Form 10-Q

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 x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Immersion Corporation (the “Company”) was incorporated in 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 digital devices with touch interaction.

The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Immersion Corporation and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Immersion Canada Inc., Immersion International, LLC, Immersion Medical, Inc., Immersion Japan K.K., and Haptify, Inc. All intercompany accounts, transactions, and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and with the instructions for Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X and, therefore, do not include all information and footnotes necessary for a complete presentation of the financial position, results of operations, and cash flows, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. These condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010. In the opinion of management, all adjustments consisting of only normal and recurring items necessary for the fair presentation of the financial position and results of operations for the interim periods presented have been included.

The results of operations for the interim periods ended June 30, 2011 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year.

The Company recognizes revenues in accordance with applicable accounting standards, including Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 605-10-S99, “Revenue Recognition” (“ASC 605-10-S99”); ASC 605-25, “Multiple Element Arrangements” (“ASC 605-25”); and ASC 985-605, “Software-Revenue Recognition” (“ASC 985-605”). The Company derives its revenues from three principal sources: royalty and license fees, product sales, and development contracts. As described below, significant management judgments and estimates must be made and used in connection with the revenue recognized in any accounting period. Material differences may result in the amount and timing of revenue for any period based on the judgments and estimates made by management. Specifically, in connection with each transaction, the Company must evaluate whether: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, (ii) delivery has occurred, (iii) the fee is fixed or determinable, and (iv) collectibility is probable. The Company applies these criteria as discussed below.

Royalty and license revenue — The Company recognizes royalty revenue based on royalty reports or related information received from the licensee and when collectibility is deemed probable. The terms of the royalty agreements generally require licensees to give the Company notification of royalties within 30 to 45 days of the end of the quarter during which the sales occur. The Company recognizes license fee revenue for licenses to intellectual property when earned under the terms of the agreements, which is generally recognized when all deliverables including services are completed or on a straight-line basis over the expected term of the license.

Development contracts and other revenue — Development contracts and other revenue is comprised of professional services (consulting services and/or development contracts). Professional services revenues are recognized under the proportional performance accounting method based on physical completion of the work to be performed or completed performance method. A provision for losses on contracts is made, if necessary, in the period in which the loss becomes probable and can be reasonably estimated. Revisions in estimates are reflected in the period in which the conditions become known. To date, such losses have not been significant.

Multiple element arrangements — The Company enters into multiple element arrangements in which customers purchase a time-based license which include a combination of software and/or intellectual property licenses, professional services and in limited cases, post contract customer support. For arrangements that are software based and include software and professional services, the services are generally not essential to the functionality of the software, and customers may purchase consulting services to facilitate the adoption of the Company’s technology, but they may also decide to use their own resources or appoint other professional service organizations to perform these services. For these arrangements, including those with post contract customer support, revenue is recognized either over the period of the ongoing obligation which is generally consistent with the contractual term, or when all deliverables including services have been completed.

Product sales — The Company recognizes revenue from the sale of products and the license of associated software if any, and expenses all related costs of products sold, once delivery has occurred and customer acceptance, if required, has been achieved. The Company has determined that the license of software for its medical simulation products is incidental to the product as a whole. The Company typically grants to customers a warranty which guarantees that products will substantially conform to the Company’s current specifications for generally twelve months from the delivery date pursuant to the terms of the arrangement. Historically, warranty-related costs have not been significant. Separately priced extended warranty contract revenues are recognized ratably over the contractual period.

In September 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) ratified Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2009-13 (update to ASC 605), “Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables” (“ASU 2009-13 (update to ASC 605)”). This guidance addresses criteria for separating the

consideration in multiple-element arrangements. ASU 2009-13 (update to ASC 605) requires companies to allocate the overall consideration to each deliverable by using a best estimate of the selling price of individual deliverables in the arrangement in the absence of vendor-specific objective evidence or other third-party evidence of the selling price. ASU 2009-13 (update to ASC 605) will be effective prospectively for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010 and early adoption will be permitted. The Company adopted ASU 2009-13 (update to ASC 605) as of January 1, 2011, and its application had no impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements as no new agreements or materially modified contracts in the six months ended June 30, 2011 came under this guidance.

In September 2009, the FASB ratified ASU 2009-14 (update to ASC 605), “Certain Revenue Arrangements That Include Software Elements” (“ASU 2009-14 (update to ASC 605)”). ASU 2009-14 (update to ASC 605) provides guidance to exclude (a) non-software components of tangible products and (b) software components of tangible products that are sold, licensed, or leased with tangible products when the software components and non-software components of the tangible product function together to deliver the tangible product’s essential functionally. ASC 2009-14 (update to ASC 605) has an effective date that is consistent with ASU 2009-13 (update to ASC 605) above. The Company adopted ASC 2009-14 (update to ASC 605) as of January 1, 2011, and its application had no impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements as no new agreements or materially modified contracts in the six months ended June 30, 2011 came under this guidance.

