock from the date of
our IPO through December 6, 2000. It alleges liability
under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 on the grounds that the registration statement for the IPO
did not disclose that: (1) the underwriters agreed to allow
certain customers to purchase shares in the IPO in exchange for
excess commissions to be paid to the underwriters; and
(2) the underwriters arranged for certain customers to
purchase additional shares in the aftermarket at predetermined
prices. The complaint also appears to allege that false or
misleading analyst reports were issued. The complaint does not
claim any specific amount of damages.
Similar allegations were made in other lawsuits challenging over
300 other initial public offerings and follow-on offerings
conducted in 1999 and 2000. The cases were consolidated for
pretrial purposes. On February 19, 2003, the Court ruled on
all defendants’ motions to dismiss. The motion was denied
as to claims under the Securities Act of 1933 in the case
involving us, as well as in all other cases (except for 10
cases). The motion was denied as to the claim under
Section 10(b) as to us, on the basis that the complaint
alleged that we had made acquisition(s) following the IPO. The
motion was granted as to the claim under Section 10(b), but
denied as to the claim under Section 20(a), as to the
remaining individual defendant.
We and most of the issuer defendants have settled with the
plaintiffs. In this settlement, plaintiffs have dismissed and
released all claims against the Immersion Defendants, in
exchange for a contingent payment by the insurance companies
collectively responsible for insuring the issuers in all of the
IPO cases, and for the assignment or surrender of certain claims
we may have against the underwriters. The Immersion Defendants
will not be required to make any cash payments in the
settlement, unless the pro rata amount paid by the insurers in
the settlement exceeds the amount of the insurance coverage, a
circumstance which we believe is remote. The settlement will
require approval of the Court, which cannot be assured, after
class members are given the opportunity to object to the
settlement or opt out of the settlement.
22
If our
facilities were to experience catastrophic loss, our operations
would be seriously harmed.
Our facilities could be subject to a catastrophic loss such as
fire, flood, earthquake, power outage, or terrorist activity.
California has experienced problems with its power supply in
recent years. As a result, we have experienced utility cost
increases and may experience unexpected interruptions in our
power supply that could have a material adverse effect on our
sales, results of operations, and financial condition. In
addition, a substantial portion of our research and development
activities, manufacturing, our corporate headquarters, and other
critical business operations are located near major earthquake
faults in San Jose, California, an area with a history of
seismic events. Any such loss at our facilities could disrupt
our operations, delay production, shipments, and revenue, and
result in large expenses to repair and replace the facility.
While we believe that we maintain insurance sufficient to cover
most long-term potential losses at our facilities, our existing
insurance may not be adequate for all possible losses.
Industry
and Technology Risks
We
have little or no control or influence on our licensees’
design, manufacturing, promotion, distribution, or pricing of
their products incorporating our touch-enabling technologies,
upon which we generate
royalty revenue.
A key part of our business strategy is to license our
intellectual property to companies that manufacture and sell
products incorporating our touch-enabling technologies. Sales of
those products generate royalty and license revenue for us. For
the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, 37%,
37%, and 30%, respectively, of our total revenues were royalty
and license revenues. However, we do not control or influence
the design, manufacture, quality control, promotion,
distribution, or pricing of products that are manufactured and
sold by our licensees. In addition, we generally do not have
commitments from our licensees that they will continue to use
our technologies in current or future products. As a result,
products incorporating our technologies may not be brought to
market, meet quality control standards, achieve commercial
acceptance, or generate meaningful royalty revenue for us. For
us to generate royalty revenue, licensees that pay us per-unit
royalties must manufacture and distribute products incorporating
our touch-enabling technologies in a timely fashion and generate
consumer demand through marketing and other promotional
activities. Products incorporating our touch-enabling
technologies are generally more difficult to design and
manufacture, which may cause product introduction delays or
quality control problems. If our licensees fail to stimulate and
capitalize upon market demand for products that generate
royalties for us, or if products are recalled because of quality
control problems, our revenues will not grow and could decline.
Alternatively, if a product that incorporates our touch-enabling
technologies achieves widespread market acceptance, the product
manufacturer may elect to stop making it rather than pay us
royalties based on sales of the product.
Peak demand for products that incorporate our technologies,
especially in the video console gaming and computer gaming
peripherals market, typically occurs in the fourth calendar
quarter as a result of increased demand during the year-end
holiday season. If our licensees do not ship products
incorporating our touch-enabling technologies in a timely
fashion or fail to achieve strong sales in the fourth quarter of
the calendar year, we may not receive related royalty and
license revenue.
Most of our current gaming royalty revenues come from
third-party peripheral makers who make licensed gaming products
designed for use with popular video game console systems from
Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo. Video game console systems are
closed, proprietary systems, and video game console system
makers typically impose certain requirements or restrictions on
third-party peripheral makers who wish to make peripherals that
will be compatible with a particular video game console system.
These requirements and restrictions could be in the form of
hardware technical specifications, software technical
specifications, security specifications, component vendor
specifications, licensing terms and conditions, or other forms.
If third-party peripheral makers can not or are not allowed to
obtain or satisfy these requirements or restrictions, our gaming
royalty revenues could be significantly reduced. Furthermore,
should a significant video game console maker choose to omit
touch-enabling capabilities from its console system, it may very
well lead our gaming licensees to stop making products with
touch-enabling capabilities, thereby significantly reducing our
gaming royalty revenues. The recently launched Microsoft
Xbox 360 ships with touch-enabling capabilities built-in,
and the upcoming next generation Nintendo Revolution
23
has been reported by Nintendo to have touch-enabling
capabilities. However, no announcements have been made regarding
the touch-enabling capabilities of the upcoming next-generation
Sony console system.
Microsoft launched its next-generation Xbox 360 video game
console in November 2005, and it is anticipated that Sony and
Nintendo will launch their new next-generation video game
console systems in 2006. Historically, according to data from
the NPD Group, sales of console peripherals by third-party
suppliers grow to about 65% or more of total market share near
the end of the life cycle of a console system. When
next-generation console systems are released third-party
peripheral product sales initially account for 30% or less of
total market share. This percentage increases as the console
model ages. Most of our current gaming royalty revenue is from
third-party peripheral makers. Consequently, with the new
console introductions already beginning and continuing to take
place over the year, our gaming royalty revenue will likely
decrease from current levels, which may hurt our business.
Because
we have a fixed payment license with Microsoft, our royalty
revenue from licensing in the
gaming market and other consumer markets might decline if
Microsoft increases its volume of sales of
touch-enabled gaming products and consumer products at the
expense of our other licensees.
Under the terms of our present agreement with Microsoft,
Microsoft receives a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable
license to our worldwide portfolio of patents. This license
permits Microsoft to make, use, and sell hardware, software, and
services, excluding specified products, covered by our patents.
We also granted to Microsoft a limited right, under our patents
relating to touch technologies, to sublicense specified rights,
excluding rights to excluded products and peripheral devices, to
third-party customers of Microsoft’s or Microsoft’s
subsidiaries’ products (other than Sony Corporation, Sony
Computer Entertainment Inc., Sony Computer Entertainment of
America Inc., and their subsidiaries). In exchange, for the
grant of these rights and the rights included in a separate
Sublicense Agreement, Microsoft paid us a one-time payment of
$20.0 million. We will not receive any further revenues or
royalties from Microsoft under our current agreement with
Microsoft. Microsoft has a significant share of the market for
touch-enabled console gaming computer peripherals and is
pursuing other consumer markets such as mobile phones and PDAs.
Microsoft has significantly greater financial, sales, and
marketing resources, as well as greater name recognition and a
larger customer base than our other licensees. In the event that
Microsoft increases its share of these markets, our royalty
revenue from other licensees in these market segments might
decline.
For the Microsoft Xbox 360 video console system launched in
November 2005, Microsoft has, to date, not licensed the rights
to produce wireless controllers to any third-party peripheral
makers. Wireless game controllers account for a significant and
growing portion of our royalty revenue, including revenue from
Logitech and Mad Catz. Therefore, by retaining the market for
wireless Xbox 360 game controllers exclusively for itself,
Microsoft will likely significantly increase its market share of
all aftermarket game controller sales, the effect of which is
likely to reduce our gaming royalty revenue.
Logitech
accounts for a significant portion of our revenue and the
failure of Logitech to achieve sales volumes for its gaming
peripheral products that incorporate our touch-enabling
technologies may reduce our total revenue.
Logitech accounts for a significant portion of our revenue. For
the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, 11%,
10%, and 5%, respectively, of our total revenues were derived
from Logitech. We expect that Logitech will continue to account
for a significant portion of our total revenue. If
Logitech’s sales volumes for its computer and console
gaming peripheral products that incorporate our technologies
decline, our total revenue may decline.
Medtronic
accounts for a significant portion of our revenues and a
reduction in sales to Medtronic, or a reduction in development
work for Medtronic, may reduce our total revenue.
Medtronic accounts for a significant portion of our revenue. For
the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, 11%,
17%, and 18%, respectively, of our total revenues were derived
from Medtronic. If our product sales to Medtronic decline,
and/or
Medtronic reduces the development activities we perform, then
our total revenue may decline.
24
Automotive
royalties will be reduced if BMW were to abandon its iDrive
system or remove our technology from the iDrive.
Our largest royalty stream from the automotive industry is
currently from BMW for its iDrive controller. Press reviews of
this system have been largely negative and critical of the
system’s complex user interface, which we did not design.
Nevertheless, this negative press may cause BMW to abandon the
iDrive controller or to redesign it
and/or
remove our technology from it. The design cycle time for major
automotive systems like iDrive is typically two to five years.
One or more of the current BMW product lines may go through
replacement or redesign and during that cycle the iDrive
controller may be replaced or removed. Historically, BMW has
often launched its newest technology in its 7 Series. We also
believe that the current 7 series is due for redesign by 2008
and that our technology may, or may not, be part of the
redesigned iDrive. A decline in our royalties from BMW will harm
our business.
We
depend on third-party suppliers, and our revenue
and/or
results of operations could suffer if we fail to manage supplier
issues properly.
Our operations depend on our ability to anticipate our needs for
components and products for a wide variety of systems, products,
and services, and our suppliers’ ability to deliver
sufficient quantities of quality components, products, and
services at reasonable prices in time for us to meet critical
schedules. We may experience a shortage of, or a delay in
receiving, certain supplies as a result of strong demand,
capacity constraints, supplier financial weaknesses, disputes
with suppliers, other problems experienced by suppliers, or
problems faced during the transition to new suppliers. If
shortages or delays persist, the price of these supplies may
increase, we may be exposed to quality issues, or the supplies
may not be available at all. We may not be able to secure enough
supplies at reasonable prices or of acceptable quality to build
products or provide services in a timely manner in the
quantities or according to the specifications needed. We could
lose time-sensitive sales, incur additional freight costs, or be
unable to pass on price increases to our customers. If we cannot
adequately address supply issues, we might have to reengineer
some products or service offerings, resulting in further costs
and delays.
Additionally, our use of single source suppliers for certain
components could exacerbate our supplier issues. We obtain a
significant number of components from single sources due to
technology, availability, price, quality, or other
considerations. In addition, new products that we introduce may
use custom components obtained from only one source initially,
until we have evaluated whether there is a need for additional
suppliers. The performance of such single source suppliers may
affect the quality, quantity, and price of supplies to us.
Accordingly, our revenue
and/or
results of operations could be adversely impacted by such events.
Because
personal computer peripheral products that incorporate our
touch-enabling technologies
currently must work with Microsoft’s operating system
software, our costs could increase and our
revenues could decline if Microsoft modifies its operating
system software.
Our hardware and software technologies for personal computer
peripheral products that incorporate our touch-enabling
technologies are currently compatible with Microsoft’s
Windows 2000, Windows Me, and Windows XP operating systems,
including DirectX, Microsoft’s entertainment applications
programming interface. Modifications and new versions of
Microsoft’s operating system (including DirectX and the
upcoming Windows Vista anticipated to launch in late
2006) may require that we
and/or our
licensees modify the touch-enabling technologies to be
compatible with Microsoft’s modifications or new versions,
and this could cause delays in the release of products by our
licensees. If Microsoft modifies its software products in ways
that limit the use of our other licensees’ products, our
costs could increase and our revenues could decline.
Reduced
spending by corporate or university research and development
departments may adversely affect sales of our three-dimensional
and professional products.
Any economic downturn could lead to a reduction in
corporations’ or university budgets for research and
development in sectors, including the automotive and aerospace
sectors, which use our three-dimensional and professional
products. Sales of our three-dimensional and professional
products, including our CyberGlove line of
25
whole-hand sensing gloves and our MicroScribe line of
digitizers, could be adversely affected by cuts in corporate
research and development budgets.
Competition
between our products and our licensees’ products may reduce
our revenue.
Rapid technological change, short product life cycles, cyclical
market patterns, declining average selling prices, and
increasing foreign and domestic competition characterize the
markets in which we and our licensees compete. We believe that
competition in these markets will continue to be intense and
that competitive pressures will drive the price of our products
and our licensees’ products downward. These price
reductions, if not offset by increases in unit sales or
productivity, will cause our revenues to decline.
We face competition from unlicensed products as well. Our
licensees or other third parties may seek to develop products
using our intellectual property or develop alternative designs
that attempt to circumvent our intellectual property, which they
believe do not require a license under our intellectual
property. These potential competitors may have significantly
greater financial, technical, and marketing resources than we
do, and the costs associated with asserting our intellectual
property rights against such products and such potential
competitors could be significant. Moreover, if such alternative
designs were determined by a court not to require a license
under our intellectual property rights, competition from such
unlicensed products could limit or reduce our revenues.
We
have experienced significant change in our business, and our
failure to manage the complexities
associated with the changing economic environment and
technology landscape could harm our business.
Any future periods of rapid economic and technological change
may place significant strains on our managerial, financial,
engineering, and other resources. In particular, because our
technologies are complex, if the economy weakens, an unusually
high level of managerial effectiveness in anticipating,
planning, coordinating, and meeting our operational needs as
well as the needs of our licensees may be required.
The
market for certain touch-enabling technologies and touch-enabled
products is at an early stage and if market demand does not
develop, we may not achieve or sustain revenue
growth.
The market for certain of our touch-enabling technologies and
certain of our licensees’ touch-enabled products is at an
early stage. If we and our licensees are unable to develop
demand for touch-enabling technologies and touch-enabled
products, we may not achieve or sustain revenue growth. We
cannot accurately predict the growth of the markets for these
technologies and products, the timing of product introductions,
or the timing of commercial acceptance of these products.
Even if our touch-enabling technologies and our licensees’
touch-enabled products are ultimately widely adopted, widespread
adoption may take a long time to occur. The timing and amount of
royalties and product sales that we receive will depend on
whether the products marketed achieve widespread adoption and,
if so, how rapidly that adoption occurs.
We expect that we will need to pursue extensive and expensive
marketing and sales efforts to educate prospective licensees,
component customers, and end users about the uses and benefits
of our technologies and to persuade software developers to
create software that utilizes our technologies. Negative product
reviews or publicity about our products, our licensees’
products, haptic features, or haptic technology in general could
have a negative impact on market adoption, our revenue,
and/or our
ability to license our technologies in the future.
If we
are unable to enter into new licensing arrangements with our
existing licensees, and with additional third-party
manufacturers for our touch-enabling technologies, our royalty
revenue may not grow.
Our revenue growth is significantly dependent on our ability to
enter into new licensing arrangements. Our failure to enter into
new or renewal of licensing arrangements will cause our
operating results to suffer. We face numerous risks in obtaining
new licenses on terms consistent with our business objectives
and in maintaining, expanding, and supporting our relationships
with our current licensees. These risks include:
|
|
|
|
•
|
the lengthy and expensive process of building a relationship
with potential licensees;
|
26
|
|
|
|
•
|
the fact that we may compete with the internal design teams of
existing and potential licensees;
|
|
|
•
|
difficulties in persuading product manufacturers to work with
us, to rely on us for critical technology, and to disclose to us
proprietary product development and other strategies;
|
|
|
•
|
challenges in demonstrating the compelling value of our
technologies in new applications like mobile phones and
touchscreens;
|
|
|
•
|
difficulties in persuading existing and potential licensees to
bear the development costs and risks necessary to incorporate
our technologies into their products;
|
|
|
•
|
difficulties in signing up new automotive licensees for
not-yet-commercialized technology when their components
suppliers may not yet be able to meet the car companies’
stringent quality and parts availability standards;
|
|
|
•
|
difficulty in signing up new gaming licensees, as well as losing
our existing gaming licensees, if we are not successful in the
litigation with Sony Computer Entertainment; and
|
|
|
•
|
reluctance of content developers, mobile phone manufacturers,
and service providers to sign license agreements without a
critical mass of other such inter-dependent supporters of the
mobile phone industry having a license or without enough phones
in the market that incorporate our technologies.
|
A majority of our current royalty revenue has been derived from
the licensing of our portfolio of touch-enabling technologies
for video game console and personal computer gaming peripherals,
such as gamepads, joysticks, and steering wheels. Though
substantially smaller than the market for dedicated gaming
console peripherals, the market for gamepads, joysticks, and
steering wheels for use with personal computers is declining and
is characterized by declining average selling prices. If the
console peripheral market also experiences declines in sales and
selling prices, we may not achieve royalty revenue growth.
If we
fail to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights,
our ability to license our technologies and generate revenues
would be impaired.
Our business depends on generating revenues by licensing our
intellectual property rights and by selling products that
incorporate our technologies. We rely on our significant patent
portfolio to protect our proprietary rights. If we are not able
to protect and enforce those rights, our ability to obtain
future licenses or maintain current licenses and royalty revenue
could be impaired. In addition, if a court or the patent office
were to limit the scope, declare unenforceable, or invalidate
any of our patents, current licensees may refuse to make royalty
payments or they may choose to challenge one or more of our
patents. It is also possible that:
|
|
|
|
•
|
our pending patent applications may not result in the issuance
of patents;
|
|
|
•
|
our patents may not be broad enough to protect our proprietary
rights; and
|
|
|
•
|
effective patent protection may not be available in every
country in which our licensees do business.
|
We also rely on licenses, confidentiality agreements, other
contractual agreements, and copyright, trademark, and trade
secret laws to establish and protect our proprietary rights. It
is possible that:
|
|
|
|
•
|
laws and contractual restrictions may not be sufficient to
prevent misappropriation of our technologies or deter others
from developing similar technologies; and
|
|
|
•
|
policing unauthorized use of our products, trademarks, and other
proprietary rights would be difficult, expensive, and
time-consuming, particularly overseas.
|
Certain
terms or rights granted in our license agreements or our
development contracts may limit our future revenue
opportunities.
While it is not our general practice to sign license agreements
that provide exclusive rights for a period of time with respect
to a technology, field of use,
and/or
geography, or to accept similar limitations in product
development contracts, we have entered into such agreements and
may in the future. Although additional compensation or other
27
benefits may be part of the agreement, the compensation or
benefits may not adequately compensate us for the limitations or
restrictions we have agreed to as that particular market
develops. Over the life of the exclusivity period, especially in
markets that grow larger or faster than anticipated, our revenue
may be limited and less than what we could have achieved in the
market with several licensees or additional products available
to sell to a specific set of customers.
If we
are unable to continually improve and reduce the cost of our
technologies, companies may not incorporate our technologies
into their products, which could impair our revenue
growth.
Our ability to achieve revenue growth depends on our continuing
ability to improve and reduce the cost of our technologies and
to introduce these technologies to the marketplace in a timely
manner. If our development efforts are not successful or are
significantly delayed, companies may not incorporate our
technologies into their products and our revenue growth may be
impaired.
If we
fail to develop new or enhanced technologies for new
applications and platforms, we may not be able to create a
market for our technologies or our technologies may become
obsolete, and our ability to grow and our results of operations
might be harmed.
Our initiatives to develop new and enhanced technologies and to
commercialize these technologies for new applications and new
platforms may not be successful. Any new or enhanced
technologies may not be favorably received by consumers and
could damage our reputation or our brand. Expanding our
technologies could also require significant additional expenses
and strain our management, financial, and operational resources.
Moreover, technology products generally have relatively short
product life cycles and our current products may become obsolete
in the future. Our ability to generate revenues will be harmed
if:
|
|
|
|
•
|
we fail to develop new technologies or products;
|
|
|
•
|
the technologies we develop infringe on third-party patents;
|
|
|
•
|
our new technologies fail to gain market acceptance; or
|
|
|
•
|
our current products become obsolete.
|
Compliance
with the restriction of hazardous substances (RoHS) Directive in
the European Union may increase our costs and limit our revenue
opportunities.
The RoHS Directive eliminates most uses of lead, cadmium,
hexavalent-chromium, mercury, and certain fire retardants in
electronics placed on the market after July 1, 2006. We
have not yet quantified the potential full effect of this new
Directive on our products, but the Directive will require
changes to some of our products that may be costly and this may
have a negative impact on our revenues and results of
operations. We are currently in discussions with our suppliers
and working with them so that we can be in compliance as of the
effective date of the RoHS Directive. If we are unable to, or
decide not to make our products compliant by the effective date,
we will not be able to ship them in the European Union
and/or any
other region that adopts the Directive until such time that they
are compliant, and this may limit our revenue opportunities.
The
higher cost of products incorporating our touch-enabling
technologies may inhibit or prevent their widespread
adoption.
Personal computer and console gaming peripherals, mobile phones,
touchscreens, and automotive and industrial controls
incorporating our touch-enabling technologies can be more
expensive than similar competitive products that are not
touch-enabled. Although major manufacturers, such as ALPS
Electric Co., Ltd., BMW, Logitech, Microsoft, and Samsung have
licensed our technologies, the greater expense of development
and production of products containing our touch-enabling
technologies as compared to non-touch-enabled products may be a
significant barrier to the widespread adoption and sale of
touch-enabled products.
28
If we
fail to increase sales of our medical simulation devices, our
financial condition and operations may suffer.
Our medical simulation products, such as our Endovascular
AccuTouch System and our Laparascopic Surgical Workstation, have
only recently begun to be used by hospitals and medical schools
to help train healthcare professionals. As a result, many of
these medical institutions do not budget for such simulation
devices. To increase sales of our simulation devices, we must,
in addition to convincing medical institution personnel of the
usefulness of the devices, persuade them to include a
significant expenditure for the devices in their budgets. If
these medical institutions are unwilling to budget for
simulation devices or reduce their budgets as a result of
cost-containment pressures or other factors, we may not be able
to increase or maintain sales of medical simulators at a
satisfactory rate. Any failure to increase sales of our medical
simulation products will harm our business.
Third-party
validation studies may not demonstrate all the benefits of our
medical training simulators, which could affect customer
motivation to buy.
In medical training, validation studies are generally used to
confirm the usefulness of new techniques, devices, and training
methods. For medical training simulators, several levels of
validation are generally tested: content, concurrent, construct,
and predictive. A validation study performed by a third party,
such as a hospital, a teaching institution, or even an
individual healthcare professional, could result in showing
little or no benefit for one or more types of validation for our
medical training simulators. Such validation study results
published in medical journals could impact the willingness of
customers to buy our training simulators, especially new
simulators that have not previously been validated. Due to the
time generally required to complete and publish additional
validation studies (often more than a year), the negative impact
on sales revenue could be significant.
Medical
licensing and certification authorities may not recommend or
require use of our technologies for training
and/or
testing purposes, significantly slowing or inhibiting the market
penetration of our medical simulation
technologies.
Several key medical certification bodies, including the American
Board of Internal Medicine, or ABIM and the American College of
Cardiology, or ACC, have great influence in recommending
particular medical methodologies, including medical training and
testing methodologies, for use by medical professionals. In the
event that the ABIM and the ACC, as well as other, similar
bodies, do not endorse medical simulation products as a training
and/or
testing tool, market penetration for our products could be
significantly and adversely affected.
We
have limited distribution channels and resources to market and
sell our medical simulation and three-dimensional simulation and
digitizing products, and if we are unsuccessful in marketing and
selling these products, we may not achieve or sustain product
revenue growth.
We have limited resources for marketing and selling medical
simulation or three-dimensional simulation and digitizing
products either directly or through distributors. To achieve our
business objectives, we must build a balanced mixture of sales
through a direct sales channel and through qualified
distribution channels. The success of our efforts to sell
medical simulation and three-dimensional simulation products
will depend upon our ability to retain and develop a qualified
sales force and effective distributor channels. We may not be
successful in attracting and retaining the personnel necessary
to sell and market our simulation products. A number of our
distributors represent small, specialized companies and may not
have sufficient capital or human resources to support the
complexities of selling and supporting simulation products.
There can be no assurance that our direct selling efforts will
be effective, distributors will market our products successfully
or, if our relationships with distributors terminate, that we
will be able to establish relationships with other distributors
on satisfactory terms, if at all. Any disruption in the
distribution, sales, or marketing network for our simulation
products could have a material adverse effect on our product
revenues.
29
Competition
in the medical market may reduce our revenue.
If the medical simulation market develops as we anticipate, we
believe that we will have a greater number of competitors. This
increased competition may result in the decline of our revenue
and may cause us to reduce our selling prices.
Competition
in the mobility or touchscreen markets may increase our costs
and reduce our revenue.
If the mobility or touchscreen markets develop as we anticipate,
we believe that we will face a greater number of competitors.
These potential competitors may have significantly greater
financial and technical resources than we do, and the costs
associated with competing with such potential competitors could
be significant. Additionally, increased competition may result
in the reduction of our market share
and/or cause
us to reduce our prices, which may result in a decline in our
revenue.
Automobiles
incorporating our touch-enabling technologies are subject to
lengthy product development periods, making it difficult to
predict when and whether we will receive per unit automotive
royalties.
The product development process for automobiles is very lengthy,
sometimes longer than four years. We do not earn per unit
royalty revenue on our automotive technologies unless and until
automobiles featuring our technologies are shipped to customers,
which may not occur until several years after we enter into an
agreement with an automobile manufacturer or a supplier to an
automobile manufacturer. Throughout the product development
process, we face the risk that an automobile manufacturer or
supplier may delay the incorporation of, or choose not to
incorporate, our technologies into its automobiles, making it
difficult for us to predict the per unit automotive royalties we
may receive, if any. After the product launches, our royalties
still depend on market acceptance of the vehicle or the option
packages if our technology is an option (for example, a
navigation unit), which is likely to be determined by many
factors beyond our control.
We
might be unable to retain or recruit necessary personnel, which
could slow the development and deployment of our
technologies.
Our ability to develop and deploy our technologies and to
sustain our revenue growth depends upon the continued service of
our management and other key personnel, many of whom would be
difficult to replace. Management and other key employees may
voluntarily terminate their employment with us at any time upon
short notice. The loss of management or key personnel could
delay product development cycles or otherwise harm our business.
We believe that our future success will also depend largely on
our ability to attract, integrate, and retain sales, support,
marketing, and research and development personnel. Competition
for such personnel is intense, and we may not be successful in
attracting, integrating, and retaining such personnel. Given the
protracted nature of if, how, and when we collect royalties on
new design contracts, it may be difficult to craft compensation
plans that will attract and retain the level of salesmanship
needed to secure these contracts. Some of our executive officers
and key employees hold stock options with exercise prices
considerably above the current market price of our common stock.
Each of these factors may impair our ability to retain the
services of our executive officers and key employees. Our
technologies are complex and we rely upon the continued service
of our existing engineering personnel to support licensees,
enhance existing technologies, and develop new technologies.
Investment
Risks
Our
quarterly revenues and operating results are volatile, and if
our future results are below the
expectations of public market analysts or investors, the
price of our common stock is likely to decline.
Our revenues and operating results are likely to vary
significantly from quarter to quarter due to a number of
factors, many of which are outside of our control and any of
which could cause the price of our common stock to decline.
30
These factors include:
|
|
|
|
•
|
the establishment or loss of licensing relationships;
|
|
|
•
|
the timing of payments under fixed
and/or
up-front license agreements;
|
|
|
•
|
the timing of work performed under development agreements;
|
|
|
•
|
the timing of our expenses, including costs related to
litigation, stock-based awards, acquisitions of technologies, or
businesses;
|
|
|
•
|
the timing of introductions and market acceptance of new
products and product enhancements by us, our licensees, our
competitors, or their competitors;
|
|
|
•
|
our ability to develop and improve our technologies;
|
|
|
•
|
our ability to attract, integrate, and retain qualified
personnel; and
|
|
|
•
|
seasonality in the demand for our products or our
licensees’ products.
|
Our
stock price may fluctuate regardless of our
performance.
The stock market has experienced extreme volatility that often
has been unrelated or disproportionate to the performance of
particular companies. These market fluctuations may cause our
stock price to decline regardless of our performance. The market
price of our common stock has been, and in the future could be,
significantly affected by factors such as: actual or anticipated
fluctuations in operating results; announcements of technical
innovations; announcements regarding litigation in which we are
involved; new products or new contracts; sales or the perception
in the market of possible sales of large number of shares of our
common stock by insiders or others; changes in securities
analysts’ recommendations; changing circumstances regarding
competitors or their customers; governmental regulatory action;
developments with respect to patents or proprietary rights;
inclusion in or exclusion from various stock indices; and
general market conditions. In the past, following periods of
volatility in the market price of a company’s securities,
securities class action litigation has been initiated against
that company, such as the suit currently filed against us.
Provisions
in our charter documents and Delaware law could prevent or delay
a change in control, which could reduce the market price of our
common stock.
Provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may
have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control or
changes in our management. In addition, certain provisions of
Delaware law may discourage, delay, or prevent someone from
acquiring or merging with us. These provisions could limit the
price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for
shares.
Issuance
of the shares of common stock upon conversion of debentures,
exercise of stock options, and exercise of warrants will dilute
the ownership interest of existing stockholders and could
adversely affect the market price of our common
stock.
The issuance of shares of common stock in the following
circumstances will dilute the ownership interest of existing
stockholders: (i) upon conversion of some or all of the
convertible debentures (ii) upon exercise of some or all of
the stock options, and (iii) upon exercise of some or all
of the warrants. Any sales in the public market of the common
stock issuable upon such conversion or upon such exercises,
respectively, could adversely affect prevailing market prices of
our common stock. In addition, the existence of these
convertible debentures, stock options, and warrants may
encourage short selling by market participants.
Our
major stockholders retain significant control over us, which may
lead to conflicts with other
stockholders over corporate governance matters and could
also affect the volatility of our stock price.
We currently have, have had in the past, and may have in the
future, stockholders who retain greater than 10%, or in some
cases greater than 20%, of our outstanding stock. Acting
together, these stockholders would be able to exercise
significant influence over matters that our stockholders vote
upon, including the election of directors and
31
mergers or other business combinations, which could have the
effect of delaying or preventing a third party from acquiring
control over or merging with us. Further, if any individuals in
this group elect to sell a significant portion or all of their
holdings of our common stock, the trading price of our common
stock could experience volatility.
We may
need to raise additional capital in the future, which may result
in substantial dilution to our stockholders.
We may need to raise additional capital in order to ensure a
sufficient supply of cash for continued operations and
litigation costs. We have taken measures to control our costs
and will continue to monitor these efforts. In addition, Sony
Computer Entertainment has made payments to us pursuant to the
Court’s orders. Although we have received the payments, we
may be required to return them and any future payments based on
the outcome of an appeals process. Our plans to raise additional
capital may include possible customer prepayments of certain
royalty obligations in exchange for a royalty discount
and/or other
negotiated concessions, entering into new license agreements
that require up-front license payments, and through debt or
equity financing. We cannot be certain that additional financing
will be available to us on favorable terms when required, or at
all. Changes in equity markets over the past five years have
adversely affected the ability of companies to raise equity
financing and have adversely affected the markets for financing
for companies with a history of losses such as ours. Additional
financing may require us to take on more debt or issue
additional shares of our common or preferred stock such that our
existing stockholders may experience substantial dilution.
We may
engage in acquisitions that could dilute stockholders’
interests, divert management attention, or cause integration
problems.
As part of our business strategy, we have in the past and may in
the future, acquire businesses or intellectual property that we
feel could complement our business, enhance our technical
capabilities, or increase our intellectual property portfolio.
If we consummate acquisitions through cash
and/or an
exchange of our securities, our stockholders could suffer
significant dilution. Acquisitions could also create risks for
us, including:
|
|
|
|
•
|
unanticipated costs associated with the acquisitions;
|
|
|
•
|
use of substantial portions of our available cash to consummate
the acquisitions;
|
|
|
•
|
diversion of management’s attention from other business
concerns;
|
|
|
•
|
difficulties in assimilation of acquired personnel or
operations; and
|
|
|
•
|
potential intellectual property infringement claims related to
newly acquired product lines.
|
Any acquisitions, even if successfully completed, might not
generate significant additional revenue or provide any benefit
to our business.
If we
fail to comply with Nasdaq’s maintenance criteria for
continued listing on the Nasdaq National Market, our common
stock could be delisted.
To maintain the listing of our common stock on the Nasdaq
National Market, we are required to comply with one of two sets
of maintenance criteria for continued listing. Under the first
set of criteria, among other things, we must maintain
stockholders’ equity of at least $10 million, the
market value of our “publicly held” common stock
(excluding shares held by our affiliates) must be at least
$5 million, and the minimum bid price for our common stock
must be at least $1.00 per share. Under the second set of
criteria, among other things, the market value of our common
stock must be at least $50 million or we must have both
$50 million in assets and $50 million in revenues, the
market value of our “publicly held” shares must be at
least $15 million, and the minimum bid price for our common
stock must be at least $1.00 per share. As of
December 31, 2005, our most recent balance sheet date, we
had a deficit in stockholders’ equity, and therefore would
not have been in compliance with the first set of listing
criteria as of that date. Although we were in compliance with
the second set of criteria, should the price of our common stock
decline to the point where the aggregate value of our
outstanding common stock falls below $50 million, the value
of our “publicly held” shares falls below
$15 million, or the bid price of our common stock falls
below $1.00 per share, our shares could be delisted from
the Nasdaq National Market. If we are unable to
32
comply with the applicable criteria and our common stock is
delisted from the Nasdaq National Market, it would likely be
more difficult to affect trades and to determine the market
price of our common stock. In addition, delisting of our common
stock could materially affect the market price and liquidity of
our common stock and our future ability to raise necessary
capital.
Failure
to maintain effective internal controls in accordance with
section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act could have a material
adverse effect on our business and stock price.
If we fail to maintain the adequacy of our internal controls, as
standards are modified, supplemented, or amended from time to
time, we may not be able to ensure that we can conclude on an
ongoing basis that we have effective internal controls over
financial reporting in accordance with Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Failure to maintain an effective internal
control environment could have a material adverse effect on our
business and stock price.
Legislative
actions, higher insurance cost, and potential new accounting
pronouncements are likely to impact our future financial
position and results of operations.
There have been regulatory changes, including the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, and there may potentially be new accounting
pronouncements or additional regulatory rulings that will have
an impact on our future financial position and results of
operations. These changes and other legal changes, as well as
proposed legislative initiatives following the Enron bankruptcy,
are likely to increase general and administrative costs. In
addition, insurers are likely to increase premiums as a result
of high claims rates over the past year, which we expect will
increase our premiums for our various insurance policies.
Further, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(“FASB”) recently enacted Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 123R,
“Share-Based Payment”
(“SFAS No. 123R”) which requires us, as of
January 1, 2006, to adopt a different method of determining
the compensation expense of our employee stock options.
SFAS No. 123R may have a significant adverse effect on
our reported financial conditions and may impact the way we
conduct our business. These and other potential changes could
materially increase the expenses we report under generally
accepted accounting principles, and adversely affect our
operating results.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
We lease a facility in San Jose, California of
approximately 48,000 square feet, which serves as our
corporate headquarters and includes our sales, marketing,
administration, research and development, manufacturing, and
distribution functions for the Immersion Computing,
Entertainment, and Industrial operating segment. Products
produced in San Jose include our MicroScribe G2 and MX
digitizers, our CyberGlove line of whole-hand sensing gloves and
three-dimensional software products, and several of our
professional and industrial products, including the SoftMouse,
rotary encoders, components to enable tactile feedback in
touchscreens, and various arcade products. The lease for this
property expires in June 2010.
We lease a facility in Montreal, Quebec, Canada of approximately
6,400 square feet, for our subsidiary, Immersion Canada,
Inc. The facility is used for administration and research and
development functions. The lease for this property expires in
October 2010.
We lease a facility in Gaithersburg, Maryland of approximately
18,900 square feet, for the Immersion Medical operating
segment. The facility is used for sales, marketing,
administration, research and development, manufacturing, and
distribution functions. Products assembled and distributed in
Gaithersburg include five medical simulators: the CathSim
AccuTouch System, the Endoscopy AccuTouch System, the
Endovascular AccuTouch System, the Laparoscopy AccuTouch System,
and the Hysteroscopy AccuTouch System. The lease for this
property expires in May 2009.
33
We lease office space in Kangnam-Ku, Seoul, Korea. The facility
is used for sales and marketing support and research and
development functions. This lease expires in September 2006.
We believe that our existing facilities are adequate to meet our
current needs.
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
In re
Immersion Corporation
We are involved in legal proceedings relating to a class action
lawsuit filed on November 9, 2001, In re Immersion
Corporation Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation,
No. Civ. 01-9975 (S.D.N.Y.), related to In re Initial
Public Offering Securities Litigation, No. 21 MC 92
(S.D.N.Y.). The named defendants are Immersion and three of our
current or former officers or directors (the “Immersion
Defendants”), and certain underwriters of our
November 12, 1999 initial public offering
(“IPO”). Subsequently, two of the individual
defendants stipulated to a dismissal without prejudice.
The operative amended complaint is brought on purported behalf
of all persons who purchased our common stock from the date of
our IPO through December 6, 2000. It alleges liability
under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, on the grounds that the registration statement for the IPO
did not disclose that: (1) the underwriters agreed to allow
certain customers to purchase shares in the IPO in exchange for
excess commissions to be paid to the underwriters; and
(2) the underwriters arranged for certain customers to
purchase additional shares in the aftermarket at predetermined
prices. The complaint also appears to allege that false or
misleading analyst reports were issued. The complaint does not
claim any specific amount of damages.
Similar allegations were made in other lawsuits challenging over
300 other initial public offerings and follow-on offerings
conducted in 1999 and 2000. The cases were consolidated for
pretrial purposes. On February 19, 2003, the Court ruled on
all defendants’ motions to dismiss. The motion was denied
as to claims under the Securities Act of 1933 in the case
involving us as well as in all other cases (except for 10
cases). The motion was denied as to the claim under
Section 10(b) as to us, on the basis that the complaint
alleged that we had made acquisition(s) following the IPO. The
motion was granted as to the claim under Section 10(b), but
denied as to the claim under Section 20(a), as to the
remaining individual defendant.
We and most of the issuer defendants have settled with the
plaintiffs. In this settlement, plaintiffs have dismissed and
released all claims against the Immersion Defendants, in
exchange for a contingent payment by the insurance companies
collectively responsible for insuring the issuers in all of the
IPO cases, and for the assignment or surrender of certain claims
we may have against the underwriters. The Immersion Defendants
will not be required to make any cash payments in the
settlement, unless the pro rata amount paid by the insurers in
the settlement exceeds the amount of the insurance coverage, a
circumstance which we believe is remote. The settlement will
require approval of the Court, which cannot be assured, after
class members are given the opportunity to object to the
settlement or opt out of the settlement.
Immersion Corporation vs. Microsoft Corporation, Sony
Computer Entertainment Inc. and Sony Computer Entertainment of
America, Inc.
On February 11, 2002, we filed a complaint against
Microsoft Corporation, Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc., and
Sony Computer Entertainment of America, Inc. in the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District Court of
California alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos.
5,889,672 and 6,275,213. The case was assigned to United States
District Judge Claudia Wilken. On April 4, 2002, Sony
Computer Entertainment and Microsoft answered the complaint by
denying the material allegations and alleging counterclaims
seeking a judicial declaration that the asserted patents were
invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed. Under the
counterclaims, the defendants were also seeking damages for
attorneys’ fees. On October 8, 2002, we filed an
amended complaint, withdrawing the claim under the
U.S. Patent No. 5,889,672 and adding claims under a
new patent, U.S. Patent No. 6,424,333.
On July 28, 2003, we announced that we had settled our
legal differences with Microsoft, and both parties agreed to
dismiss all claims and counterclaims relating to this matter as
well as assume financial responsibility for their respective
legal costs with respect to the lawsuit between us and Microsoft.
34
On August 16, 2004, the trial against Sony Computer
Entertainment commenced. On September 21, 2004, the jury
returned its verdict in favor of us. The jury found all the
asserted claims of the patents valid and infringed. The jury
awarded us damages in the amount of $82.0 million. On
January 10, 2005, the Court awarded us prejudgment interest
on the damages the jury awarded at the applicable prime rate.
The Court further ordered Sony Computer Entertainment to pay us
a compulsory license fee at the rate of 1.37%, the ratio of the
verdict amount to the amount of sales of infringing products,
effective as of July 1, 2004 and through the date of
Judgment. On February 9, 2005, the Court ordered that Sony
Computer Entertainment provide us with sales data 15 days
after the end of each quarter and clarifying that Sony Computer
Entertainment shall make the ordered payment 45 days after
the end of the applicable quarter. Sony Computer Entertainment
has made quarterly payments to us pursuant to the Court’s
orders. Although we have received payments, we may be required
to return them and any future payments based on the outcome of
the appeals process.
On February 9, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
Notice of Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit to appeal the Court’s January 10, 2005
order, and on February 10, 2005 Sony Computer Entertainment
filed an Amended Notice of Appeal to include an appeal from the
Court’s February 9, 2005 order.
On January 5 and 6, 2005, the Court held a bench trial on
Sony Computer Entertainment’s remaining allegations that
the ’333 patent was not enforceable due to alleged
inequitable conduct. On March 24, 2005, the Court resolved
this issue, entering a written order finding in favor of us. On
March 24, 2005, Judge Wilken also entered judgment in our
favor and awarded us $82.0 million in past damages, and
pre-judgment interest in the amount of $8.7 million, for a
total of $90.7 million. We were also awarded certain court
costs. Court costs do not include attorneys’ fees.
Additionally, the Court issued a permanent injunction against
the manufacture, use, sale, or import into the United States of
the infringing Sony Computer Entertainment PlayStation system
consisting of the PlayStation consoles, Dual Shock controllers,
and the 47 games found by the jury to infringe our patents. The
Court stayed the permanent injunction pending appeal to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The
Court further ordered Sony Computer Entertainment to pay a
compulsory license fee at the rate of 1.37% for the duration of
the stay of the permanent injunction at the same rate and
conditions as previously awarded in its interim January 10,
2005 and February 9, 2005 Orders. On April 7, 2005
pursuant to a stipulation of the parties, the Court entered an
Amended Judgment to clarify that the Judgment in favor of us and
against Sony Computer Entertainment also encompassed Sony
Computer Entertainment’s counterclaims for declaratory
relief on invalidity and unenforceability, as well as
non-infringement.
Sony Computer Entertainment also filed further motions seeking
“judgment as a matter of a law” (JMOL) or for a new
trial, and a motion for a stay of an accounting and execution of
the Judgment. On May 17, 2005, Judge Wilken denied these
motions. On April 27, 2005, the Court granted Sony Computer
Entertainment’s request to approve a supersedeas bond,
secured by a cash deposit with the Court in the amount of
$102.5 million, to obtain a stay of enforcement of the
Court’s Amended Judgment pending appeal. On May 17,
2005, the Court issued a minute order stating that in lieu of
the supersedeas bond the Court would allow Sony Computer
Entertainment to place the funds on deposit with the Court in an
escrow account subject to acceptable escrow instructions. The
parties have negotiated an agreement pursuant to which the funds
on deposit with the Court may be deposited in an escrow account
at JP Morgan Chase.
On May 17, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
Request for Inter Partes Reexamination of the ‘333 Patent
with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. On
May 19, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a similar
Request for reexamination of the ‘213 Patent. On
July 6, 2005, we filed a Petition to dismiss, stay or
alternatively to suspend both of the requests for reexamination,
based at least on the grounds that a final judgment has already
been entered by a United States district court, and that the
PTO’s current inter partes reexamination procedures deny
due process of law. The PTO denied the first petition, and we
filed a second petition on September 9, 2005. On
November 17, 2005, the PTO granted our petition, and
suspended the inter partes reexaminations until such time as the
parallel court proceedings warrant termination or resumption of
the PTO examination and prosecution proceedings. On
December 13, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
third petition requesting permission to file an additional inter
partes reexamination on the claims of the ‘333 and
‘213
35
Patents for which reexamination was not requested in Sony
Computer Entertainment’s original requests for
reexamination; we have opposed this petition. The PTO has not
yet issued a decision on Sony Computer Entertainment’s
third petition. Sony Computer Entertainment also filed ex parte
reexamination requests on the claims of the ’333 and
’213 Patents on December 13, 2005.
On June 16, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
Notice of Appeal from the District Court Judgment to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The appeals of
the January and February orders regarding the compulsory license
have been consolidated with this appeal of the Judgment. Sony
Computer Entertainment’s Opening Brief was filed on
October 21, 2005; we filed an Opposition Brief on
December 5, 2005. Due to the cross appeal by ISLLC (see
below), the Federal Circuit allowed us to file a Substitute
Opposition Brief on February 17, 2006 responding to the
briefs filed by both Sony Computer Entertainment and ISLLC. We
expect the briefing for the appeal to be concluded by all
parties by the end of March 2006.
On July 21, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
motion in the District Court before Judge Wilken seeking relief
from the final judgment under Rule 60(b) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure on the grounds of alleged fraud and
“newly discovered evidence” of purported prior art
which Sony Computer Entertainment contends we concealed and
withheld attributable to Mr. Craig Thorner, a named inventor on
three patents that Sony Computer Entertainment urged as a basis
for patent invalidity during the trial. We dispute and intend to
vigorously defend ourselves against these allegations. Briefing
is complete, and a hearing was held before Judge Wilken on
January 20, 2006. On March 8, 2006, the Court denied
Sony Computer Entertainment’s motion pursuant to Rule 60(b)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in its entirety.
Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, we cannot
accurately predict how the Court of Appeals will decide the
appeal. We anticipate that the litigation will continue to be
costly, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to
recover the costs we incur in connection with the litigation. We
expense litigation costs as incurred and only accrue for costs
that have been incurred but not paid to the vendor as of the
financial statement date. The litigation has diverted, and is
likely to continue to divert, the efforts and attention of some
of our key management and personnel. As a result, until such
time as it is resolved, the litigation could adversely affect
our business. Further, any unfavorable outcome could adversely
affect our business.
In the event we settle our lawsuit with Sony Computer
Entertainment, we will be obligated to pay certain sums to
Microsoft as described in Note 9 to the consolidated
financial statements. If Sony Computer Entertainment ultimately
were successful on appeal or in the reexamination process, the
Judgment may be put at risk, assets relating to the patents in
the lawsuit may be impaired, and Sony Computer Entertainment may
seek additional relief, such as attorneys’ fees.
Internet
Services LLC Litigation
On October 20, 2004, ISLLC, a Company licensee and
cross-claim defendant against whom Sony Computer Entertainment
had filed a claim seeking declaratory relief, filed claims
against us alleging that we breached a contract with ISLLC by
suing Sony Computer Entertainment for patent infringement
relating to haptically-enabled software whose topics or images
are allegedly age-restricted, for judicial apportionment of
damages awarded by the jury between ISLLC and us, and for a
judicial declaration with respect to ISLLC’s rights and
duties under agreements with us. On December 29, 2004, the
Court issued an order dismissing ISLLC’s claims against
Sony Computer Entertainment with prejudice and dismissing
ISLLC’s claims against us without prejudice to ISLLC filing
a new complaint “if it can do so in good faith without
contradicting, or repeating the deficiency of, its
complaint.”
On January 12, 2005, ISLLC filed Amended Cross-Claims and
Counterclaims against us that contained similar claims. ISLLC
also realleged counterclaims against Sony Computer
Entertainment. On January 28, 2005, we filed a motion to
dismiss ISLLC’s Amended Cross-Claims and a motion to strike
ISLLC’s Counterclaims against Sony Computer Entertainment.
On March 24, 2005 the Court issued an order dismissing
ISLLC’s claims with prejudice as to ISLLC’s claim
seeking a declaratory judgment that it is an exclusive licensee
under the ‘213 and ‘333 patents and as to ISLLC’s
claim seeking “judicial apportionment” of the damages
verdict in the Sony Computer Entertainment case. The
Court’s order further dismissed ISLLC’s claims without
prejudice as to ISLLC’s breach of contract and unjust
enrichment claims.
36
ISLLC filed a notice of appeal of those orders with the Federal
Circuit on April 18, 2005. ISLLC’s appeal has been
consolidated with Sony Computer Entertainment’s appeal.
ISLLC filed its Opening Brief in December 2005. As noted above,
the Federal Circuit allowed us to file a Substitute Opposition
Brief on February 17, 2006 responding to the briefs filed
by both Sony Computer Entertainment and ISLLC; we expect the
briefing for the appeal to be concluded by all parties by the
end of March 2006.
On February 8, 2006, ISLLC filed a lawsuit against us in
the Superior Court of Santa Clara County. ISLLC’s
complaint seeks a share of our Judgment and recovery against
Sony Computer Entertainment and of the Microsoft settlement
proceeds, and generally restates the claims already adjudicated
in District Court. Our response to the complaint is due on
March 16, 2006.
Immersion
Corporation vs. Electro Source LLC
On September 24, 2004, we filed in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California a
complaint for patent infringement against Electro Source LLC
(“Electro Source”) (Case
No. 04-CV-4040
CW). Electro Source is a leading seller of video game
peripherals under the Pelican Accessories brand. Our Complaint
alleged that Electro Source had willfully infringed, and was
continuing to willfully infringe, the same two patents asserted
in our litigation against Sony Computer Entertainment. The
Complaint sought injunctive relief, as well as damages in an
amount to be proven at trial, trebled due to Electro
Source’s willful infringement, and attorneys’ fees and
costs. Electro Source filed an answer to the Complaint denying
the material allegations and asserting against us counterclaims
seeking a judicial declaration that the asserted patents are
invalid, unenforceable, and not infringed.
On February 28, 2006, we announced that we had settled our
legal differences with Electro Source and both parties agreed to
dismiss all claims and counterclaims relating to this matter. In
addition to the Confidential Settlement Agreement, Electro
Source entered into a worldwide license to our patents for
vibro-tactile devices in the consumer gaming peripheral field of
use. Electro Source will make royalty payments to us based on
sales by Electro Source of spinning mass vibro-tactile gamepads,
steering wheels, and other game controllers for dedicated gaming
consoles, such as the Sony PlayStation and PlayStation 2,
the Nintendo GameCube, and the Microsoft Xbox and Xbox 360. Both
companies also have agreed to explore the possibility of working
together in technology or engineering related assignments. In
March 2006, Electro Source paid us $650,000. We are entitled to
be paid a minimum amount of $1.0 million in future periods.
Both parties each assumed financial responsibility for their
respective legal costs with respect to the lawsuit.
|
|
Item 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders in the
fourth quarter of fiscal 2005.
37
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Our common stock is traded on the Nasdaq National Market under
the symbol “IMMR.” The following table sets forth, for
the periods indicated, the high and low sales prices for our
common stock on such market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Fiscal year ended
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
$
|
7.50
|
|
|
$
|
6.11
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
$
|
7.13
|
|
|
$
|
5.23
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
$
|
6.34
|
|
|
$
|
4.87
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
7.93
|
|
|
$
|
5.45
|
|
Fiscal year ended
December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
$
|
7.64
|
|
|
$
|
4.36
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
$
|
7.00
|
|
|
$
|
4.00
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
$
|
8.35
|
|
|
$
|
3.85
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
10.39
|
|
|
$
|
5.61
|
|
On February 24, 2006, the closing price was $6.88 and there
were 170 holders of record of our common stock. Because many of
such shares are held by brokers and other institutions on behalf
of stockholders, we are unable to estimate the total number of
stockholders represented by these record holders.
Dividend
Policy
We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common
stock and we do not anticipate paying cash dividends in the
foreseeable future. We currently intend to retain any earnings
to fund future growth, product development, and operations.
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
The following selected consolidated financial data is qualified
in its entirety by, and should be read in conjunction with,
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” and the consolidated
financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in
this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2001
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share
data)
|
|
|
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
DATA:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
24,277
|
|
|
$
|
23,763
|
|
|
$
|
20,223
|
|
|
$
|
20,235
|
|
|
$
|
19,232
|
|
Cost and expenses(1)
|
|
|
36,177
|
|
|
|
44,155
|
|
|
|
35,073
|
|
|
|
35,270
|
|
|
|
36,660
|
|
Operating loss(1)
|
|
|
(11,900
|
)
|
|
|
(20,392
|
)
|
|
|
(14,850
|
)
|
|
|
(15,035
|
)
|
|
|
(17,428
|
)
|
Net loss(1) (2)
|
|
|
(13,085
|
)
|
|
|
(20,738
|
)
|
|
|
(16,974
|
)
|
|
|
(16,530
|
)
|
|
|
(21,746
|
)
|
Basic and diluted net loss per
share
|
|
$
|
(0.54
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.91
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.83
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.83
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.16
|
)
|
Shares used in calculating basic
and diluted net loss per share
|
|
|
24,027
|
|
|
|
22,698
|
|
|
|
20,334
|
|
|
|
19,906
|
|
|
|
18,702
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2001
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
BALANCE SHEET DATA:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
28,171
|
|
|
$
|
25,538
|
|
|
$
|
21,738
|
|
|
$
|
8,717
|
|
|
$
|
10,381
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
28,885
|
|
|
|
23,088
|
|
|
|
22,032
|
|
|
|
8,898
|
|
|
|
11,888
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
44,760
|
|
|
|
42,250
|
|
|
|
37,913
|
|
|
|
25,301
|
|
|
|
37,025
|
|
Long-term debt, less current
portion
|
|
|
17,490
|
|
|
|
16,917
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
250
|
|
Long-term customer advance from
Microsoft.
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
27,050
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total stockholders’ equity
(deficit)
|
|
|
(16,795
|
)
|
|
|
(5,967
|
)
|
|
|
(1,219
|
)
|
|
|
13,948
|
|
|
|
28,814
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
In 2002, includes impairment of goodwill of $3.8 million
related to Immersion Computing, Entertainment, and Industrial
operating segment. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes amounts written off of cost-method investments of
$1.2 million and $4.3 million in 2002 and 2001,
respectively. |
|
|
Item 7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with
the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto.