In June 2011, the FASB ratified ASU 2011-05 “Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income.” ASU 2011-05 requires that all nonowner changes in stockholders’ equity be presented either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements, eliminating the option to present other comprehensive income in the statement of changes in equity. Under either choice, items that are reclassified from other comprehensive income to net income are required to be presented on the face of the financial statements where the components of net income and the components of other comprehensive income are presented. This amendment is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2011, and will be applied retrospectively. This amendment will change the manner in which the Company presents comprehensive income.

The financial instruments of the Company measured at fair value on a recurring basis are cash equivalents and short-term investments. The Company’s cash equivalents and short-term investments are classified within Level 1 or Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted market prices, broker or dealer quotations, or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency. The Company did not have any transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements during the periods presented.

The types of instruments valued based on quoted market prices in active markets include most U.S. Treasury securities and most money market securities. Such instruments are generally classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.

The types of instruments valued based on quoted prices in markets that are less active, broker or dealer quotations, or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency include most investment-grade corporate commercial paper. Such instruments are generally classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

The types of instruments valued based on unobservable inputs which reflect the reporting entity’s own assumptions or data that market participants would use in valuing an instrument are generally classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.

In January 2010, the FASB ratified ASU 2010-06 “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures – Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Measurements” (“ASU 2010-06”). ASU 2010-06 requires new disclosures for significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and 2 of the fair value hierarchy and the level of disaggregation of assets or liabilities and the valuation techniques and inputs used to measure fair value. The Company adopted the updated guidance which was effective for the Company’s annual reporting period at December 31, 2009, with the exception of new Level 3 activity disclosures, which was adopted January 1, 2011. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on its condensed consolidated results of operations and financial condition.

Financial instruments measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are classified based on the valuation technique in the table below:

The contractual maturities of the Company’s available-for-sale securities on June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were all due within one year.

The Company amortizes its intangible assets related to patents and trademarks, over their estimated useful lives, generally 10 years. Amortization of intangibles excluding impairments or abandonments was as follows:

The estimated remaining annual amortization expense for intangible assets as of June 30, 2011 was as follows:

7. COMPONENTS OF OTHER CURRENT LIABILITIES AND DEFERRED REVENUE AND CUSTOMER ADVANCES

The Company’s equity incentive program is a long-term retention program that is intended to attract, retain, and provide incentives for talented employees, consultants, officers, and directors and to align stockholder and employee interests. The Company may grant options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units (“RSUs”), performance shares, performance units, and other stock-based or cash-based awards to employees, officers, directors, and consultants. Under these programs, stock options may be granted at prices not less than the fair market value on the date of grant for stock options. These options generally vest over 4 years and expire from 5 to 10 years from the date of grant. Restricted stock generally vests over one year. RSUs generally vest over 3 years. On June 3, 2011, the Company’s stockholders approved the 2011 Equity Incentive Plan in which 2,300,000 shares were authorized. In addition, 400,000 shares were transferred from the Company’s 2007 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2007 Plan”) and 2,279,263 shares were transferred from the Company’s 2008 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2008 Plan”) for a total of 4,979,263 available for grant under the new plan. The 2007 Plan and 2008 Plan have been terminated.

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 purchase stock having a value greater than $25,000 in any calendar year as measured at the beginning of the offering period. A total of 1,000,000 shares of common stock are reserved for issuance under the ESPP. As of June 30, 2011, 441,601 shares had been purchased since the inception of the ESPP in 1999. Under ASC 718-10, the ESPP is considered a compensatory plan and the Company is required to recognize compensation cost related to the fair value of common stock purchased under the ESPP. Shares purchased under the ESPP for the six months ended June 30, 2011 are listed below. No shares were purchased under the ESPP for the six months ended June 30, 2010. The intrinsic value listed below is calculated as the difference between the market value on the date of purchase and the purchase price of the shares.

The following table sets forth the summary of option activity under the Company’s stock option plans for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and year ended December 31, 2010:

Information regarding stock options outstanding at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 is summarized below:

RSU activity for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and year ended December 31, 2010 was as follows:

Information regarding RSUs outstanding at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 is summarized below:

Restricted stock award activity for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and year ended December 31, 2010 was as follows:

The assumptions used to value option grants under the Company’s Stock Plans were as follows:

Total stock-based compensation recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of operations is as follows:

As of June 30, 2011, there was $6.4 million related to stock options, restricted stock awards, and RSUs of unrecognized compensation cost, adjusted for estimated forfeitures, granted to the Company’s employees and directors. This cost will be recognized over an estimated weighted-average period of approximately 2.52 years for options, 2.11 years for RSUs, and 0.70 years for restricted stock awards. Total unrecognized compensation cost will be adjusted for future changes in estimated forfeitures.