This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations includes forward-looking
statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The forward-looking
statements involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking
statements are identified by words such as
“anticipates,” “believes,”
“expects,” “intends,” “may,”
“will,” and other similar expressions. However, these
words are not the only way we identify forward-looking
statements. In addition, any statements, which refer to
expectations, projections, or other characterizations of future
events or circumstances, are forward-looking statements. Actual
results could differ materially from those projected in the
forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors,
including those set forth in Item 1A,“Risk
Factors,” those described elsewhere in this report, and
those described in our other reports filed with the SEC. We
caution you not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking
statements, which speak only as of the date of this report, and
we undertake no obligation to release the results of any
revisions to these forward-looking statements which could occur
after the filing of this report.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and
results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial
statements, which have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
(“GAAP”). The preparation of these consolidated
financial statements requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets,
liabilities, revenues, expenses, and related disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities. On an ongoing basis, we
evaluate our estimates, including those related to revenue
recognition, bad debts, warranty obligations, patents and
intangible assets, inventories, contingencies, and litigation.
We base our estimates on historical experience and on various
other factors that we believe to be reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making
judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities
that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results
may differ from these estimates.
39
We believe the following critical accounting policies affect our
more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation
of our consolidated financial statements:
Revenue
Recognition
We recognize revenues in accordance with applicable accounting
standards including Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”)
No. 104, “Revenue Recognition,” Emerging Issues
Task Force (“EITF”) Issue
No. 00-21,
“Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple
Deliverables,” and the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants (“AICPA”) Statement of Position
(“SOP”) 97-2, “Software Revenue
Recognition,” as amended. Revenue is recognized when
persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has
occurred or service has been rendered, the fee is fixed and
determinable, and collectibility is probable. We derive our
revenues from three principal sources: royalty and license fees,
product sales, and development contracts.
Royalty
and license revenue
We recognize royalty and license revenue based on royalty
reports or related information received from the licensee as
well as time-based licenses of our intellectual property
portfolio. Up-front payments under license agreements are
deferred and recognized as revenue based on either the royalty
reports received or amortized over the license period depending
on the nature of the agreement. Advance payments under license
agreements that also require us to provide future services to
the licensee are deferred and recognized over the service period
when vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”)
related to the value of the services does not exist.
We generally recognize revenue from our licensees under one or a
combination of the following license models:
|
|
|
License Revenue Model
|
|
Revenue Recognition
|
|
Perpetual license of intellectual
property portfolio based on per unit royalties, no services
contracted.
|
|
Based on royalty reports received
from licensees. No further obligations to licensee exist.
|
|
|
|
Time-based license of intellectual
property portfolio with up-front payments
and/or
annual minimum royalty requirements, no services contracted.
|
|
Based on straight-line
amortization of annual minimum/up-front payment recognized over
contract period or annual minimum period. No further obligations
to licensee exist.
|
|
|
|
Perpetual license of intellectual
property portfolio or technology license along with contract for
development work.
|
|
Based on
cost-to-cost
percentage-of-completion
accounting method over the service period. Obligation to
licensee exists until development work is complete.
|
|
|
|
License of software or technology,
no modification necessary, no services contracted.
|
|
Up-front revenue recognition based
on
SOP 97-2
criteria or EITF No. 00-21, as applicable.
|
Individual contracts may have characteristics that do not fall
within a specific license model or may have characteristics of a
combination of license models. Under those circumstances, we
recognize revenue in accordance with SAB No. 104, EITF
No. 00-21,
and
SOP 97-2,
as amended, to guide the accounting treatment for each
individual contract. See also comments regarding “Multiple
element arrangements” below. If the information received
from our licensees regarding royalties is incorrect or
inaccurate, our revenues in future periods may be adversely
affected. To date, none of the information we have received from
our licensees has caused any material reduction in future period
revenues.
Product
sales
We recognize revenues from product sales when the product is
shipped, provided collection is determined to be probable and no
significant obligation remains. We sell the majority of our
products with warranties ranging from three to twenty-four
months. We record the estimated warranty costs during the
quarter the revenue is recognized. Historically,
warranty-related costs and related accruals have not been
significant. We offer a general right of return on the
MicroScribe product line for 14 days after purchase. We
recognize revenue at the time of shipment of a
40
MicroScribe system and provide an accrual for potential returns
based on historical experience. No other general right of return
is offered on our products.
Development
contracts and other revenue
Development contracts and other revenue is comprised of
professional services (consulting services
and/or
development contracts), customer support, and extended warranty
contracts. Development contract revenues are recognized under
the
cost-to-cost
percentage-of-completion
accounting method based on physical completion of the work to be
performed. Losses on contracts are recognized when determined.
Revisions in estimates are reflected in the period in which the
conditions become known. Customer support and extended warranty
contract revenue is recognized ratably over the contractual
period.
Multiple
element arrangements
We enter into revenue arrangements in which the customer
purchases a combination of patent, technology,
and/or
software licenses, products, professional services, support, and
extended warranties (multiple element arrangements). When VSOE
of fair value exists for all elements, we allocate revenue to
each element based on the relative fair value of each of the
elements. The price charged when the element is sold separately
generally determines the fair value or VSOE. For arrangements
where VSOE of fair value exists only for the undelivered
elements, we defer the full fair value of the undelivered
elements and recognize the difference between the total
arrangement fee and the amount deferred for the undelivered
items as revenue, assuming all other criteria for revenue
recognition have been met.
Our revenue recognition policies are significant because our
revenues are a key component of our results of operations. In
addition, our revenue recognition determines the timing of
certain expenses, such as commissions and royalties. Revenue
results are difficult to predict, and any shortfall in revenue
or delay in recognizing revenue could cause our operating
results to vary significantly from quarter to quarter and could
result in greater or future operating losses.
Long-term
Liabilities
In 2003 we executed a series of agreements with Microsoft as
described in Note 9 to the consolidated financial
statements that provided for settlement of our lawsuit against
Microsoft as well as various licensing, sublicensing, and equity
and financing arrangements. We accounted for the proceeds
received under the agreements as a long-term customer advance
based on certain provisions that would result in payment of
funds to Microsoft. Upon Microsoft’s election to convert
its shares of our Series A Redeemable Convertible Preferred
Stock (“Series A Preferred Stock”) into common
stock in April 2004, we reduced the long-term customer advance
from Microsoft to the minimum amount we would be obligated to
pay Microsoft upon a settlement with Sony Computer
Entertainment. The remainder of the consideration was
transferred to common stock.
In December 2004, we executed a series of agreements as
described in Note 7 to the consolidated financial
statements that provided for the issuance of 5% Senior
Subordinated Convertible Debenture (“5% Convertible
Debenture”), and warrants, and that granted certain
registration rights to the holders of the 5% Convertible
Debentures (“Registration Rights”). We accounted for
the issuance of our 5% Convertible Debentures and related
warrants in accordance with EITF
No. 98-5,
“Accounting for Convertible Securities with Beneficial
Conversion Features or Contingently Adjustable Conversion
Ratios” and other related accounting guidance. We estimated
the relative fair value of the various instruments included in
the agreements entered into in December 2004 and allocated the
relative fair values to be as follows:
warrants — $1.7 million, Put
Option — $0.1 million, Registration
Rights — $0.1 million, issuance
costs — $1.3 million, 5% Convertible
Debenture — $16.8 million. The
5% Convertible Debentures are being accreted to
$20.0 million over their five-year life, resulting in
additional interest expense. The value of the warrants is
included in Stockholders’ Deficit, the value of the Put
Option and Registration Rights are recorded as liabilities and
are subject to future value adjustments, and the value of the
5% Convertible Debentures is recorded as long-term debt.
41
Recovery
of Accounts Receivable
We maintain allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated
losses resulting from our review and assessment of our
customers’ ability to make required payments. If the
financial condition of one or more of our customers were to
deteriorate, resulting in an impairment of their ability to make
payments, additional allowances might be required. To date such
estimated losses have been within our expectations.
Inventory
Reserves
We reduce our inventory value for estimated obsolete and slow
moving inventory in an amount equal to the difference between
the cost of inventory and the net realizable value based upon
assumptions about future demand and market conditions. If actual
future demand and market conditions are less favorable than
those projected by management, additional inventory write-downs
may be required.
Product
Return and Warranty Reserves
We provide for estimated costs of future anticipated product
returns and warranty obligations based on historical experience
when related revenues are recognized, and we defer
warranty-related revenue over the related warranty term.
Intangible
Assets
We have acquired patents and other intangibles. In addition, we
capitalize the external legal and filing fees associated with
patents and trademarks. We assess the recoverability of our
intangible assets, and we must make assumptions regarding
estimated future cash flows and other factors to determine the
fair value of the respective assets that affect our consolidated
financial statements. If these estimates or related assumptions
change in the future, we may be required to record impairment
charges for these assets. We amortize our intangible assets
related to patents and trademarks, once they issue, over their
estimated useful lives, generally 10 years. Future changes
in the estimated useful life could affect the amount of future
period amortization expense that we will incur. During 2005, we
capitalized external costs associated with patents and
trademarks of $1.0 million. Our total amortization expense
for the same period for all intangible assets was
$1.3 million.
The above listing is not intended to be a comprehensive list of
all of our accounting policies. In many cases, the accounting
treatment of a particular transaction is specifically dictated
by GAAP, with no need for management’s judgment in their
application. There are also areas in which management’s
judgment in selecting any available alternative would not
produce a materially different result. See our consolidated
financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report,
which contains accounting policies and other disclosures
required by GAAP.
Results
of Operations
Overview
of 2005
During 2005, we achieved several significant milestones
including growth in several of our key market areas. This growth
was due, in part, to our continued investment in a strengthened
and more focused sales and marketing effort across our business
segments during 2005. In addition,
|
|
|
|
•
|
As market acceptance of medical simulation has increased,
our medical product sales grew 29% in 2005 on a
year-over-year
basis and accounted for 84% of total Immersion Medical revenue
for the year. This growth is also a result of the ongoing
transformation of our business model into one emphasizing
product development that leads to increased product sales. In
2005 we introduced significant new software modules for our
endovascular training simulator.
|
|
|
•
|
In 2005, an additional handset licensee was signed, SKY
Teletech. In addition, the first Samsung mobile phones with our
VibeTonz technology launched, and by the end of the year, four
VibeTonz-enabled models were being offered by six wireless
operators worldwide that serve a total of approximately
140 million subscribers. Content agreements were also
signed with several companies.
|
42
|
|
|
|
•
|
We launched our TouchSense system for touchscreens and signed an
agreement with 3M Touch Systems. It is expected that 3M will
integrate our components into its touchscreens and market and
sell the resulting product to manufacturers of casino gaming and
bar-top amusement equipment.
|
|
|
•
|
In 2005, royalty revenue from automotive market increased 34% as
more vehicles shipped with our technology, including the launch
in Europe of the new Mercedes-Benz S class sedan. We also signed
new license agreements with Volkswagen and automotive supplier
Methode.
|
|
|
•
|
On March 24, 2005, the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California entered judgment in our favor
and awarded us a total of $90.7 million in damages and
interest with regard to our litigation with Sony Computer
Entertainment. The court issued, and subsequently stayed pending
appeal, a permanent injunction against the manufacture, use,
sale, or import into the United States of the infringing Sony
PlayStation system consisting of the PlayStation consoles, Dual
Shock controllers, and the 47 games found by the jury to
infringe our patents. The court further ordered Sony Computer
Entertainment to pay a compulsory license fee for the duration
of the stay of the permanent injunction, pursuant to which Sony
Computer Entertainment has made quarterly payments to us. Sony
Computer Entertainment has appealed the judgment, including the
$90.7 million award, the injunction, and the compulsory
license, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit.
|
In 2006, we expect to continue to focus on the execution of
sales and marketing plans in our established businesses to
increase revenue and make selected investments in product and
technology development for longer-term new growth areas. We have
taken measures to control our operating expenses including a
reduction in force of approximately 10% in early 2005. We expect
litigation expenses to decrease in 2006 as compared to 2005. We
have budgeted to continue to protect and defend our extensive
intellectual property portfolio across all business segments.
Our success could be limited by several factors, including the
timely release of our new products or our licensees’
products, continued market acceptance of our products and
technology, the introduction of new products by existing or new
competitors, and the cost of ongoing litigation. For a further
discussion of these and other risk factors, see
Item 1A — “Risk Factors.”
43
The following table sets forth our statement of operations data
as a percentage of total revenues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Royalty and license
|
|
|
36.6
|
%
|
|
|
36.9
|
%
|
|
|
30.1
|
%
|
Product sales
|
|
|
52.6
|
|
|
|
49.0
|
|
|
|
46.8
|
|
Development contracts and other
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
|
|
14.1
|
|
|
|
23.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales
|
|
|
26.5
|
|
|
|
26.3
|
|
|
|
26.1
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
48.0
|
|
|
|
47.6
|
|
|
|
38.4
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
24.7
|
|
|
|
33.6
|
|
|
|
39.0
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
43.8
|
|
|
|
72.1
|
|
|
|
61.9
|
|
Amortization of intangibles
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
Restructuring costs
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
|
149.0
|
|
|
|
185.8
|
|
|
|
173.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(49.0
|
)
|
|
|
(85.8
|
)
|
|
|
(73.4
|
)
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(6.2
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
Other expense
|
|
|
(0.0
|
)
|
|
|
(2.6
|
)
|
|
|
(10.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before benefit (provision)
for income taxes
|
|
|
(53.2
|
)
|
|
|
(87.9
|
)
|
|
|
(83.2
|
)
|
Benefit (provision) for income
taxes
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(53.9
|
)%
|
|
|
(87.3
|
)%
|
|
|
(83.9
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparison
of Years Ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Royalty and license
|
|
$
|
8,888
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
$
|
8,778
|
|
|
|
44
|
%
|
|
$
|
6,088
|
|
Product sales
|
|
|
12,762
|
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
11,644
|
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
|
|
9,455
|
|
Development contracts and other
|
|
|
2,627
|
|
|
|
(21
|
)%
|
|
|
3,341
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)%
|
|
|
4,680
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue
|
|
$
|
24,277
|
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
$
|
23,763
|
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
$
|
20,223
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
2005 Compared to Fiscal 2004
Total Revenue. Our total revenue for the year
ended December 31, 2005 increased by $514,000 or 2% to
$24.3 million from $23.8 million in 2004.
Royalty and license revenue. Royalty and
license revenue is comprised of royalties earned on sales by our
licensees and license fees charged for our intellectual property
portfolio. Royalty and license revenue increased by $110,000 or
1% from 2004 to 2005. The increase in royalty and license
revenue was primarily a result of an increase in gaming
royalties of $678,000 and an increase in automotive royalties
and licensee revenue of $399,000, offset by a decrease in
medical royalty and license revenue of $1.1 million. The
increase in gaming royalties was mainly due to increased
third-party market share of aftermarket game console
controllers, increased growth in the game console controller
market, and royalties from new licensees signed in late 2004 and
early 2005. In the console peripheral business, many of our
third-party licensees from whom we earn per unit royalties
enjoyed the benefits of strong sales of premium products and
significant market share growth in 2005 at the expense of
first-party peripheral
44
makers (i.e., Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo). Third-party
peripheral makers’ market share tends to increase as
consoles near end of life. Microsoft’s Xbox 360
next-generation video console system was introduced in November
2005, and additional next-generation consoles are expected to be
introduced in late 2006 by Sony and Nintendo. Accordingly, we
anticipate that third-party royalties will likely decline as
these new consoles are introduced and market share shifts back
to first-party peripheral makers. For the Xbox 360
next-generation video console system, Microsoft has, to date,
not licensed the rights to produce wireless controllers to any
third party peripheral makers. Wireless game controllers account
for a significant and growing portion of all game controller
sales. Therefore, by retaining the market for wireless Xbox 360
game controllers exclusively for itself, Microsoft will likely
significantly increase its market share of all aftermarket game
controller sales, the effect of which is likely to reduce our
gaming royalty revenue. Furthermore, according to NPD Funworld,
in the first two months of launch of the Xbox 360,
Microsoft had over a 90% market share of wired Xbox 360 game
controllers, leaving third parties with less than a 10% market
share. While we expect third party market share of wired Xbox
360 game controllers to increase in 2006 from its current level,
the dominant market position by Microsoft in wired Xbox 360 game
controllers will reduce our gaming royalty revenue compared to
2005. In the PC gaming peripheral business, the overall industry
again declined, but this decline was more than offset by the
aforementioned gains in the console peripheral business.
Automotive royalties increased in 2005 due to increased licensee
revenue from signing a new licensee in 2005 and royalties from
an increased number of vehicles manufactured with our technology
incorporated in them. We expect increased automotive royalties
and license revenue in 2006 based on new licensees signed and
additional launches of cars sold incorporating our technology.
The decrease in medical royalty and license revenue in 2005
compared to 2004 was primarily due to a decrease in license
revenue from our license and development agreements with
Medtronic. Revenue recognition on the license and development
agreements with Medtronic is based on
cost-to-cost
percentage-of-completion;
a decrease in activity on these contracts results in a decrease
in revenue recognized.
Product sales. Product sales increased by
$1.1 million or 10% from 2004 to 2005. The increase in
product sales was primarily due to increased medical product
sales of $1.8 million, in particular, increased sales of
our vascular access, endovascular, and laparoscopic simulator
platforms. This increase was a result of focusing sales force
resources on selling training simulator products to hospitals
and teaching institutions as well as targeted marketing programs
and improved reseller performance. Additionally, as the market
acceptance of medical simulation has increased, we have
transformed our business model for Immersion Medical into one
that emphasizes product development and product sales as opposed
to development contracts. Offsetting this was a decrease of
$703,000 in product sales mainly from our 3D and professional
products, and microprocessors. This decrease was primarily due
to reduced sales of our 3D products such as our
CyberGlove®
and
CyberTouchtm
devices caused by the delay in upgrades to this product line and
increased competition, decreased sales of our force feedback
electronics for arcade gaming due to the timing of product
introductions by our customers, and reduced sales of
microprocessors based on a decision to eliminate the sales
effort related to this lower margin product line.
Development contracts and other
revenue. Development contracts and other revenue
decreased by $714,000 or 21% from 2004 to 2005. Development
contracts and other revenue is comprised of revenue on
commercial and government contracts. The decrease in this
category was primarily due to decreases in both medical
government and commercial development contract revenues, but was
partially offset by an increase in development contracts in the
industrial market. The decrease in medical development contract
revenue was due to a decrease in revenue recognized on our
license and development agreements with Medtronic and the
continued transition of our medical engineering resources from
government grants and certain commercial development contract
efforts to product development efforts that focus on leveraging
our existing sales and channel distribution capabilities.
Fiscal
2004 Compared to Fiscal 2003
Total Revenue. Our total revenues for the year
ended December 31, 2004 increased by $3.6 million or
18% to $23.8 million from $20.2 million in 2003.
Royalty and license revenue. Royalty and
license revenue increased by $2.7 million or 44% from 2003
to 2004. The increase in royalty and license revenue was
primarily a result of an increase in gaming royalties of
$2.5 million and an increase in automotive royalties of
$337,000, offset by a decrease in medical royalty and license
fees of $150,000. The increase in gaming royalties was mainly
due to increased third-party market share of
45
aftermarket game console controllers, increased growth in the
game console controller market, the addition of new licensees,
and increased PC gaming royalties due to Microsoft’s exit
from the PC gaming peripheral business. Automotive royalties
increased in 2004 due to an increase in the number of vehicles
manufactured with our technology incorporated in them. The
decrease in medical royalty and license revenue in 2004 compared
to 2003 was primarily due to a decrease in license revenue from
our license and development agreements with Medtronic. Although
total revenue from Medtronic increased in 2004, license revenue
decreased due to a change in the mix of revenue from Medtronic
in 2004.
Product sales. Product sales increased by
$2.2 million or 23% from 2003 to 2004. The increase in
product sales was primarily due to increased medical product
sales of $1.8 million, mainly due to increased sales of our
endovascular and laparoscopic simulator platforms as a result of
new and focused sales force management and the timing of
purchases from significant customers. Product sales from 3D and
professional products increased in 2004 by $294,000, primarily
due to increased sales of our force feedback electronics for
arcade gaming as a result of a customer’s successful
product introduction that began in the third quarter of 2003,
and increased sales of our SoftMouse product.
Development contracts and other
revenue. Development contracts and other revenue
decreased by $1.3 million or 29% from 2003 to 2004. The
decrease in this category was primarily attributable to a
decrease of $1.2 million in government contracts. The
decrease in revenue from government contracts was due to a
reduced number of government grants awarded as well as a
decrease in the work performed against our current government
contracts. In 2004, Immersion Medical began its transition from
government grants and certain commercial development contract
efforts to product development efforts thereby reducing revenue
in this category.
Cost
of Product Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Cost of product sales
|
|
$
|
6,446
|
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
$
|
6,255
|
|
|
|
19
|
%
|
|
$
|
5,276
|
|
% of product sales
|
|
|
51
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56
|
%
|
Our cost of product sales consists primarily of materials,
labor, and overhead. There is no cost of product sales
associated with royalty and license revenue or development
contract revenue. The cost of product sales increased by
$191,000 or 3% from 2004 to 2005. This increase was mainly due
to increased product sales of 10% and the corresponding
increased direct materials, freight costs to customers, and
royalties, as well as increased inventory write offs, offset in
part by decreased overhead and decreased price and cost
variances. Increased volume related expense such as increased
direct materials, increased freight costs, and increased
royalties accounted for $130,000 of the increase in cost of
product sales from 2004 to 2005. Of the aforementioned amount,
direct materials only increased by $22,000 due to favorable
product mix shifts resulting from increased sales of higher
margin products such as our vascular access training simulators
and reduced sales of our lower margin microprocessors.
Additionally during 2005, we experienced increased physical
inventory write offs, scrap charges, and increased reserves for
excess and obsolete inventory of $173,000 due to some product
and process transitions during the period. These increases were
offset in part by reduced overhead costs and reduced price and
cost variances of $112,000. Cost of product sales as percentage
of revenue declined to 51% in 2005 as compared to 54% in 2004
due to the aforementioned favorable product mix shifts.
The cost of product sales increased by $1.0 million or 19%
from 2003 to 2004. The increase was primarily a combination of
increased direct material and labor costs of $1.2 million,
associated with increased product sales of 23% and increased
price and cost variances of $165,000, offset in part by
decreased inventory write offs for excess and obsolete inventory
of $136,000, due to revisions made to certain products to
improve quality in 2003, decreased warranty costs of $105,000,
and decreased royalty costs of $53,000.
46
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
$
|
11,649
|
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
$
|
11,312
|
|
|
|
46
|
%
|
|
$
|
7,768
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
6,003
|
|
|
|
(25
|
)%
|
|
|
7,985
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
7,899
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
10,638
|
|
|
|
(38
|
)%
|
|
|
17,133
|
|
|
|
37
|
%
|
|
|
12,511
|
|
Amortization of intangibles
|
|
|
1,256
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)%
|
|
|
1,470
|
|
|
|
(9
|
)%
|
|
|
1,619
|
|
Restructuring costs
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
|
—
|
|
Sales and Marketing. Our sales and marketing
expenses are comprised primarily of employee compensation and
benefits, advertising, trade shows, brochures, market
development funds, travel, and an allocation of facilities
costs. Sales and marketing expenses increased by $337,000 or 3%
in 2005 compared to 2004. The increase was primarily the result
of increased travel of $369,000, an increase in bad debt expense
of $232,000, and an increase in office expenses of $148,000
resulting from the ongoing execution of sales and marketing
plans in our established businesses. These increases were offset
by cost savings from a reduction in professional and consulting
fees of $309,000 due to reduced employee recruitment fees, and a
reduction in market research expense of $115,000. We expect to
continue to focus our sales and marketing efforts on medical,
mobile phone, and touchscreen market opportunities to build
greater market acceptance for our touch technologies. We
anticipate sales and marketing costs will increase in absolute
dollars in future periods as we increase our investment to
exploit market opportunities for our technologies.
Sales and marketing expenses increased by $3.5 million or
46% in 2004 compared to 2003. The increase in expenses was
primarily due to the expansion of our sales and marketing team,
investment in initiatives focusing on medical and mobile phone
market opportunities, and the upgrading of our corporate
marketing function. The increase in 2004 included increased
headcount and related compensation, benefits, and overhead of
$2.3 million, increased travel of $300,000 to support sales
and marketing efforts, an increase in advertising and marketing
expenses including, market research, product marketing, and
shows and exhibits of $457,000, an increase in bad debt expense
of $156,000 primarily due to reversals in 2003, and an increase
in consulting, recruiting, and license fees of $283,000.
Research and Development. Our research and
development expenses are comprised primarily of employee
compensation and benefits, consulting fees, tooling and
supplies, and an allocation of facilities costs. Research and
development expenses decreased by $2.0 million or 25% in
2005 compared to 2004. The decrease was mainly due to an
increased focus on targeted development work, leading to a
reduction in general development contract work, which led to a
reduction in headcount and related compensation, benefits,
overhead, and travel, totaling $1.5 million, a decrease in
consulting expense of $243,000, a reduction in supplies and
materials and prototyping expenses of $162,000, and a decrease
in demonstration unit expenses of $85,000. We believe that
continued investment in research and development is critical to
our future success, and we expect to make targeted investments
in areas of product and technology development to support future
growth.
Research and development expenses increased by $86,000 or 1% in
2004 compared to 2003. The increase was mainly due to an
increase in supplies and materials and prototyping expenses of
$256,000, an increase in outside professional services of
$240,000 to supplement our engineering staff, and an increase of
travel of $58,000, partially offset by a decrease in
compensation, benefits, and overhead of $470,000 mainly due to a
decrease in deferred stock compensation expense from 2003 to
2004.
General and Administrative. Our general and
administrative expenses are comprised primarily of employee
compensation and benefits, legal and professional fees, office
supplies, travel, and an allocation of facilities costs. General
and administrative expenses decreased by $6.5 million or
38% in 2005 compared to 2004. The decrease was primarily
attributable to a decrease in legal and professional fees of
$6.6 million, mostly related to the litigation against Sony
Computer Entertainment. The decrease was partially offset by an
increase in supplies and office expense of $91,000. Although we
expect our total litigation costs to decrease in 2006 as
compared to 2005, we expect that the dollar amount of general
and administrative expenses to be a significant component of our
operating expenses. We will continue to incur litigation costs,
including costs associated with the appeal and other motions
that Sony Computer Entertainment has made, and we expect will
continue to make, and costs related to litigation
47
against other parties as we defend our intellectual property. In
addition, we anticipate costs associated with maintaining
compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and Nasdaq
listing requirements will continue to be significant.
General and administrative expenses increased by
$4.6 million or 37% in 2004 compared to 2003. The increase
was primarily attributable to increased legal and professional
fees of $4.2 million, mostly related to the litigation
against Sony Computer Entertainment and compliance with the
Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, and increased compensation,
benefits, and overhead costs of $355,000.
Amortization of Intangibles. Our amortization
of intangibles is comprised primarily of patent amortization and
other intangible amortization. Amortization of intangibles
decreased by $214,000 or 15% from 2004 to 2005. Amortization of
intangibles decreased by $149,000 or 9% from 2003 to 2004. The
decreases were primarily attributable to some intangible assets
reaching full amortization.
Restructuring Costs. Restructuring costs were
$185,000 for 2005. No restructuring costs were incurred in 2004
or 2003. The costs consisted of severance benefits paid as a
result of our reduction in force in the first quarter of 2005.
Employees from manufacturing, sales and marketing, research and
development, and general and administrative were included in the
reduction in force. We did not incur any additional charges
related to this reduction in force and do not anticipate any
further costs in future periods related to this reduction in
force.
Interest
and Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Interest and other income
|
|
$
|
490
|
|
|
|
192
|
%
|
|
$
|
168
|
|
|
|
33
|
%
|
|
$
|
126
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
1,506
|
|
|
|
3,573
|
%
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
(18
|
)%
|
|
|
50
|
|
Other expense
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
(98
|
)%
|
|
|
624
|
|
|
|
(70
|
)%
|
|
|
2,046
|
|
Interest and Other Income. Interest and other
income consists primarily of interest income and dividend income
from cash and cash equivalents. Interest and other income
increased by $322,000 from 2004 to 2005 as a result of higher
interest rates and increased cash and cash equivalents primarily
due to the $20.0 million we received in December 2004 from
the sale of our 5% Convertible Debentures. Interest earned on
monies received pursuant to the Sony Computer Entertainment
compulsory license has not been recorded as interest income but
has been recorded as long-term deferred revenue due to the
contingent nature of these payments.
Interest and other income increased by $42,000 from 2003 to
2004. The increase was mainly attributable to the
$26.0 million received during the third quarter of 2003
from Microsoft for a license to our portfolio of patents and
their investment in our Series A Preferred Stock.
Interest Expense. Interest expense consists
primarily of interest expense on notes payable, capital leases,
and our 5% Convertible Debenture. The increase in interest
expense of $1.5 million from 2004 to 2005 was primarily due
to interest and accretion expense on our 5% Convertible
Debentures. The decrease in interest expense of $9,000 from 2003
to 2004 related to the maturity and subsequent payment of
certain notes payable in 2004, partially offset by interest and
accretion expense on our 5% Convertible Debentures. We
expect interest expense to continue to be significant while our
5% Convertible Debentures remain outstanding.
Other Expense. Other expense consists
primarily of impairment losses on our investments in privately
held companies and accretion and dividend expense on our
long-term customer advance from Microsoft. Other expense was
$11,000 in 2005, $624,000 in 2004, and $2.0 million in
2003. Other expense in 2004 consisted primarily of accretion of
$500,000 on our long-term customer advance from Microsoft and
dividend expense on our Series A Preferred Stock of
$98,000. Other expense in 2003 consisted primarily of a noncash
impairment loss due to the write off of our investment in a
technology application developer, There, Inc., in the amount of
$1.0 million. We review our cost-method investments on a
quarterly basis to determine if there has been an
other-than-temporary
decline in the investment’s value based on our estimate of
their net realizable value taking into account the
companies’ respective business prospects, financial
condition, and ability to raise third-party financing. The
impairment loss was based on There, Inc.’s continued
decline in financial condition, uncertain future revenue
streams, and inability to raise adequate third-party financing.
In addition to the impairment loss, other expense for 2003
included
48
accretion $867,000 on our long-term customer advance from
Microsoft and dividend expense on our Series A Preferred
Stock of $183,000.
Provision
for Taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Benefit (provision) for income
taxes
|
|
$
|
(158
|
)
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
151
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
(154
|
)
|
Benefit (Provision) for Income Taxes. For the
year ended 2005, we recorded a provision for income taxes of
$158,000, yielding an effective tax rate of (1.2%). The
provision for income tax was based on federal and state
alternative minimum income tax payable on taxable income and
foreign withholding tax expense. Although we incurred a pre-tax
loss of $12.9 million, sums received from Sony Computer
Entertainment and interest thereon included in long-term
deferred revenue, approximating $16.8 million in 2005, are
taxable, thus giving rise to an overall taxable profit. The
effective tax rate differs from the statutory rate primarily due
to the recording of a full valuation allowance of
$44.7 million against deferred tax assets. For the year
ended 2004, we reversed the tax provision that had been recorded
in 2003. No tax provision was required for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003 due to net losses in those
periods. For the year ended 2003, we had recorded a provision
for income taxes of $154,000 on a pre-tax loss of
$16.8 million, yielding an effective tax rate of (0.9%).
The 2003 provision for income tax was based on federal
alternative minimum income tax due on taxable income primarily
the result of the $20.0 million license fee paid by
Microsoft during 2003. This rate differed from the statutory
rate primarily due to the recording of a full valuation
allowance of $31.3 million against deferred tax assets.
Subsequent to December 31, 2003, in May 2004, Revenue
Procedure 2004-34 (“Rev. Proc. 2004-34”) was issued by
the Internal Revenue Service. This revenue procedure allows
taxpayers a limited deferral beyond the taxable year of receipt
for certain advance payments. Qualifying taxpayers generally may
defer to the next succeeding year the inclusion in gross income
for federal income tax purposes of advance payments to the
extent the advance payments are not recognized (or, in certain
cases, are not earned) in the taxable year of receipt. Under
Rev. Proc. 2004-34 we were able to defer a significant amount of
the Microsoft payment during 2003 when calculating our federal
taxable income and therefore were not subject to federal
alternative minimum income tax for the year ended
December 31, 2003.
Segment
Results for the Years Ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and
2003 are as follows:
We have two operating and reportable segments. One segment,
Immersion Computing, Entertainment, and Industrial, develops and
markets touch feedback technologies that enable software and
hardware developers to enhance realism and usability for their
computing, entertainment, and industrial applications. The
second segment, Immersion Medical, develops, manufactures, and
markets medical simulators that recreate realistic healthcare
environments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Immersion Computing,
Entertainment, and Industrial
|
|
$
|
14,840
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
$
|
13,972
|
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
$
|
11,855
|
|
Immersion Medical
|
|
|
9,760
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)%
|
|
|
9,966
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
|
9,574
|
|
Intersegment eliminations
|
|
|
(323
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(175
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,206
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
24,277
|
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
$
|
23,763
|
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
$
|
20,223
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Immersion Computing,
Entertainment, and Industrial
|
|
$
|
(10,306
|
)
|
|
|
(42
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(17,805
|
)
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
$
|
(17,100
|
)
|
Immersion Medical
|
|
|
(2,842
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)%
|
|
|
(2,949
|
)
|
|
|
(3,020
|
)%
|
|
|
101
|
|
Intersegment eliminations
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
(13,085
|
)
|
|
|
(37
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(20,738
|
)
|
|
|
22
|
%
|
|
$
|
(16,974
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49
Fiscal
2005 Compared to Fiscal 2004
Immersion Computing, Entertainment, and Industrial
segment. Revenues from the Immersion Computing,
Entertainment, and Industrial segment increased $868,000, or 6%
for the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to the year
ended December 31, 2004. The increase was primarily
attributable to increased royalty and license revenue of
$1.2 million from our licensees that sell console and PC
gaming peripheral products, as well as increased royalties and
license fees from our automotive licensees, and increased
development contract revenue of $270,000, primarily in the
industrial market, offset in part by a reduction in product
sales of $609,000, primarily due to decreased sales of our 3D
products and lower sales of microprocessors. Our net loss for
2005 decreased by $7.5 million or 42% as compared to 2004.
The decrease was primarily due to reduced operating expenses of
$7.2 million, mainly due to reduced litigation costs
associated with our litigation against Sony Computer
Entertainment and increased gross margin of $1.2 million,
primarily due to increased revenue and higher margin royalty and
license revenues accounting for a larger percentage of the
revenue mix, offset in part by increased non-operating expenses
of $864,000, mainly due to increased interest expense on our
5% Convertible Debentures. Although we expect our total
litigation costs to decrease in 2006 as compared to 2005, we
will continue to incur litigation costs, including costs
associated with the appeal and other motions that Sony Computer
Entertainment has made, and we expect will continue to make, and
costs related to litigation against other parties as we defend
our intellectual property. In addition, we anticipate costs
associated with maintaining compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and Nasdaq listing requirements will continue to be
significant. Also, we anticipate sales and marketing costs in
this segment will increase in absolute dollars in future periods
as we increase our investment in the mobile phone, touchscreen,
and other markets to exploit opportunities for our technologies.
Immersion Medical segment. Revenues from
Immersion Medical decreased $206,000, or 2% from 2004 to 2005.
The decrease was due primarily to a decrease of
$1.1 million in royalty and license revenue, and a decrease
of $930,000 in development contract revenue, offset in part by
an increase of $1.8 million in product sales primarily due
to increased sales of our vascular access, endovascular, and
laparoscopic simulator platforms. Royalty and license revenue
and development contract revenue decreased primarily due to a
reduction in revenue recognized on our license and development
agreements with Medtronic. Decreased work performed on
government contracts also contributed to the decrease in
development contract revenue. The product sales increase was a
result of focusing sales force resources on selling training
simulator products to hospitals and teaching institutions as
well as targeted marketing programs and improved reseller
performance. In an effort to increase product sales, we continue
to transition medical engineering resources away from government
grants and certain commercial development contract efforts to
focus on product development to leverage existing sales and
channel distribution capabilities. Our net loss for 2005 was
$2.8 million, a decrease of $107,000 from the net loss of
$2.9 million for 2004. The decrease in net loss was mainly
due to decreased operating expenses of $936,000, primarily the
result of reduced research and development spending due to the
transition from development contract efforts to product sales,
offset in part by decreased gross margin of $855,000 due to a
change in revenue mix, including the reduction of higher margin
license and development contract revenue.
Fiscal
2004 Compared to Fiscal 2003
Immersion Computing, Entertainment, and Industrial
segment. Revenues from the Immersion Computing,
Entertainment, and Industrial segment increased
$2.1 million, or 18% for 2004 compared to 2003. The
increase was mainly due to increased royalty and license revenue
of $2.8 million, primarily from existing and new gaming
licensees who increased their market share of the game console
controllers aftermarket as well as growth in the game console
controller market, offset in part by decreased product sales of
$491,000 and decreased development contract revenue of $232,000,
due to decreased intercompany sales and intercompany development
work for Immersion Medical. Our net loss for 2004 increased by
$705,000 or 4% as compared to 2003. The increase was primarily
attributable to increased general and administrative expense of
$3.7 million and increased sales and marketing expense of
$1.8 million, offset in part by increased gross margin of
$2.9 million, a decrease in other expense of
$1.5 million, a decrease in amortization of intangibles of
$149,000, and increased interest and other income of $60,000.
The increase in gross margin was mainly due to the increase in
revenue. Increased general and administrative costs were
primarily related to the litigation against Sony Computer
Entertainment. Increased sales and marketing expense was due
primarily to our expansion of our sales and marketing team
including better
50
worldwide geographical sales coverage and investment in mobile
phone market opportunities. Other expense lessened due to a
decrease in noncash impairment loss from the write off of a
cost-method investment in 2003, decreased accretion of our
long-term customer advance from Microsoft, and decreased
dividend expense on Series A Preferred Stock.
Immersion Medical segment. Revenues from
Immersion Medical increased $391,000, or 4% for 2004 compared to
2003. The increase was due to a $1.8 million increase in
product sales, offset in part by a decrease in development
contract revenues of $1.2 million, and a decrease in
royalty and licensing revenue of $150,000. The increase in the
product sales was primarily due to increased sales of our
endovascular and laparoscopic simulator platforms as a result of
new and focused sales force management and the timing of
purchases from significant customers. In 2004, Immersion Medical
began its transition from government grants and certain
commercial development contract efforts to product development
efforts thereby reducing revenue in development contracts. Our
net loss for 2004 was $2.9 million, a change of
$3.0 million from the net income of $101,000 for 2003. The
net loss for 2004 was mainly the result of increased sales and
marketing expenses of $1.7 million, increased general and
administrative costs of $906,000, and decreased gross margin of
$469,000. The increase in sales and marketing expense was
primarily due to the expansion of our sales and marketing team.
General and administrative expenses increased due to increased
compensation and benefits expense and additional professional
and outside service expenses. The decrease in gross margin was
mainly due to the change in revenue mix from higher margin
development contract revenue to product sales.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Our cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments consist
primarily of money market funds and highly liquid debt
instruments. All of our cash equivalents and short-term
investments are classified as
available-for-sale
under the provisions of SFAS No. 115, “Accounting
for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities.” The
securities are stated at market value, with unrealized gains and
losses reported as a component of accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss), within stockholders’ deficit.
At December 31, 2005, our cash and cash equivalents totaled
$28.2 million, up $2.7 million from $25.5 million
at December 31, 2004.
During 2003, we entered into a series of agreements with
Microsoft in connection with the settling of our lawsuit against
Microsoft. As part of these agreements, we may require
Microsoft, at our discretion, to buy up to $6.0 million of
our 7% Senior Redeemable Convertible Debentures (“7%
Debentures”), at a rate of $2.0 million per annum plus
any amounts not purchased in the prior 12 months, for the
two years ending July 2007. As of December 31, 2005, we had
not sold any of these 7% Debentures to Microsoft.
In December 2004, we issued an aggregate principal amount of
$20.0 million of 5% Convertible Debentures. The
5% Convertible Debentures will mature on December 22,
2009. The amount payable at maturity of each 5% Convertible
Debenture is the initial principal plus all accrued but unpaid
interest thereon, to the extent such principal amount and
interest has not been converted into common shares or previously
paid in cash. Commencing on the date the 5% Convertible
Debentures were issued, interest accrues daily on the principal
amount of the 5% Convertible Debenture at a rate of
5% per year. Interest will cease to accrue on that portion
of the 5% Convertible Debenture that is converted or paid,
including pursuant to conversion right or redemption. The holder
of a 5% Convertible Debenture has the right to convert the
outstanding principal amount and accrued and unpaid interest in
whole or in part into shares of our common shares at a price of
$7.0265 per common share.
Net cash provided by operating activities during 2005 was
$2.2 million, a change of $17.8 million from the
$15.6 million used during 2004. Cash provided by operations
during the year ended December 31, 2005 was primarily the
result of a $15.5 million increase due to a change in
deferred revenue and customer advances primarily related to
compulsory license fee payments received and interest thereon
from Sony Computer Entertainment of $16.8 million and
noncash charges and credits of $2.5 million, including
$1.3 million in amortization of intangibles, $730,000 in
depreciation, and $634,000 in accretion expenses on our
5% Convertible Debenture. Additionally, cash provided by
operations during 2005 was also impacted by an increase of
$791,000 due to a change in accounts receivable and an increase
of $149,000 due to a change in prepaid expenses and other
current assets. These increases were offset by our
$13.1 million net loss, a decrease of $2.1 million due
to a change in accounts payable due to the
51
timing of payments to vendors, a decrease of $814,000 due to a
change in inventories, and a decrease of $709,000 due to a
change in accrued compensation and other current liabilities.
Net cash used in operating activities during 2004 was
$15.6 million, a change of $3.0 million from the
$12.6 million used during 2003. Cash used in operations
during the year ended December 31, 2004 was comprised
primarily of our $20.7 million net loss offset by noncash
charges and credits of $3.1 million, including
$1.6 million in amortization of intangibles and deferred
stock compensation, $874,000 in depreciation, and $598,000 in
dividend and accretion expenses on our Series A Preferred
Stock. Cash used in operations during 2004 was also impacted by
a decrease of $500,000 due to a change in accounts receivable
and a decrease of $154,000 due to a change in prepaid expenses
and other current assets. These decreases were offset by an
increase of $1.2 million due to a change in deferred
revenue and customer advances, mainly due to extending a
prepayment arrangement with a licensee, an increase of $805,000
due to a change in accounts payable due to the timing of
payments to vendors, an increase of $432,000 due to a change in
accrued compensation and other current liabilities, and an
increase of $293,000 due to a change in inventories.
Net cash used in investing activities during 2005 was
$2.0 million, compared to $2.5 million used in
investing activities during 2004, a change of $554,000. Net cash
used in investing activities during 2005 consisted of a
$1.0 million increase in other assets, primarily due to
capitalization of external patent filing and application costs,
and $967,000 used to purchase capital equipment. Net cash used
in investing activities during 2004 was $2.5 million,
compared to the $2.0 million used in investing activities
during 2003, a change of $527,000. Net cash used in investing
activities during 2004 consisted of a $1.9 million increase
in other assets, primarily due to capitalization of external
patent filing and application costs, and $623,000 used to
purchase capital equipment.
Net cash provided by financing activities during 2005 was
$2.2 million compared to $21.4 million provided during
2004, or a $19.2 million change from the prior year. Net
cash provided by financing activities during 2005 consisted
primarily of issuances of common stock and exercises of stock
options in the amount of $2.2 million. Net cash provided by
financing activities during 2004 consisted of the issuance of
$20.0 million of our 5% Convertible Debentures as
discussed in Note 7 to the consolidated financial
statements and issuances of common stock and exercises of stock
options in the amount of $1.8 million, offset by the
payment of dividends on Series A Preferred Stock of
$281,000 as discussed in Note 9 to the consolidated
financial statements.
We believe that our cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient
to meet our working capital needs and our continued litigation
costs for at least the next twelve months. We have taken
measures to control our costs and will continue to monitor these
efforts. Although we will continue to incur significant
additional expenses associated with post-judgment motions and an
appeal process related to our litigation against Sony Computer
Entertainment, we expect our litigation costs to decrease during
2006 compared to 2005. We anticipate that capital expenditures
for the year ended December 31, 2006 will total
approximately $1.0 million in connection with anticipated
upgrades to operations and infrastructure. If we are unable to
collect on the damages awarded in the Sony Computer
Entertainment litigation, or have to repay the compulsory
license payments previously received and interest thereon
totaling $16.8 million as of December 31, 2005, or are
unsuccessful in resolving the Sony Computer Entertainment
litigation in the short term, we may elect to raise additional
capital through sale of debt
and/or
equity securities or through a line of credit. Additionally, if
we acquire one or more businesses, patents, or products, our
cash or capital requirements could increase substantially. In
the event of such an acquisition, or should any unanticipated
circumstances arise that significantly increase our capital
requirements, we may elect to raise additional capital through
debt or equity financing. This could result in substantial
dilution to our stockholders. Although we expect to be able to
raise additional capital if necessary, there is no assurance
that such additional capital will be available on terms
acceptable to us, if at all.
Our 5% Convertible Debentures accrue interest at
5% per annum. Accordingly, we are required to make interest
payments in the amount of $1.0 million per annum until such
time as the 5% Convertible Debentures are either converted
to common stock or mature. If the daily volume-weighted average
price of our common shares is at or above 200% of the Conversion
Price for at least 20 consecutive trading days, and certain
other conditions are met, we have the right to (i) require
the holder of a 5% Convertible Debenture to convert the
5% Convertible Debenture in whole, including interest, into
shares of our common stock at a price of $7.0265 per common
share, as may be adjusted under the debenture, as set forth and
subject to the conditions in the 5% Convertible Debenture, or
(ii) redeem the 5% Convertible Debenture. If we make
either of the foregoing elections with respect to any
5% Convertible Debenture, we must make the same election
with respect to all 5% Convertible Debentures.
52
Summary
Disclosures About Contractual Obligations and Commercial
Commitments
The following table reflects a summary of our contractual cash
obligations and other commercial commitments as of
December 31, 2005 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 and
|
|
|
2009 and
|
|
Contractual
Obligations
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Long-term debt and interest
|
|
$
|
23,975
|
|
|
$
|
1,000
|
|
|
$
|
2,000
|
|
|
$
|
20,975
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
|
3,855
|
|
|
|
975
|
|
|
|
1,855
|
|
|
|
1,025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual cash obligations
|
|
$
|
27,830
|
|
|
$
|
1,975
|
|
|
$
|
3,855
|
|
|
$
|
22,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In connection with our series of agreements with Microsoft
executed in July 2003, we are obligated to pay Microsoft certain
amounts based on a settlement of the Sony Computer Entertainment
litigation (see Notes 9 and 18 to the consolidated
financial statements).
With regard to our 5% Convertible Debentures, in the event
of a change of control of us, a holder may require us to redeem
all or a portion of their 5% Convertible Debenture (“Put
Option”). The redeemed portion shall be redeemed at a price
equal to the redeemed amount multiplied by (a) 105% of the
principal amount of the 5% Convertible Debenture if the
change of control occurs after December 23, 2005 and on or
prior to December 23, 2006, or (b) 100% of the
principal amount of the 5% Convertible Debenture if the
change of control occurs after December 23, 2006. The
conversion price will be reduced in certain instances where
shares of common stock are sold or deemed to be sold at a price
less than the applicable conversion price, including the
issuance of certain options, the issuance of convertible
securities, or the change in exercise price or rate of
conversion for options or convertible securities. The conversion
price will be proportionately adjusted if we subdivide (by stock
split, stock dividend, recapitalization, or otherwise) or
combine (by combination, reverse stock split, or otherwise) one
or more classes of our common stock. So long as any
5% Convertible Debentures are outstanding, we will not, nor
will we permit any of our subsidiaries to, directly or
indirectly, incur or guarantee, assume or suffer to exist any
indebtedness other than permitted indebtedness under the
5% Convertible Debenture agreement. If an event of default
occurs, and is continuing with respect to any of our
5% Convertible Debentures, the holder may, at its option,
require us to redeem all or a portion of the 5% Convertible
Debenture.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
We have accounted for stock-based compensation awards issued to
employees using the intrinsic value measurement provisions of
Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion
No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees” (“APB 25”). Accordingly, no
compensation expense was recorded for stock options granted with
exercise prices greater than or equal to the fair value of the
underlying common stock at the option grant date. In December
2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R, “Share-Based
Payment.” SFAS No. 123R eliminates the
alternative of applying the intrinsic value measurement
provisions of APB 25 to stock compensation awards issued to
employees. Rather, the new standard requires enterprises to
measure the cost of employee services received in exchange for
an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair
value of the award. That cost will be recognized over the period
during which an employee is required to provide services in
exchange for the award, known as the requisite service period
(usually the vesting period). In March 2005, the Securities and
Exchange Commission issued Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 107 (“SAB 107”) relating
to the adoption of SFAS No. 123R.
SFAS No. 123R will be effective for our first quarter
of fiscal 2006. We expect that the new standard will result in
significant stock-based compensation expense.
The pro forma effects on net income and earnings per share, as
if we had applied the fair value recognition provisions of
original SFAS No. 123 on stock compensation awards
(rather than applying the intrinsic value measurement provisions
of APB 25), are disclosed in Note 1 to the
consolidated financial statements. Although such pro forma
effects of applying the original SFAS No. 123 may be
indicative of the effects of adopting SFAS No. 123R,
the provisions of these two statements differ in some important
aspects. The actual effects of adopting SFAS No. 123R
will be dependent on numerous factors including, but not limited
to, the valuation model chosen by us to value stock-based
awards; the assumed award forfeiture rate; the accounting
policies adopted concerning the method of recognizing the fair
value of awards over the requisite service period; and the
transition
53
method. We plan to use the modified prospective application
method upon our adoption of SFAS No. 123R.
Accordingly, SFAS No. 123R will be applied to new
awards and to awards modified, repurchased, or cancelled after
the effective date. The compensation cost for the portion of
awards for which the requisite service has not been rendered,
(such as unvested options) that are outstanding as of the date
of adoption, is recognized as the remaining requisite services
are rendered. The compensation cost relating to unvested awards
at the date of adoption is based on the grant-date fair value of
those awards as calculated for pro forma disclosures under the
original SFAS No. 123 as adjusted for the effect of
estimated forfeiture rates.
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
We have limited exposure to financial market risks, including
changes in interest rates. The fair value of our investment
portfolio or related income would not be significantly impacted
by a 100 basis point increase or decrease in interest rates
due mainly to the short-term nature of the major portion of our
investment portfolio. An increase or decrease in interest rates
would not significantly increase or decrease interest expense on
debt obligations due to the fixed nature of our debt
obligations. Our foreign operations are limited in scope and
thus we are not materially exposed to foreign currency
fluctuations.
As of December 31, 2005, we had outstanding
$20.0 million of fixed rate long-term convertible
debentures. The holder of a 5% Convertible Debenture has
the right to convert the outstanding principal amount and
accrued and unpaid interest in whole or in part into our common
shares at a price of $7.0265 per common share, the
Conversion Price. In the event of a change of control, a holder
may require us to redeem all or a portion of their
5% Convertible Debenture. This is referred to as the Put
Option. The redeemed portion shall be redeemed at a price equal
to the redeemed amount multiplied by (a) 105% of the
principal amount of the 5% Convertible Debenture if the
change of control occurs after December 23, 2005 and on or
prior to December 23, 2006, or (b) 100% of the
principal amount of the 5% Convertible Debenture if the
change of control occurs after December 23, 2006. If the
daily volume-weighted average price of our common shares is at
or above 200% of the Conversion Price for at least 20
consecutive trading days and certain other conditions are met,
we have the right to (i) require the holder of a
5% Convertible Debenture to convert the debenture in whole,
including interest, into shares of our common stock at a price
of $7.0265 per common share, as may be adjusted under the
debenture, as set forth and subject to the conditions in the
5% Convertible Debenture, or (ii) redeem the
5% Convertible Debenture. If we make either of the
foregoing elections with respect to any 5% Convertible
Debenture, we must make the same election with respect to all
5% Convertible Debentures.
We have equity investments in several privately held companies.
We intend to hold our equity investments for the long term and
will monitor whether there has been
other-than-temporary
declines in their values based on management’s estimates of
their net realizable value taking into account the companies
respective financial condition and ability to raise third-party
financing. If the decline in fair value is determined to be
other-than-temporary,
an impairment loss is recorded and the individual security is
written down to a new cost basis. As a result of our review of
the fair value of these investments, we recorded an impairment
loss of $1.0 million in the fourth quarter of 2003. The
remaining cost basis of these investments on our Consolidated
Balance Sheet is zero. As of December 31, 2005, management
determined that the carrying value of these investments at zero
is appropriate.