On November 1, 2007, the Company announced that its board of directors authorized the repurchase of up to $50 million of the Company’s common stock. The Company may repurchase its stock for cash in the open market in accordance with applicable securities laws. The timing of and amount of any stock repurchase will depend on share price, corporate and regulatory requirements, economic and market conditions, and other factors. The stock repurchase authorization has no expiration date, does not require the Company to repurchase a specific number of shares, and may be modified, suspended, or discontinued at any time. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, there were no stock repurchases under this program, but the program currently remains available. In July 2011, our Board approved a proposal to repurchase some of our shares of common stock under the previously authorized Stock Repurchase Program which currently has $31.6 million remaining.

On March 30, 2010, the Company entered into and closed an Asset Purchase Agreement, a Transition Services Agreement and a License Agreement (collectively the “Transaction”) with CAE Healthcare USA (“CAE”). Under the Asset Purchase Agreement, CAE acquired certain assets including inventory, fixed assets, and certain liabilities which included warranty liabilities of the Endoscopy, Endovascular, and Laparoscopy medical simulation product lines used in the field of medical training for an approximate amount of $1.6 million subject to purchase price adjustments for final inventory levels. The agreement also provided for the transfer of certain employees to CAE as well as distribution agreements and customer relationships. Under the transition services agreement, the Company provided certain back-office services to CAE for up to nine months and was being reimbursed for the expenses incurred for such services. Under the license agreement, the Company licensed to CAE the Immersion TouchSense patent portfolio within a specific field of use. As such, revenues and costs for the Endoscopy, Endovascular, and Laparoscopy medical simulation product lines have been included in operating income in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations through the date of sale. Although the Company has ceased manufacturing these three specific product lines, these operating results have not been reported as discontinued operations. The Company continues to manufacture Virtual IV products, another medical product line, but the primary focus of the Company’s business has changed from simulation product sales to licensing fees. During the six months ended June 30, 2010, the Company recognized a pre-tax loss of approximately $42,000 in continuing operations in connection with the asset purchase agreement and the

transition services agreement. There was no cost in 2011 related to the CAE transaction. The cost reimbursements received under the Transition Services Agreement were recorded as an off-set to the related operating expense line items. The Company’s license agreement with CAE includes quarterly revenue under the license arrangement which started July, 2010. Under the terms of the Company’s revenue recognition policy for transactions with extended payment terms such as this, the Company does not recognize revenue until the amounts become due and payable and all revenue recognition criteria are met. In connection with the transaction, the Company agreed to indemnify CAE for certain liabilities, claims, and other specified items in the asset purchase agreement.

On November 17, 2008, the Company announced that it would divest its 3D product line which was part of its Touch segment. During 2009, the Company sold all of its 3D product line including inventory, fixed assets, and intangibles and recorded gains on the sale of discontinued operations of $187,000 at the time of the sales. Negotiated consideration for the sales was $2.7 million in the form of cash of $320,000 and notes receivable of $2.4 million payable through 2013, for which the proceeds are being recognized when they are received. The Company has abandoned all other 3D operations. Accordingly, the operations of the 3D product line have been classified as discontinued operations, net of income tax, in the condensed consolidated statement of operations for all periods presented. The assets sold consisted primarily of intangible assets that had no carrying value on the Company’s books at the time of sale. In the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 the Company recorded a gain on sale of discontinued operations net of tax of $18,000 and $61,000 respectively, from payments on notes from the sale of the 3D product line. In the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 the Company recorded a gain on sale of discontinued operations net of tax of $30,000 and $60,000 respectively, from payments on notes from the sale of the 3D product line.

The effective tax rates differ from the statutory rate primarily due to the valuation allowance, foreign withholding taxes, and unrecognized tax benefits. The income tax provision for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 are primarily as a result of foreign withholding tax expense.

As of June 30, 2011, the Company had unrecognized tax benefits under ASC 740 “Income Taxes” of approximately $670,000 including interest of $42,000. The total amount of unrecognized tax benefits that would affect the Company’s effective tax rate, if recognized, was $241,000. There were no material changes in the amount of unrecognized tax benefits during the six months ended June 30, 2011. The Company does not expect any material changes to its liability for unrecognized tax benefits during the next twelve months. The Company’s policy is to account for interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions as a component of income tax provision.

Because the Company had net operating loss and credit carryforwards, there are open statutes of limitations in which federal, state, and foreign taxing authorities may examine the Company’s tax returns for all years from 1993 through the current period.

The Company maintains a valuation allowance for its entire deferred tax assets at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 as a result of uncertainties regarding the realization of the asset balance due to past losses, the variability of operating results, and near term projected results. In the event that the Company determines the deferred tax assets are realizable, an adjustment to the valuation allowance may increase income in the period such determination is made. The valuation allowance does not impact the Company’s ability to utilize the underlying net operating loss carryforwards.