54
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
IMMERSION
CORPORATION
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
55
IMMERSION
CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
28,171
|
|
|
$
|
25,538
|
|
Accounts receivable (net of
allowances for doubtful accounts of:
2005, $383; and 2004, $159)
|
|
|
4,650
|
|
|
|
5,435
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
2,655
|
|
|
|
1,805
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current
assets
|
|
|
1,131
|
|
|
|
1,280
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
36,607
|
|
|
|
34,058
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
1,366
|
|
|
|
1,174
|
|
Intangibles and other assets, net
|
|
|
6,787
|
|
|
|
7,018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
44,760
|
|
|
$
|
42,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
2,179
|
|
|
$
|
4,038
|
|
Accrued compensation
|
|
|
1,193
|
|
|
|
1,499
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
1,604
|
|
|
|
2,003
|
|
Deferred revenue and customer
advances
|
|
|
2,741
|
|
|
|
3,420
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
7,722
|
|
|
|
10,970
|
|
Long-term debt, less current
portion
|
|
|
17,490
|
|
|
|
16,917
|
|
Long-term deferred revenue, less
current portion
|
|
|
21,294
|
|
|
|
5,154
|
|
Long-term customer advance from
Microsoft (Note 9)
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
176
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
61,555
|
|
|
|
48,217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies
(Notes 9, 11, and 18)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’ deficit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.001 par
value; 100,000,000 shares authorized; shares issued and
outstanding: 2005, 24,360,427; 2004, 23,526,067
|
|
|
106,277
|
|
|
|
104,027
|
|
Warrants
|
|
|
3,686
|
|
|
|
3,686
|
|
Deferred stock compensation
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive
income
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(126,822
|
)
|
|
|
(113,737
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders’ deficit
|
|
|
(16,795
|
)
|
|
|
(5,967
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and
stockholders’ deficit
|
|
$
|
44,760
|
|
|
$
|
42,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
56
IMMERSION
CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Royalty and license
|
|
$
|
8,888
|
|
|
$
|
8,778
|
|
|
$
|
6,088
|
|
Product sales
|
|
|
12,762
|
|
|
|
11,644
|
|
|
|
9,455
|
|
Development contracts and other
|
|
|
2,627
|
|
|
|
3,341
|
|
|
|
4,680
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
24,277
|
|
|
|
23,763
|
|
|
|
20,223
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales (exclusive
of amortization of intangibles shown separately below)
|
|
|
6,446
|
|
|
|
6,255
|
|
|
|
5,276
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
11,649
|
|
|
|
11,312
|
|
|
|
7,768
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
6,003
|
|
|
|
7,985
|
|
|
|
7,899
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
10,638
|
|
|
|
17,133
|
|
|
|
12,511
|
|
Amortization of intangibles
|
|
|
1,256
|
|
|
|
1,470
|
|
|
|
1,619
|
|
Restructuring costs
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
|
36,177
|
|
|
|
44,155
|
|
|
|
35,073
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(11,900
|
)
|
|
|
(20,392
|
)
|
|
|
(14,850
|
)
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
490
|
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(1,506
|
)
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
Other expense
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
(624
|
)
|
|
|
(2,046
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before benefit (provision)
for income taxes
|
|
|
(12,927
|
)
|
|
|
(20,889
|
)
|
|
|
(16,820
|
)
|
Benefit (provision) for income
taxes
|
|
|
(158
|
)
|
|
|
151
|
|
|
|
(154
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(13,085
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,738
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16,974
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per
share
|
|
$
|
(0.54
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.91
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.83
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in calculating basic
and diluted net loss per share
|
|
|
24,027
|
|
|
|
22,698
|
|
|
|
20,334
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
57
IMMERSION
CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
(DEFICIT)
(In thousands, except share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Warrants
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Balances at January 1, 2003
|
|
|
20,137,040
|
|
|
$
|
89,061
|
|
|
$
|
1,974
|
|
|
$
|
(1,046
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16
|
)
|
|
$
|
(76,025
|
)
|
|
$
|
13,948
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16,974
|
)
|
|
|
(16,974
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16,974
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(16,925
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of stock for ESPP purchase
|
|
|
31,367
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
502,134
|
|
|
|
858
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
858
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reversal of deferred stock
compensation due to cancellation of stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred stock
compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
861
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
861
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at December 31, 2003
|
|
|
20,670,541
|
|
|
$
|
89,903
|
|
|
$
|
1,974
|
|
|
$
|
(130
|
)
|
|
$
|
33
|
|
|
$
|
(92,999
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,219
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,738
|
)
|
|
|
(20,738
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,738
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(20,712
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conversion of series A
redeemable preferred stock to common stock
|
|
|
2,185,792
|
|
|
|
12,367
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,367
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of stock for ESPP purchase
|
|
|
49,524
|
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
620,210
|
|
|
|
1,587
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,587
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred stock
compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at December 31, 2004
|
|
|
23,526,067
|
|
|
$
|
104,027
|
|
|
$
|
3,686
|
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
|
$
|
(113,737
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5,967
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,085
|
)
|
|
|
(13,085
|
)
|
|
$
|
(13,085
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(13,080
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of stock for ESPP purchase
|
|
|
55,967
|
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
778,393
|
|
|
|
2,017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,017
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred stock
compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
24,360,427
|
|
|
$
|
106,277
|
|
|
$
|
3,686
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
64
|
|
|
$
|
(126,822
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16,795
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
58
IMMERSION
CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(13,085
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,738
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16,974
|
)
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss
to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
730
|
|
|
|
874
|
|
|
|
1,040
|
|
Amortization of intangibles
|
|
|
1,256
|
|
|
|
1,470
|
|
|
|
1,619
|
|
Amortization of deferred stock
compensation
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
861
|
|
Interest
expense — accretion on 5% Convertible
Debenture (Note 7)
|
|
|
634
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Interest and other
expense — Microsoft (Note 9)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
598
|
|
|
|
1,050
|
|
Amortization of discount on notes
payable
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Fair value adjustment of Put Option
and Registration Rights
|
|
|
(128
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Fair value adjustment for warrant
liability
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Noncash interest expense
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
Noncash compensation expense
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Loss on disposal of equipment
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Loss on writedown of investments
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,000
|
|
Changes in operating assets and
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
791
|
|
|
|
(500
|
)
|
|
|
(1,257
|
)
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(814
|
)
|
|
|
293
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current
assets
|
|
|
149
|
|
|
|
(154
|
)
|
|
|
26
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(2,087
|
)
|
|
|
805
|
|
|
|
(207
|
)
|
Accrued compensation and other
current liabilities
|
|
|
(709
|
)
|
|
|
432
|
|
|
|
933
|
|
Deferred revenue and customer
advances
|
|
|
15,461
|
|
|
|
1,223
|
|
|
|
(722
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities
|
|
|
2,210
|
|
|
|
(15,550
|
)
|
|
|
(12,580
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangibles and other assets
|
|
|
(1,025
|
)
|
|
|
(1,918
|
)
|
|
|
(1,573
|
)
|
Purchases of property and equipment
|
|
|
(967
|
)
|
|
|
(623
|
)
|
|
|
(441
|
)
|
Proceeds from the sale of property
and equipment
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing
activities
|
|
|
(1,987
|
)
|
|
|
(2,541
|
)
|
|
|
(2,014
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of 5% Convertible
Debenture
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Increase in issuance cost of
5% Convertible Debenture (Note 7)
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Issuance of common stock under
employee stock purchase plan
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
2,017
|
|
|
|
1,587
|
|
|
|
858
|
|
Long-term customer advance from
Microsoft (Note 9)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
26,000
|
|
Dividends paid on Series A
Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock (Note 9)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(281
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
Payment on notes payable and
capital leases
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
(32
|
)
|
|
|
(102
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing
activities
|
|
|
2,184
|
|
|
|
21,444
|
|
|
|
26,791
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rates on cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
|
226
|
|
|
|
447
|
|
|
|
824
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash
equivalents
|
|
|
2,633
|
|
|
|
3,800
|
|
|
|
13,021
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of year
|
|
|
25,538
|
|
|
|
21,738
|
|
|
|
8,717
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of year
|
|
$
|
28,171
|
|
|
$
|
25,538
|
|
|
$
|
21,738
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash
flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for taxes
|
|
$
|
55
|
|
|
$
|
160
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for interest
|
|
$
|
1,026
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of noncash
investing and financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfer to common stock of
long-term customer advance from Microsoft (Note 9)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
12,367
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock warrants
in connection with the issuance of the 5% Convertible Debentures
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
1,712
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs related to debt issuance
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
1,392
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
59
IMMERSION
CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years Ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003
|
|
1.
|
Significant
Accounting Policies
|
Description of Business — Immersion
Corporation (the “Company”) was incorporated in May
1993 in California and reincorporated in Delaware in 1999 and
develops, manufactures, licenses, and supports a wide range of
hardware and software technologies and products that enhance
users’ interaction with digital devices using their sense
of touch.
Principles of Consolidation and Basis of
Presentation — The consolidated financial
statements include the accounts of Immersion Corporation and its
majority-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany accounts,
transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
The Company has prepared the accompanying consolidated financial
statements in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America.
Reclassifications — Certain
reclassifications have been made to prior year balances in order
to conform to the current year presentation. These
reclassifications had no effect on net loss or
stockholders’ equity (deficit).
Cash Equivalents — The Company considers
all highly liquid debt instruments purchased with an original or
remaining maturity of less than three months at the date of
purchase to be cash equivalents.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts — The
Company maintains an allowance for doubtful accounts for
estimated losses resulting from its review and assessment of its
customers’ ability to make required payments. The Company
reviews its trade receivables by aging categories to identify
significant customers with known disputes or collection issues.
For accounts not specifically identified the Company provides
reserves based on historical levels of credit losses and
reserves.
Inventories — Inventories are stated at
the lower of cost (principally on a standard cost basis which
approximates FIFO) or market. The Company reduces its inventory
value for estimated obsolete and slow moving inventory in an
amount equal to the difference between the cost of inventory and
the net realizable value based upon assumptions about future
demand and market conditions.
Property and Equipment — Property is
stated at cost and is generally depreciated using the
straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the
related asset. The estimated useful lives are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Computer equipment and purchased
software
|
|
|
3 years
|
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
3-5 years
|
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
5-7 years
|
|
Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of the
lease term or their useful life.
Intangible Assets — The Company accounts
for its intangible assets in accordance with
SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets.” SFAS No. 142 addresses the initial
recognition and measurement of intangible assets acquired
outside of a business combination and the accounting for
goodwill and other intangible assets subsequent to their
acquisition. SFAS No. 142 provides that intangible
assets with finite useful lives will be amortized and that
goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite lives will not be
amortized but rather will be tested at least annually for
impairment.
In addition to purchased intangible assets the Company
capitalizes the external legal and filing fees associated with
its patents and trademarks. These costs are amortized once the
patent or trademark is issued.
For intangibles with definite useful lives, amortization is
recorded utilizing the straight-line method, which approximates
the pattern of consumption over the estimated useful lives of
the respective assets, generally two to ten years.
Long-lived Assets — The Company evaluates
its long-lived assets for impairment in accordance with
SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” whenever events or changes
in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of that asset
may not be recoverable. An impairment loss would
60
be recognized when the sum of the undiscounted future net cash
flows expected to result from the use of the asset and its
eventual disposition is less than its carrying amount.
Measurement of an impairment loss for long-lived assets and
certain identifiable intangible assets that management expects
to hold and use is based on the fair value of the asset. As of
December 31, 2005, management believes that no impairment
losses are required.
Product Warranty — The Company sells the
majority of its products with warranties ranging from three to
twenty-four months. Historically, warranty-related costs have
not been significant.
Revenue Recognition — The Company
recognizes revenues in accordance with applicable accounting
standards including Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”)
No. 104, “Revenue Recognition,” Emerging Issues Task
Force (“EITF”) Issue No.
00-21,
“Accounting for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple
Deliverables,” and the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants (“AICPA”) Statement of Position
(“SOP”) 97-2, “Software Revenue
Recognition,” as amended. Revenue is recognized when
persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has
occurred or service has been rendered, the fee is fixed and
determinable, and collectibility is probable. The Company
derives its revenues from three principal sources: royalty and
license fees, product sales, and development contracts.
Royalty
and license revenue
The Company recognizes royalty and license revenue based on
royalty reports or related information received from the
licensee as well as time-based licenses of its intellectual
property portfolio. Up-front payments under license agreements
are deferred and recognized as revenue based on either the
royalty reports received or amortized over the license period
depending on the nature of the agreement. Advance payments under
license agreements that also require the Company to provide
future services to the licensee are deferred and recognized over
the service period when vendor-specific objective evidence
(“VSOE”) related to the value of the services does not
exist.
The Company generally recognizes revenue from its licensees
under one or a combination of the following models:
|
|
|
License Revenue Model
|
|
Revenue Recognition
|
|
Perpetual license of intellectual
property portfolio based on per unit royalties, no services
contracted.
|
|
Based on royalty reports received
from licensees. No further obligations to licensee exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time-based license of intellectual
property portfolio with up-front payments
and/or
annual minimum royalty requirements, no services contracted.
|
|
Based on straight-line
amortization of annual minimum/up-front payment recognized over
contract period or annual minimum period. No further obligations
to licensee exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perpetual license of intellectual
property portfolio or technology license along with contract for
development work.
|
|
Based on
cost-to-cost
percentage-of-completion
accounting method over the service period. Obligation to
licensee exists until development work is complete.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
License of software or technology,
no modification necessary, no services contracted.
|
|
Up-front revenue recognition based
on
SOP 97-2
criteria or EITF No. 00-21, as applicable.
|
Individual contracts may have characteristics that do not fall
within a specific license model or may have characteristics of a
combination of license models. Under those circumstances, the
Company recognizes revenue in accordance with
SAB No. 104, EITF
No. 00-21,
and
SOP 97-2,
as amended, to guide the accounting treatment for each
individual contract. See also comments regarding “Multiple
element arrangements” below. If the information received
from the Company’s licensees regarding royalties is
incorrect or inaccurate, the Company’s revenues in future
periods may be adversely affected. To date, none of the
information the Company has received from the Company’s
licensees has caused any material adjustment to period revenues.
61
Product
sales
The Company recognizes revenues from product sales when the
product is shipped, provided that collection is determined to be
probable and no significant obligation remains. The Company
sells the majority of its products with warranties ranging from
3 to 24 months. The Company records the estimated warranty
costs during the quarter the revenue is recognized.
Historically, warranty-related costs and related accruals have
not been significant. The Company offers a general right of
return on the MicroScribe product line for 14 days after
purchase. The Company recognizes revenue at the time of shipment
of a MicroScribe digitizer and provides an accrual for potential
returns based on historical experience. No other general right
of return is offered on its products.
Development
contracts and other revenue
Development contracts and other revenue is comprised of
professional services (consulting services
and/or
development contracts), customer support, and extended warranty
contracts. Development contract revenues are recognized under
the
cost-to-cost
percentage-of-completion
accounting method based on physical completion of the work to be
performed. Losses on contracts are recognized when determined.
Revisions in estimates are reflected in the period in which the
conditions become known. Customer support and extended warranty
contract revenue is recognized ratably over the contractual
period.
Multiple
element arrangements
The Company enters into revenue arrangements in which the
customer purchases a combination of patent, technology,
and/or
software licenses, products, professional services, support, and
extended warranties (multiple element arrangements). When VSOE
of fair value exists for all elements, the Company allocates
revenue to each element based on the relative fair value of each
of the elements. The price charged when the element is sold
separately generally determines the fair value or VSOE. For
arrangements where VSOE of fair value exists only for the
undelivered elements, the Company defers the full fair value of
the undelivered elements and recognizes the difference between
the total arrangement fee and the amount deferred for the
undelivered items as revenue, assuming all other criteria for
revenue recognition have been met.
The Company’s revenue recognition policies are significant
because the Company’s revenues are a key component of its
results of operations. In addition, the Company’s revenue
recognition determines the timing of certain expenses, such as
commissions and royalties.
Advertising — Advertising costs (including
obligations under cooperative marketing programs) are expensed
as incurred and included in sales and marketing expense.
Advertising expense was $179,000, $166,000, and $166,000 in
2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.
Research and Development — Research and
development costs are expensed as incurred. The Company has
generated revenues from development contracts with the United
States government and other commercial customers that have
enabled it to accelerate its own product development efforts.
Such development revenues have only partially funded the
Company’s product development activities, and the Company
generally retains ownership of the products developed under
these arrangements. As a result, the Company classifies all
development costs related to these contracts as research and
development expenses.
Income Taxes — The Company provides for
income taxes using the asset and liability approach defined by
SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes.”
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the
expected tax consequences between the tax bases of assets and
liabilities and their reported amounts. Valuation allowances are
established when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the
amount expected to be realized and are reversed at such time
that realization is believed to be more likely than not.
Software Development Costs — Certain of
the Company’s products include software. Costs for the
development of new software products and substantial
enhancements to existing software products are expensed as
incurred until technological feasibility has been established,
at which time any additional costs would be capitalized in
accordance with SFAS No. 86, “Computer Software
to be Sold, Leased or Otherwise Marketed.” The Company
considers technological feasibility to be established upon
completion of a working model of the software and the
62
related hardware. Because the Company believes its current
process for developing software is essentially completed
concurrently with the establishment of technological
feasibility, no costs have been capitalized to date.
Stock-Based Compensation — The Company has
accounted for its stock-based awards to employees using the
intrinsic value method in accordance with APB Opinion
No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees,” and its related interpretations. The Company
accounts for stock-based awards to non-employees in accordance
with SFAS No. 123, ”Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation.” Pro forma disclosures required under
SFAS No. 123, as if the Company had adopted the fair
value based method of accounting for stock options, are as
follows (in thousands, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Net loss — as
reported
|
|
$
|
(13,085
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,738
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16,974
|
)
|
Add: Stock-based employee
compensation included in reported net loss, net of related tax
effects
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
861
|
|
Less: Stock-based compensation
expense determined using fair value method, net of tax
|
|
|
(5,088
|
)
|
|
|
(6,663
|
)
|
|
|
(4,134
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss — pro forma
|
|
$
|
(18,171
|
)
|
|
$
|
(27,273
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,247
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per common
share — as reported
|
|
$
|
(0.54
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.91
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.83
|
)
|
Basic and diluted loss per common
share — pro forma
|
|
$
|
(0.76
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.20
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.00
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R,
“Share-Based Payment.” SFAS No. 123R
eliminates the alternative of applying the intrinsic value
measurement provisions of APB 25 to stock compensation
awards issued to employees. The Company will adopt
SFAS No. 123R during the Company’s first quarter
of fiscal 2006. See discussion regarding SFAS No. 123R
below in the section titled “Recent Accounting
Pronouncements.”
Comprehensive Loss — Comprehensive loss
includes net loss as well as other items of comprehensive income
(loss). The Company’s other comprehensive income (loss)
consists of unrealized gains and losses on
available-for-sale
securities and foreign currency translation adjustments. Total
comprehensive loss and the components of accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss) are presented in the accompanying
Consolidated Statement of Stockholders’ Equity (Deficit).
Net Loss per Share — Basic net loss per
share excludes dilution and is computed by dividing net loss by
the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the
period (excluding shares subject to repurchase). Diluted net
loss per common share was the same as basic net loss per common
share for all periods presented since the effect of any
potentially dilutive securities is excluded, as they are
anti-dilutive because of the Company’s net losses.
Use of Estimates — The preparation of
consolidated financial statements and related disclosures in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities
at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the
reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting
period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Concentration of Credit Risks — Financial
instruments that potentially subject the Company to a
concentration of credit risk principally consist of cash and
cash equivalents, short-term investments, and accounts
receivable. The Company invests primarily in money market
accounts, commercial paper, and debt securities of
U.S. government agencies. Deposits held with banks may
exceed the amount of insurance provided on such deposits.
Generally, these deposits may be redeemed upon demand. The
Company sells products primarily to companies in North America,
Europe, and the Far East. To reduce credit risk, management
performs periodic credit evaluations of its customers’
financial condition. The Company maintains reserves for
estimated potential credit losses, but historically has not
experienced any significant losses related to individual
customers or groups of customers in any particular industry or
geographic area.
63
Certain Significant Risks and
Uncertainties — The Company operates in a
dynamic industry and, accordingly, can be affected by a variety
of factors. For example, management of the Company believes that
changes in any of the following areas could have a negative
effect on the Company in terms of its future financial position
and results of operations: its ability to obtain additional
financing; the mix of revenues; the loss of significant
customers; fundamental changes in the technology underlying the
Company’s products; market acceptance of the Company’s
and its licensees’ products under development; the
availability of contract manufacturing capacity; development of
sales channels; litigation or other claims in which the Company
is involved; the ability to successfully assert its patent
rights against others; the hiring, training, and retention of
key employees; successful and timely completion of product and
technology development efforts; and new product or technology
introductions by competitors.
The Company has incurred net losses each year since 1997
including losses of $13.1 million in 2005,
$20.7 million in 2004, and $17.0 million in 2003. As
of December 31, 2005, the Company had an accumulated
deficit of $126.8 million. The Company believes its cash
and cash equivalents of $28.2 million are sufficient to
meet its anticipated cash needs for working capital and capital
expenditures through at least December 31, 2006. If cash
generated from operations is insufficient to satisfy the
Company’s liquidity requirements, the Company may seek to
raise additional financing or reduce the scope of its planned
product development and marketing efforts.
Supplier Concentrations — The Company
depends on a number of single source suppliers to produce some
of its medical simulators and certain other components. While
the Company seeks to maintain a sufficient level of supply and
endeavors to maintain ongoing communications with these
suppliers to guard against interruptions or cessation of supply,
any disruption in the manufacturing process from its sole source
suppliers could adversely affect the Company’s ability to
deliver its products and ensure quality workmanship and could
result in a reduction of the Company’s product sales.
Fair Value of Financial
Instruments — Financial instruments consist
primarily of cash equivalents, short-term investments, accounts
receivable, accounts payable, and long-term debt. Cash
equivalents and short-term investments are stated at fair value
based on quoted market prices. The recorded cost of accounts
receivable, accounts payable, and long-term debt approximate the
fair value of the respective assets and liabilities.
Foreign Currency Translation — The
functional currency of the Company’s foreign subsidiary is
its local currency. Accordingly, gains and losses from the
translation of the financial statements of the foreign
subsidiary are reported as a separate component of accumulated
other comprehensive income (loss). Foreign currency transaction
gains and losses are included in earnings.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements — The
Company has accounted for stock-based compensation awards issued
to employees using the intrinsic value measurement provisions of
Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion
No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees” (“APB 25”). Accordingly, no
compensation expense was recorded for stock options granted with
exercise prices greater than or equal to the fair value of the
underlying common stock at the option grant date. In December
2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R, “Share-Based
Payment.” SFAS No. 123R eliminates the
alternative of applying the intrinsic value measurement
provisions of APB 25 to stock compensation awards issued to
employees. Rather, the new standard requires enterprises to
measure the cost of employee services received in exchange for
an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair
value of the award. That cost will be recognized over the period
during which an employee is required to provide services in
exchange for the award, known as the requisite service period
(usually the vesting period). In March 2005, the Securities and
Exchange Commission issued Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 107 (“SAB 107”) relating
to the adoption of SFAS No. 123R.
SFAS No. 123R will be effective for the Company’s
first quarter of fiscal 2006. The Company expects that the new
standard will result in significant stock-based compensation
expense.
The pro forma effects on net income and earnings per share, as
if the Company had applied the fair value recognition provisions
of original SFAS No. 123 on stock compensation awards
(rather than applying the intrinsic value measurement provisions
of APB 25), are disclosed above. Although such pro forma
effects of applying original SFAS No. 123 may be
indicative of the effects of adopting SFAS No. 123R,
the provisions of these two statements differ in some important
aspects. The actual effects of adopting SFAS No. 123R
will be dependent on numerous factors including, but not limited
to, the valuation model chosen by the Company to value
stock-based awards; the assumed award forfeiture rate; the
accounting policies adopted concerning the method of recognizing
the fair value of awards over the requisite service period; and
the transition method. The Company plans to use the
64
modified prospective application method upon its adoption of
SFAS No. 123R. Accordingly, SFAS No. 123R
will be applied to new awards and to awards modified,
repurchased, or cancelled after the effective date. The
compensation cost for the portion of awards for which the
requisite service has not been rendered, (such as unvested
options) that are outstanding as of the date of adoption, is
recognized as the remaining requisite services are rendered. The
compensation cost relating to unvested awards at the date of
adoption is based on the grant-date fair value of those awards
as calculated for pro forma disclosures under the original
SFAS No. 123 as adjusted for the effect of estimated
forfeiture rates.
|
|
2.
|
Cash and
Cash Equivalents
|
Cash and cash equivalents consist of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
$
|
1,847
|
|
|
$
|
1,053
|
|
Cash equivalents:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certificate of deposit
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
Money market funds
|
|
|
26,299
|
|
|
|
24,459
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cash equivalents
|
|
|
26,324
|
|
|
|
24,485
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
28,171
|
|
|
$
|
25,538
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories consist of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Raw materials and subassemblies
|
|
$
|
2,369
|
|
|
$
|
1,555
|
|
Work in process
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
231
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
2,655
|
|
|
$
|
1,805
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.
|
Property
and Equipment
|
Property and equipment consist of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Computer equipment and purchased
software
|
|
$
|
2,974
|
|
|
$
|
2,395
|
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
2,235
|
|
|
|
2,132
|
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
1,229
|
|
|
|
1,337
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
798
|
|
|
|
692
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
7,236
|
|
|
|
6,556
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(5,870
|
)
|
|
|
(5,382
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
1,366
|
|
|
$
|
1,174
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
5.
|
Intangibles
and Other Assets
|
The components of intangibles and other assets are as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Patents and technology
|
|
$
|
11,478
|
|
|
$
|
10,453
|
|
Other intangibles
|
|
|
5,748
|
|
|
|
5,748
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross intangibles and other assets
|
|
|
17,309
|
|
|
|
16,284
|
|
Accumulated amortization of
patents and technology
|
|
|
(4,774
|
)
|
|
|
(3,973
|
)
|
Accumulated amortization of other
intangibles
|
|
|
(5,748
|
)
|
|
|
(5,293
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangibles and other assets, net
|
|
$
|
6,787
|
|
|
$
|
7,018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of intangibles during the years ended
December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003 was $1.3 million,
$1.5 million, and $1.6 million, respectively. The
estimated annual amortization expense for intangible assets as
of December 31, 2005 is $822,000 in 2006, $1.2 million
in 2007, $736,000 in 2008, $634,000 in 2009, $578,000 in 2010,
and $2.8 million in total for all years thereafter.
|
|
6.
|
Components
of Other Current Liabilities and Deferred Revenue and Customer
Advances
|
Other current liabilities consist of (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Accrued legal
|
|
$
|
307
|
|
|
$
|
489
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
1,297
|
|
|
|
1,514
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other current liabilities
|
|
$
|
1,604
|
|
|
$
|
2,003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
$
|
2,702
|
|
|
$
|
3,381
|
|
Customer advances
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred revenue and
customer advances
|
|
$
|
2,741
|
|
|
$
|
3,420
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The components of long-term debt are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
5% Senior Subordinated
Convertible Debenture
|
|
$
|
17,490
|
|
|
$
|
16,911
|
|
Other
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
17,495
|
|
|
|
16,927
|
|
Current portion
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt
|
|
$
|
17,490
|
|
|
$
|
16,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5% Senior Subordinated Convertible Debenture
(“5% Convertible Debenture”). On
December 23, 2004, the Company issued an aggregate
principal amount of $20.0 million of 5% Convertible
Debentures. The 5% Convertible Debentures will mature on
December 22, 2009. The amount payable at maturity of each
5% Convertible Debenture is the initial principal plus all
accrued but unpaid interest thereon, to the extent such
principal amount and interest have not been converted into
common shares or previously paid in cash. The Company cannot
prepay the 5% Convertible Debenture except as described
below in “Mandatory Conversion and Mandatory Redemption of
5% Convertible Debentures at the Company’s
Option.” Interest accrues daily on the principal amount of
the 5%
66
Convertible Debenture at a rate of 5% per year. Interest is
payable on the last day of each calendar quarter, and commenced
on March 31, 2005. Interest will cease to accrue on that
portion of the 5% Convertible Debenture that is converted
or paid, including pursuant to conversion right or redemption.
The holder of a 5% Convertible Debenture has the right to
convert the outstanding principal amount and accrued and unpaid
interest, in whole or in part, into the Company’s common
shares at a price of $7.0265 per common share, the
Conversion Price. In the event of a change of control, a holder
may require the Company to redeem all or a portion of their
5% Convertible Debenture. This is referred to as the Put
Option. The redeemed portion shall be redeemed at a price equal
to the redeemed amount multiplied by (a) 110% of the
principal amount of the 5% Convertible Debenture if the change
of control occurs on or prior to December 23, 2005,
(b) 105% of the principal amount of the 5% Convertible
Debenture if the change of control occurs after
December 23, 2005 and on or prior to December 23,
2006, or (c) 100% of the principal amount of the
5% Convertible Debenture if the change of control occurs
after December 23, 2006. The Conversion Price will be
reduced in certain instances where shares of common stock are
sold or deemed to be sold at a price less than the applicable
Conversion Price, including the issuance of certain options, the
issuance of convertible securities, or the change in exercise
price or rate of conversion for options or convertible
securities. The Conversion Price will be proportionately
adjusted if the Company subdivides (by stock split, stock
dividend, recapitalization, or otherwise) or combines (by
combination, reverse stock split, or otherwise) one or more
classes of its common stock. So long as any 5% Convertible
Debentures are outstanding, the Company will not, nor will the
Company permit any of its subsidiaries to directly or indirectly
incur or guarantee, assume or suffer to exist, any indebtedness
other than permitted indebtedness under the 5% Convertible
Debenture agreement. If an event of default occurs, and is
continuing with respect to any of the Company’s 5%
Convertible Debentures, the holder may, at its option, require
the Company to redeem all or a portion of the
5% Convertible Debenture.
Mandatory Conversion and Mandatory Redemption of
5% Convertible Debentures at the Company’s
Option. Commencing on December 23, 2005, if
the daily volume-weighted average price of the Company’s
common shares is at or above 200% of the Conversion Price for at
least 20 consecutive trading days and certain other conditions
are met, the Company has the right to (i) require the
holder of a 5% Convertible Debenture to convert the
5% Convertible Debenture in whole, including interest, into
shares of the Company’s common stock at a price of
$7.0265 per common share, as may be adjusted under the
debenture, as set forth and subject to the conditions in the
5% Convertible Debenture, or (ii) redeem the
5% Convertible Debenture. If the Company makes either of
the foregoing elections with respect to any 5% Convertible
Debenture, the Company must make the same election with respect
to all 5% Convertible Debentures.
Warrants. On December 23, 2004, in
connection with the issuance of the 5% Convertible Debentures,
the Company issued warrants to purchase an aggregate of
426,951 shares of its common stock at an exercise price of
$7.0265. The warrants may be exercised at any time prior to
5:00 p.m. Eastern time, on December 23, 2009. Any
warrants not exercised prior to such time will expire. The
exercise price will be reduced in certain instances where shares
of common stock are sold or deemed to be sold at a price less
than the applicable exercise price, including the issuance of
certain options, the issuance of convertible securities, or the
change in exercise price or rate of conversion for option or
convertible securities. The exercise price will be
proportionately adjusted if the Company subdivides (by stock
split, stock dividend, recapitalization, or otherwise) or
combines (by combination, reverse stock split, or otherwise) one
or more classes of its common stock.
Registration Rights. On April 18, 2005,
the Company’s registration statement relating to the
5% Convertible Debentures, and the shares of common stock
issuable upon conversion of the debentures, was declared
effective by the SEC. The Company expects to keep this
registration statement effective until the earlier of
(i) such time as all of the shares covered by the
prospectus have been disposed of pursuant to and in accordance
with the registration statement, or (ii) the date on which
the shares may be sold pursuant to Rule 144(k) of the
Securities Act.
The Company incurred approximately $1.3 million in issuance
costs and other expenses in connection with the offering. This
amount has been deferred and is being amortized to interest
expense over the term of the 5% Convertible Debenture.
Additionally, the Company evaluated the various instruments
included in the agreements entered into on December 22,
2004 and allocated the relative fair values to be as follows:
warrants — $1.7 million, Put
Option — $0.1 million, Registration
Rights — $0.1 million, issuance
costs — $1.3 million, 5% Convertible
Debenture — $16.8 million. The
5% Convertible Debentures will be accreted to
$20.0 million over their five-year life, resulting in
additional interest expense. The value of the warrants has been
included in Stockholders’ Deficit; the value of the Put
67
Option and Registration Rights have been recorded as a liability
and are subject to future value adjustments; and the value of
the 5% Convertible Debentures has been recorded as
long-term debt.
Annual maturities of long-term debt at December 31, 2005
are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
2007
|
|
|
—
|
|
2008
|
|
|
—
|
|
2009
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
20,005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.
|
Long-term
Deferred Revenue
|
At December 31, 2005, long-term deferred revenue included
payments of approximately $16.8 million of compulsory
license fees and interest from Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.
and Sony Computer Entertainment of America Inc. (collectively,
“Sony Computer Entertainment”), pursuant to Court
rulings on January 10 and February 9, 2005. Due to the
contingent nature of the court-order payments made by Sony
Computer Entertainment, the Company will not record any revenue
or interest associated with these payments as revenue or income
until such time as the contingency lapses.
9. Long-term
Customer Advance from Microsoft
On July 25, 2003, the Company contemporaneously executed a
series of agreements with Microsoft Corporation
(“Microsoft”) that (1) settled the Company’s
lawsuit against Microsoft, (2) granted Microsoft a
worldwide royalty-free, irrevocable license to the
Company’s portfolio of patents (the “License
Agreement”) in exchange for a payment of
$19.9 million, (3) provided Microsoft with sublicense
rights to pursue certain license arrangements directly with
third parties including Sony Computer Entertainment which, if
consummated, would result in payments to the Company (the
“Sublicense Rights”), and conveyed to Microsoft the
right to a payment of cash in the event of a settlement within
certain parameters of the Company’s patent litigation
against Sony Computer Entertainment of America Inc. and Sony
Computer Entertainment Inc. (the “Participation
Rights”) in exchange for a payment of $0.1 million,
(4) issued Microsoft shares of the Company’s
Series A Redeemable Convertible Preferred Stock
(“Series A Preferred Stock”) for a payment of
$6.0 million, and (5) granted the Company the right to
sell debentures of $9.0 million to Microsoft under the
terms and conditions established in newly authorized 7% Senior
Redeemable Convertible Debentures
(“7% Debentures”) with annual draw down rights
over a
48-month
period.
Under these agreements, in the event of a settlement of the Sony
Computer Entertainment litigation under certain terms, the
Company will be required to make a cash payment to Microsoft of
(i) an amount to be determined based on the settlement
proceeds, and (ii) any funds received from Microsoft under
the 7% Debentures. As discussed in Note 18, regarding the
Sony Computer Entertainment litigation, the Court entered
judgment in the Company’s favor and awarded the Company
$82.0 million in past damages and pre-judgment interest in
the amount of $8.7 million. On June 16, 2005, Sony
Computer Entertainment filed its notice of appeal of the
judgment based upon the jury verdict; the Company intends to
vigorously pursue its claims against Sony Computer Entertainment.
On April 2, 2004, Microsoft elected to convert
2,185,792 shares of Series A Preferred Stock into
2,185,792 shares of common stock. This conversion
eliminated certain obligations, such as the mandatory redemption
buy-back provision, the obligation to make dividend payments,
and certain operational limitations.
In the event of a settlement of the Sony Computer Entertainment
litigation, the Company will realize and retain net cash
proceeds received from Sony Computer Entertainment only to the
extent that settlement proceeds exceed the amounts due Microsoft
for its Participation Rights and any outstanding 7% Debentures
and interest as specified above. Under certain circumstances
related to a Company initiated settlement with Sony Computer
Entertainment, the Company would be obligated to pay Microsoft a
minimum of $15.0 million. In the event of an unfavorable
judicial resolution or a dismissal or withdrawal by the Company
of the lawsuit meeting certain conditions, the Company would not
be required to make any payments to Microsoft except pursuant to
the payment provisions relating to any outstanding
7% Debentures.
68
Under the terms of the Senior Redeemable Convertible Debentures
agreement, the Company can sell up to $3.0 million of the
7% Debentures the first year and $2.0 million per year
for the following three years. Debenture proceeds may only be
used to finance the Sony Computer Entertainment litigation. The
7% Debentures are callable by Microsoft after three years at
110%. They are also callable by Microsoft upon settlement of the
Sony Computer Entertainment litigation at 125% of par. The
7% Debentures are convertible into common stock at
364 shares/$1,000 face value (based on $2.745 per
share). Under certain specified circumstances, including the
acquisition of the Company, any outstanding 7% Debentures
would become immediately due and payable. The Company has, to
date, not sold any 7% Debentures.
The $26.0 million received from Microsoft, as described
above, plus an additional $1.4 million related to accretion
and cumulative dividends, was reflected as a liability in the
financial statements as of March 31, 2004. Upon
Microsoft’s election to convert its shares of the
Company’s Series A Preferred Stock into common stock
in April 2004, the Company reduced the long-term customer
advance from Microsoft to the minimum $15.0 million
obligation the Company would be obligated to pay Microsoft upon
a settlement with Sony Computer Entertainment. The remainder of
consideration of $12.4 million was transferred to common
stock when Microsoft elected to convert the Series A
Preferred Stock to common stock.
The Company accounts for restructuring costs in accordance with
SFAS No. 146, “Accounting for Costs Associated
with Exit of Disposal Activities.” Restructuring costs of
$185,000 incurred in the year ended December 31, 2005
consisted of severance benefits paid as a result of a reduction
in workforce of approximately 10% in early 2005. Employees from
manufacturing, sales and marketing, research and development,
and general and administrative were included in the reduction in
force. The Company did not incur any additional charges related
to the aforementioned reduction in force and management does not
anticipate any further costs in future periods related to this
reduction in force.
Restructuring costs for the year ended December 31, 2005
were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring
|
|
|
Costs Expensed
|
|
|
Restructuring
|
|
|
Restructuring
|
|
|
|
Costs Unpaid
|
|
|
in the Year
|
|
|
Costs Paid
|
|
|
Costs Unpaid
|
|
|
|
as of
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
through
|
|
|
as of
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2004
|
|
|
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
Nature of Restructuring Costs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduction in Force
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company leases several of its facilities, vehicles, and some
office equipment under noncancelable operating lease
arrangements that expire at various dates through 2010.
Minimum future lease payments are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Leases
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$
|
975
|
|
2007
|
|
|
933
|
|
2008
|
|
|
922
|
|
2009
|
|
|
709
|
|
2010
|
|
|
316
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total future minimum lease payments
|
|
$
|
3,855
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rent expense was $1.1 million, $1.0 million, and
$1.3 million in 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.
69
|
|
12.
|
Stockholders’
Deficit
|
Stock Options. Under the Company’s stock
option plans, the Company may grant options to purchase up to
15,120,074 shares of common stock to employees, directors,
and consultants at prices not less than the fair market value on
the date of grant for incentive stock options and not less than
85% of fair market value on the date of grant for nonstatutory
stock options. These options generally expire 10 years from
the date of grant. The Company has granted immediately
exercisable options as well as options that become exercisable
over periods ranging from three months to five years.
Details of activity under the option plans are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Outstanding, January 1, 2003
(3,989,165 exercisable at a weighted average price of
$9.66 per share)
|
|
|
7,549,725
|
|
|
$
|
7.56
|
|
Granted (weighted average fair
value of $2.56 per share)
|
|
|
2,250,750
|
|
|
|
3.37
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(502,134
|
)
|
|
|
1.71
|
|
Canceled
|
|
|
(1,961,433
|
)
|
|
|
8.56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding, December 31,
2003 (3,470,621 exercisable at a weighted average price of
$9.61 per share)
|
|
|
7,336,908
|
|
|
|
6.40
|
|
Granted (weighted average fair
value of $4.91 per share)
|
|
|
2,124,310
|
|
|
|
6.81
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(620,210
|
)
|
|
|
2.56
|
|
Canceled
|
|
|
(1,246,381
|
)
|
|
|
6.31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding, December 31,
2004 (4,126,485 exercisable at a weighted average price of
$8.33 per share)
|
|
|
7,594,627
|
|
|
|
6.84
|
|
Granted (weighted average fair
value of $3.43 per share)
|
|
|
1,158,400
|
|
|
|
6.75
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(778,393
|
)
|
|
|
2.59
|
|
Canceled
|
|
|
(633,838
|
)
|
|
|
7.28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding, December 31,
2005 (4,595,431 exercisable at a weighted average price of
$8.03 per share)
|
|
|
7,340,796
|
|
|
$
|
7.24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional information regarding options outstanding as of
December 31, 2005 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Range
of
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
Prices
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Life (Years)
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
$0.12 - $ 1.50
|
|
|
860,839
|
|
|
|
6.68
|
|
|
$
|
1.27
|
|
|
|
615,026
|
|
|
$
|
1.25
|
|
1.53 - 2.35
|
|
|
890,938
|
|
|
|
6.59
|
|
|
|
1.93
|
|
|
|
738,947
|
|
|
|
1.96
|
|
2.42 - 6.03
|
|
|
890,946
|
|
|
|
7.42
|
|
|
|
5.23
|
|
|
|
471,955
|
|
|
|
5.24
|
|
6.06 - 6.20
|
|
|
740,000
|
|
|
|
7.84
|
|
|
|
6.15
|
|
|
|
393,333
|
|
|
|
6.16
|
|
6.23 - 6.98
|
|
|
1,045,040
|
|
|
|
8.84
|
|
|
|
6.77
|
|
|
|
91,424
|
|
|
|
6.26
|
|
7.00 - 7.68
|
|
|
733,916
|
|
|
|
8.16
|
|
|
|
7.09
|
|
|
|
330,011
|
|
|
|
7.08
|
|
7.69 - 8.98
|
|
|
914,679
|
|
|
|
4.46
|
|
|
|
8.66
|
|
|
|
836,551
|
|
|
|
8.71
|
|
9.24 - 15.50
|
|
|
804,804
|
|
|
|
5.65
|
|
|
|
10.84
|
|
|
|
658,554
|
|
|
|
11.17
|
|
17.13 - 34.75
|
|
|
434,748
|
|
|
|
4.38
|
|
|
|
25.62
|
|
|
|
434,744
|
|
|
|
25.62
|
|
43.25 - 43.25
|
|
|
24,886
|
|
|
|
4.28
|
|
|
|
43.25
|
|
|
|
24,886
|
|
|
|
43.25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$0.12 - $43.25
|
|
|
7,340,796
|
|
|
|
6.80
|
|
|
$
|
7.24
|
|
|
|
4,595,431
|
|
|
$
|
8.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2005, the Company had 1,891,093 shares
available for future grants under the option plans.
70
Additional Stock Plan Information. As
discussed in Note 1, the Company has accounted for its
stock-based awards using the intrinsic value method in
accordance with APB Opinion No. 25 and its related
interpretations. SFAS No. 123 requires the disclosure
of pro forma net loss had the Company adopted the fair value
method as of the beginning of fiscal 1996. Under
SFAS No. 123, the fair value of stock-based awards to
employees is calculated through the use of option pricing
models, even though these models were developed to estimate the
fair value of freely tradable, fully transferable options
without vesting restrictions, which significantly differ from
the Company’s stock option awards. These models also
require subjective assumptions, including future stock price
volatility and expected time to exercise, which greatly affect
the calculated values. The Company used the Black-Scholes option
pricing model and based its calculations on a multiple option
valuation approach recognizing forfeitures as they occur. The
Company’s calculations were made using the following
weighted average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Employee Stock Purchase
Plan
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Expected life (in years)
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
Interest rate
|
|
|
4.1
|
%
|
|
|
2.8
|
%
|
|
|
2.8
|
%
|
|
|
3.7
|
%
|
|
|
1.4
|
%
|
|
|
1.2
|
%
|
Volatility
|
|
|
63
|
%
|
|
|
107
|
%
|
|
|
124
|
%
|
|
|
33
|
%
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
|
|
132
|
%
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
The Company considers a number of factors in determining how to
set its volatility rates in these calculations, including
historical stock price movement, the volatility of stock prices
of companies of similar size with similar businesses to the
Company’s, if any, and the expected future stock price
trends of the Company based on known and anticipated events,
including events related to revenues, costs, and litigation. The
Company currently considers its historical stock price movement
and future stock price trends as the best indicator of future
volatility and has set its volatility rates based on these
factors.
Employee Stock Purchase Plan. The Company has
an employee stock purchase plan (“ESPP”). Under the
ESPP, eligible employees may purchase common stock through
payroll deductions at a purchase price of 85% of the lower of
the fair market value of the Company’s stock at the
beginning of the offering period or the purchase date.
Participants may not purchase more than 2,000 shares in a
six-month offering period or stock having a value greater than
$25,000 in any calendar year as measured at the beginning of the
offering period. A total of 500,000 shares of common stock
are reserved for the issuance under the ESPP plus an automatic
annual increase on January 1, 2001 and on each January 1
thereafter through January 1, 2010 by an amount equal to
the lesser of 500,000 shares per year or a number of shares
determined by the Board of Directors. As of December 31,
2005, 246,804 shares had been purchased under the plan.
Deferred Stock Compensation. In January 2000,
Immersion Medical’s Board of Directors approved a repricing
of all outstanding stock options relating to Immersion Medical
that had been granted on or after June 1, 1998 from $15.46
per share to $7.73 per share. A total of 30,797 options
were repriced. Under APB 25 the repricing requires that
compensation associated with these options be remeasured until
they are exercised, forfeited, or expire. During the years ended
December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, the Company did not
record any deferred stock compensation in connection with these
repriced options, as the price of the Company’s stock was
not higher than the repriced amount at any quarter-end during
those periods. Effective January 01, 2006, any future
compensation expense related to these options will be accounted
for in accordance with SFAS No. 123R.
In fiscal 2000, in connection with two business combinations
accounted for under the purchase method, the Company recorded
$5.8 million of deferred stock compensation which
represented the intrinsic value of unvested assumed stock
options, and was being amortized over the respective remaining
service periods on a straight-line basis. As of
December 31, 2005 all deferred stock compensation was fully
amortized.
Warrants. On December 23, 2004, the
Company, in conjunction with the 5% Convertible Debentures,
issued an aggregate of 426,951 warrants to purchase shares of
its common stock at an exercise price of $7.0265. The warrants
may be exercised at any time prior to 5:00 p.m. Eastern
time, on December 23, 2009. Any warrants not exercised
prior to such time will expire. The Company allocated
$1.7 million of the 5% Convertible Debenture proceeds
to the warrant and will amortize the amount to interest expense
over the five-year term of the 5% Convertible Debentures.
See Note 7.
71
The following is a reconciliation of the numerators and
denominators used in computing basic and diluted net loss per
share (in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Numerator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(13,085
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,738
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16,974
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in computation, basic
and diluted (weighted average common shares outstanding)
|
|
|
24,027
|
|
|
|
22,698
|
|
|
|
20,334
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per share, basic and
diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.54
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.91
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.83
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the above-mentioned periods, the Company had securities
outstanding that could potentially dilute basic earnings per
share in the future, but were excluded from the computation of
diluted net loss per share in the periods presented since their
effect would have been anti-dilutive. These outstanding
securities consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Outstanding stock options
|
|
|
7,340,796
|
|
|
|
7,594,627
|
|
|
|
7,336,908
|
|
Warrants
|
|
|
778,494
|
|
|
|
778,494
|
|
|
|
480,943
|
|
Series A Redeemable
Convertible Preferred Stock
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,185,792
|
|
5% Senior Subordinated
Convertible Debentures
|
|
|
2,846,363
|
|
|
|
2,846,363
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2005, the Company recorded
a provision for income taxes of $158,000 yielding an effective
tax rate of (1.2)%. The provision for income tax was based on
federal and state alternative minimum income tax payable on
taxable income and foreign withholding tax expense. Although the
Company incurred a pre-tax loss, sums received from Sony
Computer Entertainment and interest thereon included in
long-term deferred revenue, approximating $16.8 million for
the year ended December 31, 2005, created
alternativeminimum taxable income. For the year ended
December 31, 2004, the Company reversed the tax provision
that had been recorded in 2003 due to the non-recognition of
deferred revenues for 2003 tax return purposes.
Significant components of the net deferred tax assets and
liabilities for federal and state income taxes consisted of (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
$
|
28,111
|
|
|
$
|
28,576
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
8,922
|
|
|
|
2,100
|
|
Deferred rent
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
Research and development credits
|
|
|
1,611
|
|
|
|
1,391
|
|
Reserves and accruals recognized
in different periods
|
|
|
560
|
|
|
|
387
|
|
Long-term customer advance from
Microsoft
|
|
|
6,112
|
|
|
|
8,184
|
|
Basis difference in investment
|
|
|
1,328
|
|
|
|
1,328
|
|
Capitalized R&D expenses
|
|
|
522
|
|
|
|
638
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets
|
|
|
47,187
|
|
|
|
42,639
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(2,106
|
)
|
|
|
(1,787
|
)
|
Difference in tax basis of
purchased technology
|
|
|
(355
|
)
|
|
|
(704
|
)
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(44,726
|
)
|
|
|
(40,148
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72
The Company’s effective tax rate differed from the expected
benefit at the federal statutory tax rate as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Federal statutory tax rate
|
|
|
(35.0
|
)%
|
|
|
(35.0
|
)%
|
State taxes, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
(6.1
|
)
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
Accretion of interest on debentures
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Deferred stock compensation
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
Other
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
39.5
|
|
|
|
37.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate
|
|
|
1.2
|
%
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Substantially all of the Company’s loss from operations for
all periods presented is generated from domestic operations.
At December 31, 2005, the Company has federal and state net
operating loss carryforwards of $75.9 million and
$27.0 million, respectively, expiring from 2011 through
2025 and from 2007 through 2015, respectively.
Amongst the net operating loss carryforwards, approximately
$4.0 million and $2.0 million of federal and state net
operating loss carryforwards were generated prior to 1999. These
losses can be used to offset future taxable income. Usage is
limited to approximately $16.4 million annually, due to an
ownership change that occurred during 1999. Approximately
$10.6 million of federal and state net operating loss
carryforwards related to pre-acquisition losses from acquired
subsidiaries can be used to offset future taxable income. Usage
of pre-acquisition losses will be limited to approximately
$1.1 million annually. During 2005, the Company evaluated
ownership changes from 1999 to 2004 and determined that there
were no further limitations on the Company’s net operating
loss carryforwards.
Undistributed earnings of the Company’s foreign
subsidiaries are considered to be indefinitely reinvested and
accordingly, no provision for federal and state income taxes has
been provided thereon. Upon distribution of those earnings in
the form of dividends or otherwise, the Company would be subject
to both U.S. income taxes (subject to an adjustment for
foreign tax credits) and withholding taxes payable to various
foreign countries.
|
|
15.
|
Employee
Benefit Plan
|
The Company has a 401(k) tax-deferred savings plan under which
eligible employees may elect to have a portion of their salary
deferred and contributed to the 401(k) plan. Contributions may
be made by the Company at the discretion of the Board of
Directors. The Company did not make any contributions during the
years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, or 2003.
Billings under certain cost-based government contracts are
calculated using provisional rates that permit recovery of
indirect costs. These rates are subject to audit on an annual
basis by the government agencies’ audit department. The
cost audit will result in the negotiation and determination of
the final indirect cost rates that the Company may use for the
period(s) audited. The final rates, if different from the
provisionals, may create an additional receivable or liability.
As of December 31, 2005, the Company has not reached final
settlements on indirect rates. The Company has negotiated
provisional indirect rates for the years ended December 31,
2005, 2004, and 2003. The Company periodically reviews its cost
estimates and experience rates, and any needed adjustments are
made and reflected in the period in which the estimates are
revised. In the opinion of management, redetermination of any
cost-based contracts for the open years will not have a material
effect on the Company’s financial position or results of
operations.
In July 2003 the Company entered into a consulting agreement
with a member of its board of directors to assist with certain
marketing initiatives of its wholly owned subsidiary, Immersion
Medical. Under the terms of the
73
consulting agreement the board member received $15,000 per
month compensation and reimbursement of
out-of-pocket
travel expenses. The initial term of the consulting agreement
was six months and was renewable for subsequent three-month
terms unless either party notified the other of its election to
terminate the agreement. The consulting agreement was terminated
in April 2004. During the years ended December 31, 2004 and
December 31, 2003 the board member earned compensation of
$50,000 and $90,000, respectively.
In re
Immersion Corporation
The Company is involved in legal proceedings relating to a class
action lawsuit filed on November 9, 2001, In re Immersion
Corporation Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation,
No. Civ. 01-9975 (S.D.N.Y.), related to In re Initial
Public Offering Securities Litigation, No. 21 MC 92
(S.D.N.Y.). The named defendants are the Company and three of
its current or former officers or directors (the “Immersion
Defendants”), and certain underwriters of the
Company’s November 12, 1999 initial public offering
(“IPO”). Subsequently, two of the individual
defendants stipulated to a dismissal without prejudice.
The operative amended complaint is brought on purported behalf
of all persons who purchased the common stock of the Company
from the date of the IPO through December 6, 2000. It
alleges liability under Sections 11 and 15 of the
Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, on the grounds that the
registration statement for the IPO did not disclose that:
(1) the underwriters agreed to allow certain customers to
purchase shares in the IPO in exchange for excess commissions to
be paid to the underwriters; and (2) the underwriters
arranged for certain customers to purchase additional shares in
the aftermarket at predetermined prices. The complaint also
appears to allege that false or misleading analyst reports were
issued. The complaint does not claim any specific amount of
damages.
Similar allegations were made in other lawsuits challenging over
300 other initial public offerings and follow-on offerings
conducted in 1999 and 2000. The cases were consolidated for
pretrial purposes. On February 19, 2003, the Court ruled on
all defendants’ motions to dismiss. The motion was denied
as to claims under the Securities Act of 1933 in the case
involving Immersion, as well as in all other cases (except for
10 cases). The motion was denied as to the claim under
Section 10(b) as to the Company, on the basis that the
complaint alleged that the Company hadmade acquisition(s)
following the IPO. The motion was granted as to the claim under
Section 10(b), but denied as to the claim under
Section 20(a), as to the remaining individual defendant.
The Company and most of the issuer defendants have settled with
the plaintiffs. In this settlement, plaintiffs have dismissed
and released all claims against the Immersion Defendants, in
exchange for a contingent payment by the insurance companies
collectively responsible for insuring the issuers in all of the
IPO cases, and for the assignment or surrender of certain claims
the Company may have against the underwriters. The Immersion
Defendants will not be required to make any cash payments in the
settlement, unless the pro rata amount paid by the insurers in
the settlement exceeds the amount of the insurance coverage, a
circumstance which the Company believes is remote. The
settlement will require approval of the Court, which cannot be
assured, after class members are given the opportunity to object
to the settlement or opt out of the settlement.
Immersion
Corporation vs. Microsoft Corporation, Sony Computer
Entertainment Inc. and Sony Computer Entertainment of America,
Inc.
On February 11, 2002, the Company filed a complaint against
Microsoft Corporation, Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc., and
Sony Computer Entertainment of America, Inc. in the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District Court of
California alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos.
5,889,672 and 6,275,213. The case was assigned to United States
District Judge Claudia Wilken. On April 4, 2002, Sony
ComputerEntertainment and Microsoft answered the complaint by
denying the material allegations and alleging counterclaims
seeking a judicial declaration that the asserted patents were
invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed. Under the
counterclaims, the defendants were also seeking damages for
attorneys’ fees. On October 8, 2002, the Company filed
an amended complaint, withdrawing the claim under the
U.S. Patent No. 5,889,672 and adding claims under a
new patent, U.S. Patent No. 6,424,333.