Basic net income (loss) per share is computed using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period, excluding unvested restricted stock and RSUs. Diluted net income (loss) per share is based upon the weighted average common shares outstanding for the period plus dilutive potential shares including unvested restricted stock and RSUs and stock options using the treasury stock method. The following is a reconciliation of the numerators and denominators used in computing basic and diluted net income (loss) per share (in thousands, except per share amounts):

The following options to purchase common stock with exercise prices greater than the average fair market value of the Company’s stock were not included in the calculation because the effect would have been anti-dilutive (in thousands, except per share amounts).

As of June 30, 2011 and June 30, 2010, the Company had securities outstanding that could potentially dilute basic earnings per share in the future, but these were excluded from the computation of diluted net loss per share for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and for the six months ended June 30, 2010, since their effect would have been anti-dilutive. These outstanding securities consisted of the following (in thousands):

The Company develops, manufactures, licenses, and supports a wide range of hardware and software technologies that more fully engage users’ sense of touch when operating digital devices. The Company focuses on the following target application areas: mobile communications and consumer electronics,

automotive, gaming, commercial and industrial controls, and medical. Through March 31, 2010, the Company managed these application areas under two operating and reportable segments: Touch and Medical. As discussed in Note 10 of the condensed consolidated financial statements, on March 30, 2010 the Company divested its Endoscopy, Endovascular, and Laparoscopy product lines. Management continues to manufacture a limited amount of product, but the primary focus from this part of the business has changed from simulation product sales to primarily a licensing model under which the Company develops and licenses a wide range of haptic-related software and patented technologies and will collect license and royalty revenue. As of April 1, 2010, the Company reorganized into one segment and there is no longer management, development, operations, or administrative personnel specifically for medical operations or product lines.

The Company’s chief operating decision maker (“CODM”) is the Chief Executive Officer. The CODM allocates resources to and assesses the performance of the Company using information about its revenue and operating income (loss). Beginning April 1, 2010, there is only one segment that is reported to management.

As the Company has changed its internal structure which caused the Company’s reportable segments to change, the Company has restated its previously reported separate segment information from Medical and Touch into only one segment. As such, separate segment information has been eliminated.

The Company is involved in legal proceedings relating to a class action lawsuit filed on November 9, 2001 in the U. S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 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 its 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 Company’s common stock from the date of the Company’s 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.

In September 2008, all of the parties to the lawsuits reached a settlement, subject to documentation and approval of the District Court. Subsequently, an underwriter defendant filed for bankruptcy and other underwriter defendants were acquired. On April 2, 2009, final documentation evidencing the settlement was presented to the District Court for approval. On October 6, 2009, the District Court approved the settlement, and the Court subsequently entered a judgment of dismissal. Under the judgment, the Immersion Defendants are not required to contribute to the settlement. Several notices of appeal have been filed by putative class members challenging the settlement. If the settlement is reversed on appeal, the Company intends to defend the lawsuit vigorously.

In September and October 2009, various putative shareholder class action and derivative complaints were filed in federal and state court against the Company and certain current and former Immersion directors and officers.

On September 2, 2009, a securities class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against the Company and certain of its current and former directors and officers. Over the following five weeks, four additional class action complaints were filed. (One of these four actions was later voluntarily dismissed.) The securities class action complaints name the Company and certain current and former Immersion directors and officers as defendants and allege violations of federal securities laws based on the Company’s issuance of allegedly misleading financial statements. The various complaints assert claims covering the period from May 2007 through July 2009 and seek compensatory damages allegedly sustained by the purported class members.

On December 21, 2009, these class actions were consolidated by the court as In Re Immersion Corporation Securities Litigation. On the same day, the court appointed a lead plaintiff and lead plaintiff’s counsel. Following the Company’s restatement of its financial statements, lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint on April 9, 2010. Defendants moved to dismiss the action on June 15, 2010 and that motion was granted on March 11, 2011. Lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint on April 29, 2011. Defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint on July 1, 2011.

On September 15, 2009, a putative shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, purportedly on behalf of the Company and naming certain of its current and former directors and officers as individual defendants. Thereafter, two additional putative derivative complaints were filed in the same court.

The derivative complaints arise from the same or similar alleged facts as the federal securities actions and seek to bring state law causes of action on behalf of the Company against the individual defendants for breaches of fiduciary duty, gross negligence, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, breach of contract, waste of corporate assets, unjust enrichment, as well as for violations of federal securities laws. The federal derivative complaints seek compensatory damages, corporate governance changes, unspecified equitable and injunctive relief, the imposition of a constructive trust, and restitution. On November 17, 2009, the court consolidated these actions as In re Immersion Corporation Derivative Litigation and appointed lead counsel. The court has issued an order staying this action.

On October 7, 2009, a putative shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara, purportedly on behalf of the Company, seeking compensatory damages, equitable and injunctive relief, and restitution. The complaint names certain current and former directors and officers of the Company as individual defendants. This complaint arises from the same or similar alleged facts as the federal securities actions and seeks to bring causes of action on behalf of the Company against the individual defendants for breaches of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment. On April 4, 2011, plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the action, with prejudice, and an order of dismissal was entered that same day.