74
On July 28, 2003, the Company announced that it had settled
its legal differences with Microsoft, and the Company and
Microsoft agreed to dismiss all claims and counterclaims
relating to this matter as well as assume financial
responsibility for their respective legal costs with respect to
the lawsuit between the Company and Microsoft.
On August 16, 2004, the trial against Sony Computer
Entertainment commenced. On September 21, 2004, the jury
returned its verdict in favor of the Company. The jury found all
the asserted claims of the patents valid and infringed. The jury
awarded the Company damages in the amount of $82.0 million.
On January 10, 2005, the Court awarded the Company
prejudgment interest on the damages the jury awarded at the
applicable prime rate. The Court further ordered Sony Computer
Entertainment to pay the Company a compulsory license fee at the
rate of 1.37%, the ratio of the verdict amount to the amount of
sales of infringing products, effective as of July 1, 2004
and through the date of Judgment. On February 9, 2005, the
Court ordered that Sony Computer Entertainment provide the
Company with sales data 15 days after the end of each
quarter and clarifying that Sony Computer Entertainment shall
make the ordered payment 45 days after the end of the
applicable quarter. Sony Computer Entertainment has made
quarterly payments to the Company pursuant to the Court’s
orders. Although the Company has received payments, the Company
may be required to return them and any future payments based on
the outcome of the appeals process.
On February 9, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
Notice of Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit to appeal the Court’s January 10, 2005
order, and on February 10, 2005 Sony Computer Entertainment
filed an Amended Notice of Appeal to include an appeal from the
Court’s February 9, 2005 order.
On January 5 and 6, 2005, the Court held a bench trial on
Sony Computer Entertainment’s remaining allegations that
the ’333 patent was not enforceable due to alleged
inequitable conduct. On March 24, 2005, the Court resolved
this issue, entering a written order finding in favor of the
Company. On March 24, 2005, Judge Wilken also entered
judgment in the Company’s favor and awarded the Company
$82.0 million in past damages, and pre-judgment interest in
the amount of $8.7 million, for a total of
$90.7 million. The Company was also awarded its court
costs. Court costs do not include attorneys’ fees.
Additionally, the Court issued a permanent injunction against
the manufacture, use, sale, or import into the United States of
the infringing Sony Computer Entertainment PlayStation system
consisting of the PlayStation consoles, Dual Shock controllers,
and the 47 games found by the jury to infringe the
Company’s patents. The Court stayed the permanent
injunction pending appeal to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit. TheCourt further ordered Sony Computer
Entertainment to pay a compulsory license fee at the rate of
1.37% for the duration of the stay of the permanent injunction
at the same rate and conditions as previously awarded in its
interim January 10, 2005 and February 9, 2005 Orders.
On April 7, 2005 pursuant to a stipulation of the parties,
the Court entered an Amended Judgment to clarify that the
Judgment in favor of the Company and against Sony Computer
Entertainment also encompassed Sony Computer
Entertainment’s counterclaims for declaratory relief on
invalidity and unenforceability, as well as non-infringement.
Sony Computer Entertainment also filed further motions seeking
“judgment as a matter of a law” (JMOL) or for a new
trial, and a motion for a stay of an accounting and execution of
the Judgment. On May 17, 2005, Judge Wilken denied these
motions. On April 27, 2005, the Court granted Sony Computer
Entertainment’s request to approve a supersedeas bond,
secured by a cash deposit with the Court in the amount of
$102.5 million, to obtain a stay of enforcement of the
Court’s Amended Judgment pending appeal. On May 17,
2005, the Court issued a minute order stating that in lieu of
the supersedeas bond the Court would allow Sony Computer
Entertainment to place the funds on deposit with the Court in an
escrow account subject to acceptable escrow instructions. The
parties have negotiated an agreement pursuant to which the funds
on deposit with the Court may be deposited in an escrow account
at JP Morgan Chase.
On May 17, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
Request for Inter Partes Reexamination of the
‘333 Patent with the United States Patent and
Trademark Office. On May 19, 2005, Sony Computer
Entertainment filed a similar Request for reexamination of the
‘213 Patent. On July 6, 2005, the Company filed a
Petition to dismiss, stay or alternatively to suspend both of
the requests for reexamination, based at least on the grounds
that a final judgment has already been entered by a United
States district court, and that the PTO’s current inter
partes
75
reexamination procedures deny due process of law. The PTO denied
the first petition, and the Company filed a second petition on
September 9, 2005. On November 17, 2005, the PTO
granted the Company’s petition, and suspended the inter
partes reexaminations until such time as the parallel court
proceedings warrant termination or resumption of the PTO
examination and prosecution proceedings. On December 13,
2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a third petition
requesting permission to file an additional inter partes
reexamination on the claims of the ‘333 and ’213
Patents for which reexamination was not requested in Sony
Computer Entertainment’s original requests for
reexamination; the Company has opposed this petition. The PTO
has not yet issued a decision on Sony Computer
Entertainment’s third petition. Sony Computer Entertainment
also filed ex parte reexamination requests on the claims of the
‘333 and ‘213 Patents on December 13, 2005.
On June 16, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
Notice of Appeal from the District Court Judgment to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The appeals of
the January and February orders regarding the compulsory license
have been consolidated with this appeal of the Judgment. Sony
Computer Entertainment’s Opening Brief was filed on
October 21, 2005; the Company filed an Opposition Brief on
December 5, 2005. Due to the cross appeal by ISLLC (see
below), the Federal Circuit allowed the Company to file a
Substitute Opposition Brief on February 17, 2006 responding
to the briefs filed by both Sony Computer Entertainment and
ISLLC. We expect the briefing for the appeal to be concluded by
all parties by the end of March 2006.
On July 21, 2005, Sony Computer Entertainment filed a
motion in the District Court before Judge Wilken seeking relief
from the final judgment under Rule 60(b) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure on the grounds of alleged fraud and
“newly discovered evidence” of purported prior art
which Sony Computer Entertainment contends the Company concealed
and withheld attributable to Mr. Craig Thorner, a named
inventor on three patents that Sony Computer Entertainment urged
as a basis for patent invalidity during the trial. the Company
disputes and intends to vigorously defend itself against these
allegations. Briefing is complete, and a hearing was held before
Judge Wilken on January 20, 2006. On March 8, 2006,
the Court denied Sony Computer Entertainment’s motion
pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
in its entirety.
Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, the Company
cannot accurately predict how the Court of Appeals will decide
the appeal. The Company anticipates that the litigation will
continue to be costly, and there can be no assurance that the
Company will be able to recover the costs we incur in connection
with the litigation. The Company expenses litigation costs as
incurred and only accrues for costs that have been incurred but
not paid to the vendor as of the financial statement date. The
litigation has diverted, and is likely to continue to divert,
the efforts and attention of some of the Company’s key
management and personnel. As a result, until such time as it is
resolved, the litigation could adversely affect the
Company’s business. Further, any unfavorable outcome could
adversely affect the Company’s business.
In the event the Company settles its lawsuit with Sony Computer
Entertainment, the Company will be obligated to pay certain sums
to Microsoft as described in Note 9. If Sony Computer
Entertainment ultimately were successful on appeal or in the
reexamination process, the Judgment may be put at risk, assets
relating to the patents in the lawsuit may be impaired, and Sony
Computer Entertainment may seek additional relief, such as
attorneys’ fees.
Internet
Services LLC Litigation
On October 20, 2004, ISLLC, a Company licensee and
cross-claim defendant against whom Sony Computer Entertainment
had filed a claim seeking declaratory relief, filed claims
against the Company alleging that the Company breached a
contract with ISLLC by suing Sony Computer Entertainment for
patent infringement relating to haptically-enabled software
whose topics or images are allegedly age-restricted, for
judicial apportionment of damages awarded by the jury between
ISLLC and the Company, and for a judicial declaration with
respect to ISLLC’s rights and duties under agreements with
the Company. On December 29, 2004, the Court issued an
order dismissing ISLLC’s claims against Sony Computer
Entertainment with prejudice and dismissing ISLLC’s claims
against the Company without prejudice to ISLLC filing a new
complaint “if it can do so in good faith without
contradicting, or repeating the deficiency of, its
complaint.”
On January 12, 2005, ISLLC filed Amended Cross-Claims and
Counterclaims against the Company that contained similar claims.
ISLLC also realleged counterclaims against Sony Computer
Entertainment. On
76
January 28, 2005, the Company filed a motion to dismiss
ISLLC’s Amended Cross-Claims and a motion to strike
ISLLC’s Counterclaims against Sony Computer Entertainment.
On March 24, 2005 the Court issued an order dismissing
ISLLC’s claims with prejudice as to ISLLC’s claim
seeking a declaratory judgment that it is an exclusive licensee
under the ’213 and ’333 patents and as to ISLLC’s
claim seeking “judicial apportionment” of the damages
verdict in the Sony Computer Entertainment case. The
Court’s order further dismissed ISLLC’s claims without
prejudice as to ISLLC’s breach of contract and unjust
enrichment claims.
ISLLC filed a notice of appeal of those orders with the Federal
Circuit on April 18, 2005. ISLLC’s appeal has been
consolidated with Sony Computer Entertainment’s appeal.
ISLLC filed its Opening Brief in December 2005. As noted above,
the Federal Circuit allowed the Company to file a Substitute
Opposition Brief on February 17, 2006 responding to the
briefs filed by both Sony Computer Entertainment and ISLLC; the
Company expects the briefing for the appeal to be concluded by
all parties by the end of March 2006.
On February 8, 2006, ISLLC filed a lawsuit against the
Company in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County.
ISLLC’s complaint seeks a share of the Company’s
Judgment and recovery against Sony Computer Entertainment and of
the Microsoft settlement proceeds, and generally restates the
claims already adjudicated in District Court. The Company’s
response to the complaint is due on March 16, 2006.
Immersion
Corporation vs. Electro Source LLC
On September 24, 2004, the Company filed in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California a
complaint for patent infringement against Electro Source LLC
(“Electro Source”) (Case
No. 04-CV-4040
CW). Electro Source is a leading seller of video game
peripherals under the Pelican Accessories brand. The
Company’s Complaint alleged that Electro Source had
willfully infringed, and was continuing to willfully infringe,
the same two patents asserted in the Company’s litigation
against Sony Computer Entertainment. The Complaint sought
injunctive relief, as well as damages in an amount to be proven
at trial, trebled due to Electro Source’s willful
infringement, and attorneys’ fees and costs. Electro Source
filed an answer to the Complaint denying the material
allegations and asserting against the Company counterclaims
seeking a judicial declaration that the asserted patents are
invalid, unenforceable, and not infringed.
On February 28, 2006, the Company announced that it had
settled its legal differences with Electro Source and the
Company and Electro Source agreed to dismiss all claims and
counterclaims relating to this matter. In addition to the
Confidential Settlement Agreement, Electro Source entered into a
worldwide license to the Company’s patents for
vibro-tactile devices in the consumer gaming peripheral field of
use. Electro Source will make royalty payments to the Company
based on sales by Electro Source of spinning mass vibro-tactile
gamepads, steering wheels, and other game controllers for
dedicated gaming consoles, such as the Sony PlayStation and
PlayStation 2, the Nintendo GameCube, and the Microsoft
Xbox and Xbox 360. Both companies also have agreed to explore
the possibility of working together in technology or engineering
related assignments. In March 2006, Electro Source paid the
Company $650,000. The Company is entitled to be paid a minimum
amount of $1.0 million in future periods. The Company and
Electro Source each assumed financial responsibility for their
respective legal costs with respect to the lawsuit between the
Company and Electro Source.
Other
Contingencies
From time to time, the Company receives claims from third
parties asserting that the Company’s technologies, or those
of its licensees, infringe on the other parties’
intellectual property rights. Management believes that these
claims are without merit. Additionally, periodically, the
Company is involved in routine legal matters and contractual
disputes incidental to its normal operations. In
management’s opinion, the resolution of such matters will
not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s
consolidated financial condition, results of operations, or
liquidity.
In the normal course of business, the Company provides
indemnifications of varying scope to customers against claims of
intellectual property infringement made by third parties arising
from the use of the Company’s intellectual property,
technology, or products. Historically, costs related to these
guarantees have not been significant, and the Company is unable
to estimate the maximum potential impact of these guarantees on
its future results of operations. The Company has received a
claim from one of its major licensees requesting indemnification
from a patent infringement allegation. The Company has reviewed
this demand and believes that it
77
is without merit. The Company has not received communication
from this licensee with respect to this claim since June of
2005. Such claim, however, could result in litigation, which
could be costly and time-consuming to defend. Further, the
Company’s business could be adversely affected if the
Company was unsuccessful in defending against the claim.
As permitted under Delaware law, the Company has agreements
whereby it indemnifies its officers and directors for certain
events or occurrences while the officer or director is, or was,
serving at its request in such capacity. The term of the
indemnification period is for the officer’s or
director’s lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future
payments the Company could be required to make under these
indemnification agreements is unlimited; however, the Company
currently has director and officer insurance coverage that
limits its exposure and enables it to recover a portion of any
future amounts paid. Management believes the estimated fair
value of these indemnification agreements in excess of
applicable insurance coverage is minimal.
See also Note 7 regarding contingencies relating to the
5% Senior Subordinated Convertible Debenture.
The Company develops, manufactures, licenses, and supports a
wide range of hardware and software technologies that let users
interact with digital devices using their sense of touch. The
Company focuses on four application
areas — gaming, mobility, industrial, and
medical. The Company manages these application areas under two
operating and reportable segments: 1) Immersion Computing,
Entertainment, and Industrial, and 2) Immersion Medical.
The Company determines its reporting segments in accordance with
criteria outlined in SFAS No. 131, “Disclosures
about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information.”
The gaming, mobility, and industrial areas do not individually
meet the criteria for segment reporting as set out in
SFAS No. 131.
The Company’s chief operating decision maker
(“CODM”) is the Chief Executive Officer. The CODM
allocates resources to and assesses the performance of each
operating segment using information about their revenue and
operating profit before interest and taxes. A description of the
types of products and services provided by each operating
segment is as follows:
Immersion Computing, Entertainment, and Industrial develops and
markets touch feedback technologies that enable software and
hardware developers to enhance realism and usability in their
computing, entertainment, and industrial applications. Immersion
Medical develops, manufactures, and markets medical training
simulators that recreate realistic healthcare environments.
Summarized financial information concerning the Company’s
reportable segments for the respective years ended
December 31 is shown in the following table (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Immersion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Computing,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entertainment,
|
|
|
Immersion
|
|
|
Intersegment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and Industrial
|
|
|
Medical
|
|
|
Eliminations(4)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Royalty and license
|
|
$
|
8,205
|
|
|
$
|
683
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
8,888
|
|
Product sales
|
|
|
4,894
|
|
|
|
8,066
|
|
|
|
(198
|
)
|
|
|
12,762
|
|
Development contracts and other
|
|
|
1,741
|
|
|
|
1,011
|
|
|
|
(125
|
)
|
|
|
2,627
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
14,840
|
|
|
$
|
9,760
|
|
|
$
|
(323
|
)
|
|
$
|
24,277
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from
operations (2)
|
|
$
|
(9,118
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,845
|
)
|
|
$
|
63
|
|
|
$
|
(11,900
|
)
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
490
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
490
|
|
Interest expense (1)
|
|
|
(1,506
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(1,506
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,654
|
|
|
|
334
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,988
|
|
Net income (loss) (2)
|
|
|
(10,306
|
)
|
|
|
(2,842
|
)
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
(13,085
|
)
|
Long-lived assets: capital
expenditures and capitalized patent fees
|
|
|
1,378
|
|
|
|
614
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,992
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
60,457
|
|
|
|
6,166
|
|
|
|
(21,863
|
)
|
|
|
44,760
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Immersion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Computing,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entertainment,
|
|
|
Immersion
|
|
|
Intersegment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and Industrial
|
|
|
Medical
|
|
|
Eliminations(4)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Royalty and license
|
|
$
|
6,997
|
|
|
$
|
1,781
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
8,778
|
|
Product sales
|
|
|
5,503
|
|
|
|
6,244
|
|
|
|
(103
|
)
|
|
|
11,644
|
|
Development contracts and other
|
|
|
1,472
|
|
|
|
1,941
|
|
|
|
(72
|
)
|
|
|
3,341
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
13,972
|
|
|
$
|
9,966
|
|
|
$
|
(175
|
)
|
|
$
|
23,763
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
$
|
(17,482
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,926
|
)
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
(20,392
|
)
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
168
|
|
Interest expense (1)
|
|
|
(39
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
2,188
|
|
|
|
284
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,472
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
(17,805
|
)
|
|
|
(2,949
|
)
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
(20,738
|
)
|
Long-lived assets: capital
expenditures and capitalized patent fees
|
|
|
2,187
|
|
|
|
354
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,541
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
55,145
|
|
|
|
5,989
|
|
|
|
(18,884
|
)
|
|
|
42,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Royalty and license
|
|
$
|
4,157
|
|
|
$
|
1,931
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
6,088
|
|
Product sales
|
|
|
5,994
|
|
|
|
4,460
|
|
|
|
(999
|
)
|
|
|
9,455
|
|
Development contracts and other
|
|
|
1,704
|
|
|
|
3,183
|
|
|
|
(207
|
)
|
|
|
4,680
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
11,855
|
|
|
$
|
9,574
|
|
|
$
|
(1,206
|
)
|
|
$
|
20,223
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
$
|
(14,995
|
)
|
|
$
|
120
|
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
$
|
(14,850
|
)
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
109
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
Interest expense (1)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(48
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
3,244
|
|
|
|
276
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
3,520
|
|
Other expense, write down of
investments (3)
|
|
|
(1,000
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(1,000
|
)
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
(17,100
|
)
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
(16,974
|
)
|
Long-lived assets: capital
expenditures and capitalized patent fees
|
|
|
1,782
|
|
|
|
232
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,014
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
47,543
|
|
|
|
5,136
|
|
|
|
(14,766
|
)
|
|
|
37,913
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes interest on 5% Convertible Debentures and
amortization of 5% Convertible Debentures issued December
2004 and notes payable, recorded as interest expense. |
|
(2) |
|
Included in income (loss) from operations and net loss in 2005
are restructuring costs of $59,000 for the Immersion Computing,
Entertainment, and Industrial segment and $126,000 for the
Immersion Medical segment. No further costs are expected to be
incurred with respect to the restructuring. |
|
(3) |
|
Includes amounts written off of investments held by Immersion
Computing, Entertainment, and Industrial segment. |
|
(4) |
|
Intersegment eliminations consist of eliminations for
intercompany sales and cost of sales and intercompany receivable
and payables between Immersion Computing, Entertainment, and
Industrial and Immersion Medical segments. |
The Company operates primarily in the United States and in
Canada where it operates through its wholly owned subsidiary,
Immersion Canada, Inc. Segment assets and expenses relating to
the Company’s corporate operations are not allocated but
are included in Immersion Computing, Entertainment, and
Industrial as that is how they are considered for management
evaluation purposes. As a result, the segment information may
not be
79
indicative of the financial position or results of operations
that would have been achieved had these segments operated as
unaffiliated entities. Management measures the performance of
each segment based on several metrics, including net loss. These
results are used, in part, to evaluate the performance of, and
allocate resources to, each of the segments.
Revenue
by Product Lines
Information regarding revenue from external customers by product
lines is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Immersion Computing,
Entertainment, and Industrial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer
|
|
$
|
6,743
|
|
|
$
|
6,181
|
|
|
$
|
3,571
|
|
3D and Professional Products
|
|
|
5,338
|
|
|
|
5,433
|
|
|
|
5,026
|
|
Automotive
|
|
|
2,047
|
|
|
|
1,802
|
|
|
|
1,284
|
|
Other
|
|
|
515
|
|
|
|
451
|
|
|
|
792
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Immersion Computing,
Entertainment, and Industrial
|
|
|
14,643
|
|
|
|
13,867
|
|
|
|
10,673
|
|
Immersion Medical
|
|
|
9,634
|
|
|
|
9,896
|
|
|
|
9,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
24,277
|
|
|
$
|
23,763
|
|
|
$
|
20,223
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
by Region
The following is a summary of revenues by geographic areas.
Revenues are broken out geographically by the ship-to location
of the customer. Geographic revenue as a percentage of total
revenue was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
70
|
%
|
|
|
71
|
%
|
|
|
69
|
%
|
Europe
|
|
|
17
|
%
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
Far East
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
Rest of the world
|
|
|
7
|
%
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the years ended 2005, 2004, and 2003, the company derived
68%, 69%, and 68%, respectively, of its revenues from the United
States. The company derived 10% of its revenue from Germany for
the year ended 2005. Revenues from other countries represented
less than 10% individually for the periods presented.
Significant
Customers
Customers comprising 10% or greater of the Company’s net
revenues are summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer A
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer B
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
|
|
17
|
%
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
22
|
%
|
|
|
27
|
%
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Revenue derived from customer represented less than 10% for the
period. |
80
Of the significant customers noted above, Customer B had a
balance of 19%, 27%, and 23% of the outstanding accounts
receivable at December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003,
respectively.
The majority of our long-lived assets were located in the United
States. Long-lived assets included net property and equipment
and long-term investments and other assets. Long-lived assets
that were outside the United States constituted less than 10% of
the total at December 31, 2005 and 2004.
|
|
20.
|
Quarterly
Results of Operations — (Unaudited)
|
The following table presents certain unaudited consolidated
statement of operations data for our eight most recent quarters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 31,
|
|
|
Sept 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
Mar 31,
|
|
|
Dec 31,
|
|
|
Sept 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
Mar 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share
data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
6,872
|
|
|
$
|
5,387
|
|
|
$
|
6,246
|
|
|
$
|
5,772
|
|
|
$
|
7,443
|
|
|
$
|
5,451
|
|
|
$
|
5,514
|
|
|
$
|
5,355
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
5,234
|
|
|
|
3,631
|
|
|
|
4,583
|
|
|
|
4,383
|
|
|
|
5,771
|
|
|
|
3,629
|
|
|
|
3,974
|
|
|
|
4,134
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(2,646
|
)
|
|
|
(3,881
|
)
|
|
|
(2,590
|
)
|
|
|
(2,783
|
)
|
|
|
(3,009
|
)
|
|
|
(6,899
|
)
|
|
|
(4,876
|
)
|
|
|
(5,608
|
)
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(2,965
|
)
|
|
|
(4,158
|
)
|
|
|
(2,829
|
)
|
|
|
(3,133
|
)
|
|
|
(2,861
|
)
|
|
|
(6,863
|
)
|
|
|
(4,846
|
)
|
|
|
(6,168
|
)
|
Basic and diluted net loss per
share
|
|
$
|
(0.12
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.17
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.12
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.12
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.21
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.30
|
)
|
Shares used in calculating basic
and diluted net loss per share
|
|
|
24,244
|
|
|
|
24,132
|
|
|
|
24,050
|
|
|
|
23,663
|
|
|
|
23,428
|
|
|
|
23,329
|
|
|
|
23,198
|
|
|
|
20,791
|
|
81
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Immersion
Corporation:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Immersion Corporation and subsidiaries (the “Company”)
as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity
(deficit), and cash flows for each of the three years in the
period ended December 31, 2005. Our audits also included
the financial statement schedules listed in the Index at
Item 15 (a) 2. These financial statements and
financial statement schedules are the responsibility of the
Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on the financial statements and financial statement
schedule based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of
Immersion Corporation and subsidiaries at December 31, 2005
and 2004, and the results of their operations and their cash
flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2005, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. Also, in our
opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in
relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as
a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the
information set forth therein.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on the
criteria established in Internal
Control — Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
and our report dated March 10, 2006 expressed an
unqualified opinion on management’s assessment of the
effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting and an unqualified opinion on the
effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting.
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
San Jose, California
March 10, 2006
82
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Immersion
Corporation:
We have audited management’s assessment, included in the
accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting, that Immersion Corporation and subsidiaries
(the “Company”) maintained effective internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on
criteria established in Internal
Control — Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. The Company’s management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting
and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on management’s assessment and an opinion on the
effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, evaluating
management’s assessment, testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable
basis for our opinions.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed by, or under the supervision of, the
company’s principal executive and principal financial
officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected
by the company’s board of directors, management, and other
personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
company’s assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over
financial reporting, including the possibility of collusion or
improper management override of controls, material misstatements
due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a
timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the
effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting
to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may
become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the
degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate.
In our opinion, management’s assessment that the Company
maintained effective internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2005, is fairly stated, in all material
respects, based on the criteria established in Internal
Control — Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all
material respects, effective internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on the criteria
established in Internal Control — Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States),
the consolidated financial statements and financial schedule
as of and for the year ended December 31, 2005 of the
Company and our report dated March 10, 2006 expressed an
unqualified opinion on those financial statements and financial
statement schedule.
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
San Jose, California
March 10, 2006
83
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None.
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
Controls
and Procedures
Based on their evaluation of our disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) as of
December 31, 2005, our management, with the participation
of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, have
concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were
effective as of the end of the period covered by this report for
the purpose of ensuring that the information required to be
disclosed by us in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
is made known to them by others on a timely basis, and that the
information is accumulated and communicated to our management,
including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, in order to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure, and that such information is recorded, processed,
summarized, and reported by us within the time periods specified
in the SEC’s rules and instructions for
Form 10-K.
Management’s
Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined
in
Rule 13a-15(f)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended). Our
management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005. In making
this assessment, our management used the criteria set forth in
the Internal Control-Integrated Framework by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(“COSO”). Our management has concluded that, as of
December 31, 2005, our internal control over financial
reporting is effective based on these criteria. Our independent
registered public accounting firm, Deloitte & Touche
LLP, has issued an audit report on our assessment of our
internal control over financial reporting, which is included
herein.
There were no changes to internal controls over financial
reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 2005, that
have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, does not expect that our disclosure controls
and procedures or our internal controls will prevent all error
and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived
and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute
assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact
that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of
controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of
the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation
of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control
issues and instances of fraud, if any within Immersion, have
been detected. Notwithstanding these limitations, our disclosure
controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable
assurance of achieving their objectives. Our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures are, in fact, effective at
the “reasonable assurance” level.
Item 9B. Other
Information
None.
84
PART III
The SEC allows us to include information required in this report
by referring to other documents or reports we have already or
will soon be filing. This is called “Incorporation by
Reference.” We intend to file our definitive proxy
statement pursuant to Regulation 14A not later than
120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this
report, and certain information therein is incorporated in this
report by reference.
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors
and Executive Officers of the Registrant
|
The information required by Item 10 with respect to
executive officers is set forth in Part I of this Annual
Report on Form
10-K and the
remaining information required by Item 10 is incorporated
by reference from the sections entitled “Election of
Directors,” “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership
Reporting Compliance,” and “Corporate Governance and
Board Committees” in Immersion’s definitive Proxy
Statement for its 2006 annual stockholders’ meeting.
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
The information required by Item 11 is incorporated by
reference from the section entitled “Executive Compensation
and Related Information” in Immersion’s definitive
Proxy Statement for its 2006 annual stockholders’ meeting.
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
The information required by Item 12 is incorporated by
reference from the section entitled “Principal Stockholders
and Stock Ownership by Management” in Immersion’s
definitive Proxy Statement for its 2006 annual
stockholders’ meeting.
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions
|
The information required by Item 13 is incorporated by
reference from the section entitled “Certain Relationships
and Related Transactions” in Immersion’s definitive
Proxy Statement for its 2006 annual stockholders’ meeting.