On May 5, 2010, an action was filed in Delaware Chancery Court by a shareholder seeking to enforce a demand to inspect certain of the Company’s records pursuant to Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, as a possible prelude to the shareholder bringing a derivative action. The Company filed

an answer on June 14, 2010, questioning whether a proper purpose for the records inspection had been stated and raising other defenses concerning the scope of the demand, among other deficiencies. Following a one-day trial on December 2, 2010, the Court significantly narrowed the scope of the demand and the Company has responded accordingly.

The Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome of the above-mentioned federal and state actions, and it is unable to estimate any potential liability it may incur.

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 condensed 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.

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 reduces 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 indeterminable.

ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’SDISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q 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 below in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “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 update these forward-looking statements 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 publicly disclosed or filed with the SEC that attempt to advise you of the risks and factors that may affect our business.

We are a leading provider of haptic technologies that allow people to use their sense of touch more

fully when operating a wide variety of digital and other devices. To achieve this heightened interactivity, we develop and license or manufacture a wide range of 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 markets: mobile communications and consumer electronics, automotive, gaming, commercial and industrial, and medical. As of April 1, 2010, we reorganized from two segments and now we manage these application areas under one operating and reportable segment (See Note 14 to the condensed consolidated financial statements).

In most all of our markets, such as mobile communications and consumer electronics, automotive, gaming, commercial and industrial, and medical, we now license our technologies to manufacturers who use them in products sold under their own brand names. In a few markets, such as medical simulation, we sold products manufactured under our own brand name through direct sales to end users, distributors, or OEMs. We have shifted the majority of our business from manufacturing products to primarily a licensing model. From time to time, we have also engaged in development projects for third parties.

On March 30, 2010, we sold certain assets including inventory and fixed assets and certain liabilities of the Endoscopy, Endovascular, and Laparoscopy medical simulation product lines. Since that time we stopped shipping and wound down the sales of these lines of medical simulation products. However, we expect to continue to receive revenue due to our licensing agreements with medical licensees, and we continue to ship Virtual IV medical products.

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 1,200 issued or pending patents in the U.S. and other countries, covering various aspects of hardware and software technologies.

Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our condensed consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of these condensed 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 and assumptions, including those related to revenue recognition, stock-based compensation, bad debts, inventory, short-term investments, warranty obligations, patents and intangible assets, income taxes, contingencies, and litigation. We base our estimates and assumptions 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 and assumptions.

We believe the following are our most critical accounting policies as they require our significant judgments and estimates in the preparation of our condensed consolidated financial statements:

We recognize revenues in accordance with applicable accounting standards, including Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 605-10-S99, “Revenue Recognition” (“ASC 605-10-S99”); ASC 605-25, “Multiple Element Arrangements” (“ASC 605-25”); and ASC 985-605, “Software-Revenue Recognition” (“ASC 985-605”). We derive our revenues from three principal sources: royalty and license fees, product sales, and development contracts. As described below, significant management judgments and estimates must be made and used in connection with the revenue recognized in any accounting period. Material differences may result in the amount and timing of our revenue for any period based on the judgments and estimates made by our management. Specifically, in connection with each transaction, we must evaluate whether: (i) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, (ii) delivery has occurred, (iii) the fee is fixed or determinable, and (iv) collectibility is probable. We apply these criteria as discussed below.

Royalty and license revenue — We recognize royalty revenue based on royalty reports or related information received from the licensee and when collectibility is deemed probable. The terms of the royalty agreements generally require licensees to give us notification of royalties within 30 to 45 days of the end of the quarter during which the sales occur. We recognize license fee revenue for licenses to our intellectual property when earned under the terms of the agreements, which is generally recognized when all deliverables including services are completed or on a straight-line basis over the expected term of the license.

Multiple element arrangements — We enter into multiple element arrangements in which customers purchase a time-based license which include a combination of software and/or intellectual property licenses, professional services and in limited cases, post contract customer support. For arrangements that are software based and include software and professional services, the services are generally not essential to the functionality of the software, and customers may purchase consulting services to facilitate the adoption of our technology, but they may also decide to use their own resources or appoint other professional service organizations to perform these services. For these arrangements, including those with post contract customer support, revenue is recognized either over the period of the ongoing obligation which is generally consistent with the contractual term, or when all deliverables including services have been completed.

Product sales — We recognize revenue from the sale of products and the license of associated software if any, and expense all related costs of products sold, once delivery has occurred and customer acceptance, if required, has been achieved. We have determined that the license of software for the medical simulation products is incidental to the product as a whole. We typically grant our customers a warranty which guarantees that our products will substantially conform to our current specifications for generally twelve months from the delivery date pursuant to the terms of the arrangement. Historically, warranty-related costs have not been significant. Separately priced extended warranty contract revenues are recognized ratably over the contractual period.