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accounting Fees and Services
|
The information required by Item 14 is incorporated by
reference from the section entitled “Ratification of
Appointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting
Firm” in Immersion’s definitive Proxy Statement for
its 2006 annual stockholders’ meeting.
85
PART IV.
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits,
Financial Statement Schedules
|
(a) The following documents are filed as part of this Form:
1. Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets
|
|
|
56
|
|
Consolidated Statements of
Operations
|
|
|
57
|
|
Consolidated Statements of
Stockholders’ Equity (Deficit)
|
|
|
58
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash
Flows
|
|
|
59
|
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements
|
|
|
60
|
|
Reports of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm
|
|
|
82
|
|
2. Financial Statement Schedules
The following financial statement schedule of Immersion
Corporation for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004,
and 2003 is filed as part of this Annual Report and should be
read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements
of Immersion Corporation.
|
|
|
|
|
Schedule II — Valuation
and Qualifying Accounts
|
|
|
Page 93
|
|
Schedules not listed above have been omitted because the
information required to be set forth therein is not applicable
or is shown in the consolidated financial statements or notes
herein.
3. Exhibits:
The following exhibits are filed herewith:
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
2
|
.1
|
|
Agreement and Plan of
Reorganization with Cybernet Systems Corporation
(‘‘Cybernet”), its wholly-owned subsidiary and
our wholly-owned subsidiary dated March 4, 1999.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
2
|
.2
|
|
Share Purchase Agreement with
Haptic Technologies Inc. (‘‘Haptech”) and
9039-4115 Quebec, Inc. (‘Holdco”) and the Shareholders
of Haptech and Holdco and 511220 N.B. Inc.
(‘‘Purchaser”) dated February 28, 2000.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 23, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.2
|
|
Indemnification and Joinder
Agreement dated as of July 28, 2000, among Immersion
Corporation, James F. Kramer and Marc Tremblay. (Previously
filed with Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on September 15, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.3
|
|
Escrow Agreement dated as of
August 31, 2000, among Immersion Corporation, James F.
Kramer and U.S. Trust Company, National Association.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on September 15, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.5
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger dated
as of July 28, 2000, among Immersion Corporation, VT
Acquisition, Inc., Virtual Technologies, Inc., and James F.
Kramer. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration
Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.6
|
|
Agreement and Plan of
Reorganization dated as of July 31, 2000, among Immersion
Corporation, HT Medical Systems, Inc., HT Merger, Inc. and
Greg Merril. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.7
|
|
Indemnification and Joinder
Agreement dated as of July 31, 2000, among Immersion
Corporation, Gregg Merril, individually and as Representative,
and other stockholders of HT Medical Systems, Inc. (Previously
filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
2
|
.8
|
|
Escrow Agreement dated as of
September 29, 2000, among Immersion Corporation, HT Medical
Systems, Inc., Greg Merril as the Representative, and
U.S. Trust Company, National Association. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws, dated
October 23, 2002. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2003.)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate
of Incorporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on August 14, 2000.)
|
|
3
|
.3
|
|
Certificate of Designation of the
Powers, Preferences and Rights of Series A Redeemable
Convertible Preferred Stock. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
4
|
.1
|
|
Information and Registration
Rights Agreement dated April 13, 1998. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
4
|
.2
|
|
Immersion Corporation Cybernet
Registration Rights Agreement dated March 5, 1999.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
4
|
.3
|
|
Common Stock Grant and Purchase
Agreement and Plan with Michael Reich & Associates
dated July 6, 1999. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
4
|
.4
|
|
Common Stock Agreement with
Digital Equipment Corporation dated June 12, 1998.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)on
September 1, 1999.)
|
|
4
|
.5
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement
dated as of August 31, 2000, among Immersion Corporation
and the shareholders party thereto. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on September 15, 2000.)
|
|
4
|
.6
|
|
Form of 7% Senior Redeemable
Convertible Debenture. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
4
|
.7
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement by
and between Immersion Corporation and Microsoft Corporation,
dated July 25, 2003. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
4
|
.8
|
|
Stockholder’s Agreement by
and between Immersion Corporation and Microsoft Corporation,
dated July 25, 2003. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
10
|
.1
|
|
1994 Stock Option Plan and form of
Incentive Stock Option Agreement and form of Nonqualified Stock
Option Agreement. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.2
|
|
1997 Stock Option Plan and form of
Incentive Stock Option Agreement and form of Nonqualified Stock
Option Agreement. (Previously filed with Amendment No. 4 to
Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File No.
333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.3
|
|
Form of Indemnity Agreement.
(Previously filed with Amendment No. 1 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 13, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.4
|
|
Immediately Exercisable
Nonstatutory Stock Option Agreement with Steven G. Blank dated
November 1, 1996. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
Common Stock Purchase Warrant
issued to Cybernet Systems Corporation dated March 5, 1999.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
Consulting Services Agreement with
Cybernet Systems Corporation dated March 5, 1999.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.7
|
|
Amendment to Warrant to Purchase
Shares of Series B Preferred Stock to Bruce Paul amending
warrant to purchase 32,280 shares of Series B
Preferred Stock dated September 22, 1998. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
87
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.8
|
|
Amendment to Warrant to Purchase
Shares of Series B Preferred Stock to Bruce Paul amending
warrant to purchase 40,350 shares of Series B
Preferred Stock dated September 22, 1998. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.9
|
|
Operating Agreement with
MicroScribe, LLC dated July 1, 1997. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.10
|
|
Exchange Agreement with
MicroScribe, LLC dated July 1, 1997. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
Lease with Speiker Properties,
L.P. dated October 26, 1998. (Previously filed with
Amendment No. 1 to Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 13, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
Agreement Draft for ASIC Design
and Development with Kawasaki LSI, U.S.A., Inc., dated
October 16, 1997. (Previously filed with Amendment No. 5 to
Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 12, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.13
|
|
Patent License Agreement with
Microsoft Corporation dated July 19, 1999. (Previously
filed with Amendment No. 4 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.14
|
|
Semiconductor Device Component
Purchase Agreement with Kawasaki LSI, U.S.A., Inc., dated
August 17, 1998. (Previously filed with Amendment
No. 4 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.15
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to
Semiconductor Device Component Purchase Agreement with Kawasaki
LSI, U.S.A., Inc. dated April 27, 1999. (Previously filed
with Amendment No. 4 to Registrant’s Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.16
|
|
Intercompany Intellectual Property
License Agreement with MicroScribe, LLC dated July 1, 1997.
(Previously filed with Amendment No. 4 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.17
|
|
Patent License Agreement with
MicroScribe, LLC dated July 1, 1997. (Previously filed with
Amendment No. 4 to Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.18
|
|
Intellectual Property License
Agreement with Logitech, Inc. dated October 4, 1996.
(Previously filed with Amendment No. 5 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 12, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.19
|
|
Intellectual Property License
Agreement with Logitech, Inc. dated April 13, 1998.
(Previously filed with Amendment No. 5 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 12, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.20
|
|
Technology Product Development
Agreement with Logitech, Inc. dated April 13, 1998.
(Previously filed with Amendment No. 5 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 12, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.21
|
|
1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
and form of subscription agreement thereunder. (Previously filed
with Amendment No. 2 to Registrant’s Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on October 5, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.22
|
|
Common Stock Purchase Warrant
issued to Intel Corporation dated June 6, 1997. (Previously
filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 23, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.23
|
|
Marketing Development Fund Letter
Agreement with Logitech, Inc. dated November 15, 1999.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 23, 2000.) ##
|
|
10
|
.24
|
|
HT Medical Systems, Inc. Amended
Secured Convertible Promissory Note. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on November 14, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.25
|
|
Industrial Lease between WW&LJ
Gateways, Ltd. and Immersion Corporation dated January 11,
2000. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on May 15, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.26
|
|
Amendment #1 to the
April 13, 1998 Intellectual Property License Agreement and
Technology Product Development Agreement with Logitech, Inc.
dated March 21, 2000. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on May 15, 2000.)
|
88
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.27
|
|
Immersion Corporation 2000
Non-Officer Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.28
|
|
Immersion Corporation 2000 HT
Non-Officer Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on October 13, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.29
|
|
Logitech Letter Agreement dated
September 26, 2000. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.30
|
|
Stock Option Cancellation
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Bruce Schena dated
October 25, 2000. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.31
|
|
Stock Option Cancellation
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Bruce Schena dated
October 25, 2000. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.32
|
|
Stock Option Cancellation
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Louis Rosenberg
dated October 25, 2000. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.33
|
|
Stock Option Cancellation
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Charles Boesenberg
dated October 25, 2000. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.34
|
|
Stock Option Cancellation
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Charles Boesenberg
dated October 25, 2000. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.35
|
|
Lease Agreement between Mor
Bennington LLLP and HT Medical Systems, Inc. dated
February 2, 1999. (Previously file with Registrant’s
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.36
|
|
Haptic Technologies, Inc. 2000
Stock Option Plan. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.37
|
|
Retention Agreement dated
August 29, 2001, between Immersion Corporation and Rodney
G. Hilton (Previously filed with Registrant’s Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on November 14, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.38
|
|
Promissory Note dated
August 29, 2001, between Immersion Corporation and Rodney
G. Hilton (Previously filed with Registrant’s Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on November 14, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.39
|
|
Amendment to 1996 Intellectual
Property License Agreement by and between Immersion Corporation
and Logitech, Inc dated October 11, 2001. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2002.)#
|
|
10
|
.40*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
November 5, 2001, between Immersion Corporation and Bob
O’Malley. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2002.)
|
|
10
|
.41*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
November 5, 2001, between Immersion Corporation and Victor
Viegas. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2002.)
|
|
10
|
.42*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
November 5, 2001, between Immersion Corporation and Stuart
Mitchell. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2002.)
|
|
10
|
.43*
|
|
Independent Consultant Services
Agreement dated February 11, 2002, between Immersion
Corporation and Louis Rosenberg. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2002.)
|
|
10
|
.44*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
June 14, 1996, between Immersion Corporation and Richard L.
Stacey. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2003.)
|
89
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.45
|
|
Series A Redeemable
Convertible Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement by and between
Immersion Corporation and Microsoft Corporation, dated as of
July 25, 2003. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
10
|
.46
|
|
Senior Redeemable Convertible
Debenture Purchase Agreement by and between Immersion
Corporation and Microsoft Corporation, dated as of July 25,
2003. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
10
|
.47
|
|
Settlement Agreement dated
July 25, 2003 by and between Microsoft Corporation and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on September 8, 2003.)#
|
|
10
|
.48
|
|
License Agreement dated
July 25, 2003 by and between Microsoft Corporation and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Amendment Number 1 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on February 13, 2004.)#
|
|
10
|
.49
|
|
Sublicense Agreement dated
July 25, 2003 by and between Microsoft Corporation and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Amendment Number 1 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on February 13, 2004.)#
|
|
10
|
.50*
|
|
Consulting Agreement dated
July 1, 2003 by and between Robert Van Naarden and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on September 8, 2003.)
|
|
10
|
.51*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
November 13, 2003 by and between Tim Tight and Immersion
Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File No.
333-108607)
on February 17, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.52*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
February 24, 2004 by and between Richard Vogel and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Amendment Number 2 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on March 24, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.53
|
|
First Amendment to Lease between
WW&LJ Gateways, Ltd. and Immersion Corporation dated
March 17, 2004. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Amendment Number 2 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on March 24, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.54
|
|
Letter Agreement dated
March 18, 2004 by and between Microsoft Corporation and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Amendment Number 2 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on March 24, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.55
|
|
New form of Indemnity Agreement.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Amendment Number 2 to
Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on March 24, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.56
|
|
Agreement to Terminated dated
April 21, 2004 by and between Mr. Robert Van Naarden
and Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on May 14, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.57*
|
|
Voluntary Severance Agreement and
General Release dated April 16, 2004 by and between Richard
Stacey and Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on August 13, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.58
|
|
Purchase Agreement dated
December 22, 2004, by and between Immersion Corporation and
the purchasers named therein. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on December 27, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.59*
|
|
Non Statutory Stock Option
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Richard Vogel.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-8
(File
No. 333-119877)
on October 21, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.60*
|
|
Employment Agreement between
Immersion Corporation and Mike Zuckerman. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on October 26, 2004.
|
|
10
|
.61*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
January 27, 2005 by and between Immersion Corporation and
Stephen Ambler. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 11, 2005.)
|
|
10
|
.62*
|
|
Variable compensation plan dated
March 31, 2005 by and between Immersion Corporation and
Michael Zuckerman. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 6, 2005.)
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
Subsidiaries of Immersion
Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on November 14, 2000.)
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Victor Viegas,
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director, pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Stephen Ambler,
Chief Executive Officer and Vice President, Finance, pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Victor Viegas,
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Stephen Ambler,
Chief Financial Officer and Vice President, Finance, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
# |
|
Certain information has been omitted and filed separately with
the Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with
respect to the omitted portions. |
|
## |
|
Certain information has been omitted and filed separately with
the Commission. Confidential treatment has been granted with
respect to the omitted portions. |
|
* |
|
Constitutes a management contract or compensatory plan required
to be filed pursuant to Item 15(b) of
Form 10-K. |
91
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused
this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned
thereunto duly authorized.
IMMERSION CORPORATION
Stephen Ambler
Chief Financial Officer and Vice President, Finance
POWER OF
ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose
signature appears below constitutes and appoints Victor Viegas
and James Koshland, jointly and severally, his
attorneys-in-fact,
each with the power of substitution, for him in any and all
capacities, to sign any amendments to this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
and to file the same, with exhibits thereto and other documents
in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of
said
attorneys-in-fact,
or his substitute or substitutes, may do or cause to be done by
virtue thereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the
Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
/s/ VICTOR VIEGAS
Victor
Viegas
|
|
President, Chief Executive
Officer,
and Director
|
|
March 10, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ STEPHEN AMBLER
Stephen
Ambler
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and
Vice President, Finance
|
|
March 10, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JOHN HODGMAN
John
Hodgman
|
|
Director
|
|
March 10, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JONATHAN
RUBINSTEIN
Jonathan
Rubinstein
|
|
Director
|
|
March 10, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JACK SALTICH
Jack
Saltich
|
|
Director
|
|
March 10, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ EMILY LIGGETT
Emily
Liggett
|
|
Director
|
|
March 10, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ROBERT VAN
NAARDEN
Robert
Van Naarden
|
|
Director
|
|
March 10, 2006
|
92
SCHEDULE II
VALUATION AND QUALIFIYING ACCOUNTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Charged to
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
|
Costs and
|
|
|
Deductions/
|
|
|
End of
|
|
|
|
of Period
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
Write-Offs
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
$
|
159
|
|
|
$
|
259
|
|
|
$
|
35
|
|
|
$
|
383
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
$
|
147
|
|
|
$
|
27
|
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
159
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
$
|
334
|
|
|
$
|
(129
|
)
|
|
$
|
58
|
|
|
$
|
147
|
|
93
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
2
|
.1
|
|
Agreement and Plan of
Reorganization with Cybernet Systems Corporation
(‘‘Cybernet”), its wholly-owned subsidiary and
our wholly-owned subsidiary dated March 4, 1999.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
2
|
.2
|
|
Share Purchase Agreement with
Haptic Technologies Inc. (‘‘Haptech”) and
9039-4115 Quebec, Inc. (‘‘Holdco”) and the
Shareholders of Haptech and Holdco and 511220 N.B. Inc.
(“Purchaser”) dated February 28, 2000.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 23, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.2
|
|
Indemnification and Joinder
Agreement dated as of July 28, 2000, among Immersion
Corporation, James F. Kramer and Marc Tremblay. (Previously
filed with Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on September 15, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.3
|
|
Escrow Agreement dated as of
August 31, 2000, among Immersion Corporation, James F.
Kramer and U.S. Trust Company, National Association.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on September 15, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.5
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger dated
as of July 28, 2000, among Immersion Corporation, VT
Acquisition, Inc., Virtual Technologies, Inc., and James F.
Kramer. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration
Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.6
|
|
Agreement and Plan of
Reorganization dated as of July 31, 2000, among Immersion
Corporation, HT Medical Systems, Inc., HT Merger, Inc. and
Greg Merril. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.7
|
|
Indemnification and Joinder
Agreement dated as of July 31, 2000, among Immersion
Corporation, Gregg Merril, individually and as Representative,
and other stockholders of HT Medical Systems, Inc. (Previously
filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
2
|
.8
|
|
Escrow Agreement dated as of
September 29, 2000, among Immersion Corporation, HT Medical
Systems, Inc., Greg Merril as the Representative, and
U.S. Trust Company, National Association. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws, dated
October 23, 2002. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2003.)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate
of Incorporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on August 14, 2000.)
|
|
3
|
.3
|
|
Certificate of Designation of the
Powers, Preferences and Rights of Series A Redeemable
Convertible Preferred Stock. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
4
|
.1
|
|
Information and Registration
Rights Agreement dated April 13, 1998. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
4
|
.2
|
|
Immersion Corporation Cybernet
Registration Rights Agreement dated March 5, 1999.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
4
|
.3
|
|
Common Stock Grant and Purchase
Agreement and Plan with Michael Reich & Associates
dated July 6, 1999. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
4
|
.4
|
|
Common Stock Agreement with
Digital Equipment Corporation dated June 12, 1998.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)on
September 1, 1999.)
|
|
4
|
.5
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement
dated as of August 31, 2000, among Immersion Corporation
and the shareholders party thereto. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on September 15, 2000.)
|
|
4
|
.6
|
|
Form of 7% Senior Redeemable
Convertible Debenture. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
4
|
.7
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement by
and between Immersion Corporation and Microsoft Corporation,
dated July 25, 2003. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
4
|
.8
|
|
Stockholder’s Agreement by
and between Immersion Corporation and Microsoft Corporation,
dated July 25, 2003. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
10
|
.1
|
|
1994 Stock Option Plan and form of
Incentive Stock Option Agreement and form of Nonqualified Stock
Option Agreement. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.2
|
|
1997 Stock Option Plan and form of
Incentive Stock Option Agreement and form of Nonqualified Stock
Option Agreement. (Previously filed with Amendment No. 4 to
Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File No.
333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.3
|
|
Form of Indemnity Agreement.
(Previously filed with Amendment No. 1 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 13, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.4
|
|
Immediately Exercisable
Nonstatutory Stock Option Agreement with Steven G. Blank dated
November 1, 1996. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
Common Stock Purchase Warrant
issued to Cybernet Systems Corporation dated March 5, 1999.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
Consulting Services Agreement with
Cybernet Systems Corporation dated March 5, 1999.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.7
|
|
Amendment to Warrant to Purchase
Shares of Series B Preferred Stock to Bruce Paul amending
warrant to purchase 32,280 shares of Series B
Preferred Stock dated September 22, 1998. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.8
|
|
Amendment to Warrant to Purchase
Shares of Series B Preferred Stock to Bruce Paul amending
warrant to purchase 40,350 shares of Series B
Preferred Stock dated September 22, 1998. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.9
|
|
Operating Agreement with
MicroScribe, LLC dated July 1, 1997. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.10
|
|
Exchange Agreement with
MicroScribe, LLC dated July 1, 1997. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 1, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
Lease with Speiker Properties,
L.P. dated October 26, 1998. (Previously filed with
Amendment No. 1 to Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on September 13, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
Agreement Draft for ASIC Design
and Development with Kawasaki LSI, U.S.A., Inc., dated
October 16, 1997. (Previously filed with Amendment No. 5 to
Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 12, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.13
|
|
Patent License Agreement with
Microsoft Corporation dated July 19, 1999. (Previously
filed with Amendment No. 4 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.14
|
|
Semiconductor Device Component
Purchase Agreement with Kawasaki LSI, U.S.A., Inc., dated
August 17, 1998. (Previously filed with Amendment
No. 4 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.15
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to
Semiconductor Device Component Purchase Agreement with Kawasaki
LSI, U.S.A., Inc. dated April 27, 1999. (Previously filed
with Amendment No. 4 to Registrant’s Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.16
|
|
Intercompany Intellectual Property
License Agreement with MicroScribe, LLC dated July 1, 1997.
(Previously filed with Amendment No. 4 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.17
|
|
Patent License Agreement with
MicroScribe, LLC dated July 1, 1997. (Previously filed with
Amendment No. 4 to Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 5, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.18
|
|
Intellectual Property License
Agreement with Logitech, Inc. dated October 4, 1996.
(Previously filed with Amendment No. 5 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 12, 1999.) ##
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.19
|
|
Intellectual Property License
Agreement with Logitech, Inc. dated April 13, 1998.
(Previously filed with Amendment No. 5 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 12, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.20
|
|
Technology Product Development
Agreement with Logitech, Inc. dated April 13, 1998.
(Previously filed with Amendment No. 5 to Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on November 12, 1999.) ##
|
|
10
|
.21
|
|
1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
and form of subscription agreement thereunder. (Previously filed
with Amendment No. 2 to Registrant’s Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-86361)
on October 5, 1999.)
|
|
10
|
.22
|
|
Common Stock Purchase Warrant
issued to Intel Corporation dated June 6, 1997. (Previously
filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 23, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.23
|
|
Marketing Development Fund Letter
Agreement with Logitech, Inc. dated November 15, 1999.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 23, 2000.) ##
|
|
10
|
.24
|
|
HT Medical Systems, Inc. Amended
Secured Convertible Promissory Note. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on November 14, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.25
|
|
Industrial Lease between WW&LJ
Gateways, Ltd. and Immersion Corporation dated January 11,
2000. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on May 15, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.26
|
|
Amendment #1 to the
April 13, 1998 Intellectual Property License Agreement and
Technology Product Development Agreement with Logitech, Inc.
dated March 21, 2000. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on May 15, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.27
|
|
Immersion Corporation 2000
Non-Officer Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.28
|
|
Immersion Corporation 2000 HT
Non-Officer Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on October 13, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.29
|
|
Logitech Letter Agreement dated
September 26, 2000. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.30
|
|
Stock Option Cancellation
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Bruce Schena dated
October 25, 2000. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.31
|
|
Stock Option Cancellation
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Bruce Schena dated
October 25, 2000. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.32
|
|
Stock Option Cancellation
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Louis Rosenberg
dated October 25, 2000. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.33
|
|
Stock Option Cancellation
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Charles Boesenberg
dated October 25, 2000. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.34
|
|
Stock Option Cancellation
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Charles Boesenberg
dated October 25, 2000. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.35
|
|
Lease Agreement between Mor
Bennington LLLP and HT Medical Systems, Inc. dated
February 2, 1999. (Previously file with Registrant’s
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 2, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.36
|
|
Haptic Technologies, Inc. 2000
Stock Option Plan. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(File
No. 333-45254)
on September 6, 2000.)
|
|
10
|
.37
|
|
Retention Agreement dated
August 29, 2001, between Immersion Corporation and Rodney
G. Hilton (Previously filed with Registrant’s Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on November 14, 2001.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.38
|
|
Promissory Note dated
August 29, 2001, between Immersion Corporation and Rodney
G. Hilton (Previously filed with Registrant’s Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on November 14, 2001.)
|
|
10
|
.39
|
|
Amendment to 1996 Intellectual
Property License Agreement by and between Immersion Corporation
and Logitech, Inc dated October 11, 2001. (Previously filed
with Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2002.)#
|
|
10
|
.40*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
November 5, 2001, between Immersion Corporation and Bob
O’Malley. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2002.)
|
|
10
|
.41*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
November 5, 2001, between Immersion Corporation and Victor
Viegas. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2002.)
|
|
10
|
.42*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
November 5, 2001, between Immersion Corporation and Stuart
Mitchell. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2002.)
|
|
10
|
.43*
|
|
Independent Consultant Services
Agreement dated February 11, 2002, between Immersion
Corporation and Louis Rosenberg. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2002.)
|
|
10
|
.44*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
June 14, 1996, between Immersion Corporation and Richard L.
Stacey. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 28, 2003.)
|
|
10
|
.45
|
|
Series A Redeemable
Convertible Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement by and between
Immersion Corporation and Microsoft Corporation, dated as of
July 25, 2003. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
10
|
.46
|
|
Senior Redeemable Convertible
Debenture Purchase Agreement by and between Immersion
Corporation and Microsoft Corporation, dated as of July 25,
2003. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on July 29, 2003.)
|
|
10
|
.47
|
|
Settlement Agreement dated
July 25, 2003 by and between Microsoft Corporation and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on September 8, 2003.)#
|
|
10
|
.48
|
|
License Agreement dated
July 25, 2003 by and between Microsoft Corporation and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Amendment Number 1 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on February 13, 2004.)#
|
|
10
|
.49
|
|
Sublicense Agreement dated
July 25, 2003 by and between Microsoft Corporation and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Amendment Number 1 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on February 13, 2004.)#
|
|
10
|
.50*
|
|
Consulting Agreement dated
July 1, 2003 by and between Robert Van Naarden and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on September 8, 2003.)
|
|
10
|
.51*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
November 13, 2003 by and between Tim Tight and Immersion
Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File No.
333-108607)
on February 17, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.52*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
February 24, 2004 by and between Richard Vogel and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Amendment Number 2 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on March 24, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.53
|
|
First Amendment to Lease between
WW&LJ Gateways, Ltd. and Immersion Corporation dated
March 17, 2004. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Amendment Number 2 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on March 24, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.54
|
|
Letter Agreement dated
March 18, 2004 by and between Microsoft Corporation and
Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Amendment Number 2 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on March 24, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.55
|
|
New form of Indemnity Agreement.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Amendment Number 2 to
Registration Statement on
Form S-3
(File
No. 333-108607)
on March 24, 2004.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.56
|
|
Agreement to Terminate dated
April 21, 2004 by and between Mr. Robert Van Naarden
and Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on May 14, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.57*
|
|
Voluntary Severance Agreement and
General Release dated April 16, 2004 by and between Richard
Stacey and Immersion Corporation. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on August 13, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.58
|
|
Purchase Agreement dated
December 22, 2004, by and between Immersion Corporation and
the purchasers named therein. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on December 27, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.59*
|
|
Non Statutory Stock Option
Agreement between Immersion Corporation and Richard Vogel.
(Previously filed with Registrant’s Registration Statement
on
Form S-8
(File
No. 333-119877)
on October 21, 2004.)
|
|
10
|
.60*
|
|
Employment Agreement between
Immersion Corporation and Mike Zuckerman. (Previously filed with
Registrant’s Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on October 26, 2004.
|
|
10
|
.61*
|
|
Employment Agreement dated
January 27, 2005 by and between Immersion Corporation and
Stephen Ambler. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
(File No. 000-27969) on March 11, 2005.)
|
|
10
|
.62*
|
|
Variable compensation plan dated
March 31, 2005 by and between Immersion Corporation and
Michael Zuckerman. (Previously filed with Registrant’s
Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File No. 000-27969) on April 6, 2005.)
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
Subsidiaries of Immersion
Corporation. (Previously filed with Registrant’s Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
(File No. 000-27969) on November 14, 2000.)
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Victor Viegas,
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director, pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Stephen Ambler,
Chief Executive Officer and Vice President, Finance, pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Victor Viegas,
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Stephen Ambler,
Chief Financial Officer and Vice President, Finance, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
# |
|
Certain information has been omitted and filed separately with
the Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with
respect to the omitted portions. |
|
## |
|
Certain information has been omitted and filed separately with
the Commission. Confidential treatment has been granted with
respect to the omitted portions. |
|
* |
|
Constitutes a management contract or compensatory plan required
to be filed pursuant to Item 15(b) of
Form 10-K. |