Cost of revenues includes both cost of product sales and cost of development contract revenues. Cost of product sales consists primarily of contract manufacturing and other overhead costs. Cost of development contract revenue includes primarily labor related costs relating to these contracts.

Stock-based Compensation — Stock-based compensation cost is measured at the grant date based on the fair value of the award and is recognized as expense on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period, which is the vesting period.

Valuation and amortization method — We use the Black-Scholes model, single-option approach to determine the fair value of stock options, stock awards, and ESPP shares. All share-based payment awards are amortized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service periods of the awards, which are generally the vesting periods. Stock-based compensation expense recognized at fair value includes the impact of estimated forfeitures. We estimate future forfeitures at the date of grant and revise the estimates if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from these estimates. The determination of the fair value of stock-based payment awards on the date of grant using an option-pricing model is affected by our stock price as well as assumptions regarding a number of complex and subjective variables. These variables include actual and projected employee stock option exercise behaviors that impact the expected term, our expected stock price volatility over the term of the awards, risk-free interest rate, and expected dividends.

If factors change and we employ different assumptions for estimating stock-based compensation expense in future periods, or if we decide to use a different valuation model, the future periods may differ significantly from what we have recorded in the current period and could materially affect our operating results.

The Black-Scholes model was developed for use in estimating the fair value of traded options that have no vesting restrictions and are fully transferable, characteristics not present in our option grants and ESPP shares. Existing valuation models, including the Black-Scholes and lattice binomial models, may not provide reliable measures of the fair values of our stock-based compensation. Consequently, there is a risk that our estimates of the fair values of our stock-based compensation awards on the grant dates may bear little resemblance to the actual values realized upon the exercise, expiration, early termination, or forfeiture of those stock-based payments in the future. Certain stock-based payments, such as employee stock options, may expire and be worthless or otherwise result in zero intrinsic value as compared to the fair values originally estimated on the grant date and reported in our financial statements. Alternatively, value may be realized from these instruments that are significantly higher than the fair values originally estimated on the grant date and reported in our financial statements. There currently is no market-based mechanism or other practical application to verify the reliability and accuracy of the estimates stemming from these valuation models, nor is there a means to compare and adjust the estimates to actual values.

See Note 9 to the condensed consolidated financial statements for further information regarding stock compensation disclosures.

We use the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes. Under this method, income tax expense is recognized for the amount of taxes payable or refundable for the current year. In addition, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the expected future tax consequences of temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities, and for operating losses and tax credit carryforwards. 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.

Our judgments, assumptions, and estimates relative to the current provision for income tax take into account current tax laws, our interpretation of current tax laws, and possible outcomes of current and future audits conducted by foreign and domestic tax authorities. We have established reserves for income taxes to

address potential exposures involving tax positions that could be challenged by tax authorities. Although we believe our judgments, assumptions, and estimates are reasonable, changes in tax laws or our interpretation of tax laws and any future tax audits could significantly impact the amounts provided for income taxes in our condensed consolidated financial statements.

Our assumptions, judgments, and estimates relative to the value of a deferred tax asset take into account predictions of the amount and category of future taxable income, such as income from operations or capital gains income. Actual operating results and the underlying amount and category of income in future years could render inaccurate our current assumptions, judgments, and estimates of recoverable net deferred tax assets. Any of the assumptions, judgments, and estimates mentioned above could cause our actual income tax obligations to differ from our estimates, thus materially impacting our financial position and results of operations.

Our short-term investments consist primarily of U.S. treasury bills and government agency securities purchased with an original or remaining maturity of greater than 90 days on the date of purchase. We classify all debt securities with readily determinable market values as “available-for-sale”. Even though the stated maturity dates of these debt securities may be one year or more beyond the balance sheet date, we have classified all debt securities as short-term investments as they are available for current operations and reasonably expected to be realized in cash or sold within one year. These investments are carried at fair market value, and using the specific identification method, any unrealized gains and losses considered to be temporary in nature are reported as a separate component of other comprehensive income (loss) within stockholders’ equity.

In April 2009, new accounting guidance revised the impairment model for debt securities by modifying the current intent and ability indicator in determining whether a debt security is other-than-temporarily impaired. For debt securities in an unrealized loss position, we are required to assess whether (i) we have the intent to sell the debt security or (ii) it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the debt security before its anticipated recovery. If either of these conditions is met, an other-than-temporary impairment on the security must be recognized in earnings equal to the entire difference between its fair value and amortized cost basis.

For debt securities in an unrealized loss position which are deemed to be other-than-temporary where neither of the criteria in the paragraph above are present, the difference between the security’s then-current amortized cost basis and fair value is separated into (i) the amount of the impairment related to the credit loss (i.e. the credit loss component) and (ii) the amount of the impairment related to all other factors (i.e., the non-credit loss component). The credit loss component is recognized in earnings. The non-credit loss component is recognized in accumulated other comprehensive loss. The credit loss component is the excess of the amortized cost of the security over the best estimate of the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected from the debt security. The non-credit component is the residual amount of the other-than-temporary impairment. Prior to the new accounting guidance, in all cases, if an impairment was determined to be other-than-temporary, then an impairment loss was recognized in earnings in an amount equal to the entire difference between the security’s amortized cost basis and its fair value.

When calculating the present value of expected cash flows to determine the credit loss component of the other-than-temporary impairment, we estimate the amount and timing of projected cash flows on a security-by-security basis. These calculations reflect our expectations of the performance of the underlying collateral and of the issuer to meet payment obligations as applicable. The expected cash flows are discounted using the effective interest rate of the security prior to any impairment. The amortized cost basis of a debt security is adjusted for credit losses recorded to earnings. The difference between the cash flows expected to be collected and the new cost basis is accreted to investment income over the remaining expected life of the security.

Further information about short-term investments may be found in Note 2 to the condensed consolidated financial statements.

We maintain allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from our review and assessment of our customers’ ability to make required payments, historical losses, and existing economic conditions. 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.

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.

We have acquired patents and other intangible assets. 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 condensed 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 are issued, 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 the first six months ended June 30, 2011, we capitalized costs associated with patents and trademarks of $1.6 million. Our total amortization expense (exclusive of impairments or abandonments) for the same period was $414,000.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE MONTHS AND SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2011 AND 2010

The following discussion and analysis includes our results of operations from continuing operations for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010. Accordingly, any gain or loss on sale or income tax provision from discontinued operations have been aggregated and reported as a gain or loss from discontinued operations and are not a component of the aforementioned continuing operations discussion. The operating results for the Endoscopy, Endovascular, and Laparoscopy medical simulation product lines have been included in continuing operations in the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements. Although we have ceased manufacturing these three specific product lines, these operating results have not been reported as discontinued operations. From our medical product lines, we continue to manufacture our Virtual IV product line, but the primary focus from this part of our business has changed from simulation product sales to royalty and license revenue.

Our revenues decreased by 21% during the second quarter ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the second quarter ended June 30, 2010. The second quarter revenue decrease was primarily due to a 70% decrease in product sales and a 7% decrease in royalty and license revenue. The decrease in product sales was primarily due to the transfer of certain medical product lines to CAE Healthcare, Inc. (“CAE”). The decrease in royalty and license revenue was mainly due to certain true up and other one-time payments primarily from our gaming customers in the second quarter of 2010 partially offset by increased royalty and license fees from our mobility and gaming licensees. Our revenues decreased by 10% during the first six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2010. The first six months revenue decrease was primarily due to a 68% decrease in product sales primarily due to the divestiture of certain medical product lines to CAE. Offsetting this, there was a 12% increase in royalty and license revenue mainly due to increased royalty and license fees from our mobility, gaming, and medical licensees.

On March 30, 2010 we entered into an agreement with CAE and sold certain assets of the Endoscopy, Endovascular, and Laparoscopy medical simulation product lines to CAE for approximately $1.6 million and had a loss on the transaction of $43,000 in 2010. The agreement also provided for the transfer of approximately 34 employees and contractors to CAE as well as distribution agreements and customer relationships. Our divestiture of our medical simulation product lines was completed during 2010. However, we expect to continue to receive revenue due to our licensing agreement with CAE and other companies pertaining to haptic-based technology in medical training applications, and we continue to ship Virtual IV medical products.

Our loss from continuing operations was $1.3 million during the second quarter ended June 30, 2011 as compared to a profit of $150,000 for the second quarter ended June 30, 2010. The increased loss was primarily due to decreased gross margin of $1.3 million resulting from the divestiture of certain medical product lines to CAE along with decreased revenue from true up and other one-time payments primarily from our gaming customers. Our income from continuing operations was $17,000 during the first six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to a loss from continuing operations of $2.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2010. The increased income was primarily due to reduced ongoing expenses from the transfer of product lines to CAE, reductions in personnel, and other cost savings contributed to the increase in income.

During the remainder of 2011, we expect royalty and licensing revenues to be the major component of our revenues as our technology continues to be included in more products. Our first quarter revenue is typically higher than all other quarters due to the reporting of holiday sales by our customers in the prior quarter and we expect this seasonality to continue. Also, we expect to continue to focus on the execution of plans including marketing our products in our established businesses. Our success could be limited by several factors, including the current macro-economic climate, the timely release of our new technology and our licensees’ products, continued market acceptance of our technology and our licensees’ products, 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 Part II, Item 1A – “Risk Factors.”

		00000000		00000000		00000000			00000000
	June 30,				Change			% Change
REVENUES	2011		2010

	(In thousands)
Three months ended:

Royalty and license	$	5,882	$	6,304	$	(422	)		(7	)%
Product sales		546		1,850		(1,304	)		(70	)%
Development contracts and other		254		321		(67	)		(21	)%

Total Revenues	$	6,682	$	8,475	$	(1,793	)		(21	)%


Six months ended:

Royalty and license	$	14,235	$	12,707	$	1,528			12	%
Product sales		1,547		4,818		(3,271	)		(68	)%
Development contracts and other		668		659		9			1	%

Total Revenues	$	16,450	$	18,184	$	(1,734	)		(10	)%

Three Months Ended June 30, 2011 Compared to Three Months Ended June 30, 2010

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. The decrease in royalty and

license revenue for the three months ended June 30, 2011 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2010 was primarily due to decreases in true ups and other one-time payments mainly from our gaming licensees of approximately $1 million along with decreases from our automotive and integrated circuit and other licensees. This was partially offset by increases in royalty and license revenue from our mobility, gaming, and medical licensees.

Royalty and license revenue decreased by 9% for gaming customers mainly due to decreases in true ups and other one-time payments partially offset by increases in royalties from new and existing customers due to increased units shipped by licensees.

Royalty and license revenue increased by 9% for mobility customers primarily due to increases in mobility units shipped by our licensees. The increase was due to the fact that our technology continues to be included in more phone models and other devices.

We expect royalty and license revenue to be the major component of our future revenue as we focus on our licensing model and as our technology continues to be included in more products.

Product sales — Product sales are comprised primarily of medical products, actuators, design kits, and integrated circuits. The decrease in product sales was due primarily to a $1.3 million decrease in medical product sales arising mainly from the divesture of certain medical simulation product lines in the three months ended March 31, 2010. On March 30, 2010 we entered into an agreement with CAE and sold certain assets and divested the Endoscopy, Endovascular, and Laparoscopy medical simulation product lines to CAE resulting in reduced medical product sales subsequent to that date. Revenue for the second quarter ended June 30, 2010 for the divested product lines was approximately $1 million and was primarily the result of the recognition of prior shipments not previously recognized as revenue based upon recognition criteria as required by GAAP and our revenue recognition policies. In addition, sales of our Virtual IV medical simulator product, our only medical product line remaining, decreased by $323,000 due to decreased shipments compared to the same period in the prior year. We expect product sales will remain at lower levels in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily as a result of the divestiture of the Endoscopy, Endovascular, and Laparoscopy medical simulation product lines, and that the primary focus of our business has changed from simulation product sales to royalty and license revenue.

Development contracts and other revenue — Development contracts and other revenue is comprised of revenue on commercial contracts. Development contracts and other revenue decreased mainly due to a decrease in one time contracted engineering services. We continue to transition our engineering resources from certain commercial development contract efforts to development efforts that focus on leveraging our existing sales and channel distribution capabilities. Accordingly, we do not expect development contract revenue to grow significantly in the future.

We categorize our geographic information into four major regions: North America, Europe, Far East, and Rest of the World. In the second quarter ended June 30, 2011, revenue generated in North America, Europe, Far East, and Rest of the World represented 44%, 12%, 44%, and 0% of total revenue, respectively, compared to 43%, 9%, 42%, and 6% of total revenue, respectively, for the second quarter ended June 30, 2010. The shift in revenues among regions was mainly due to a decrease in product sales in the Far East and Rest of the World as a result of the divestiture of certain medical simulation product lines. These decreases were primarily offset by an increase in gaming, medical, and automotive license and royalty revenue in Europe. In addition, there was an offsetting increase in revenues from the Far East that was primarily due to increased royalty and license revenue from licensees of mobile devices.

Royalty and license revenue — The increase in royalty and license revenue was due to increases in royalty and license revenue generated primarily from mobility, gaming, and medical licensees.

Royalty and license revenue increased by 18% for mobility customers primarily due to increases in units shipped.

Royalty and license revenue increased by 16% for gaming customers mainly due to increases in royalties from new and existing customers due to increased units shipped by licensees, partially offset by decreases in true ups and other one-time payments. We experience seasonally higher revenue from our gaming customers due to the reporting of holiday sales in the first calendar quarter.

Product sales — The decrease in product sales was due primarily to a $3.1 million decrease in medical product sales arising mainly from the divesture of certain medical simulation product lines in the three months ended March 31, 2010. Revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2010 for the divested product lines was approximately $3 million.

Development contracts and other revenue — Development contracts and other revenue increased mainly due to an increase in contracted engineering services mainly from medical customers, partially offset by a decrease in other one time contracted engineering services.

In the six months ended June 30 2011, revenue generated in North America, Europe, Far East, and Rest of the World represented 43%, 16%, 41%, and 0% of total revenue, respectively, compared to 36%, 18%, 43%, and 3% of total revenue, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2010. The shift in revenues among regions was mainly due to a decrease in product sales in Europe, the Far East, and Rest of the World as a result of the divestiture of certain medical simulation product lines and a decrease in mobile device royalty and license revenue in Europe due to the timing of revenue recognized. These decreases were primarily offset by an increase in royalty and license revenue in the Far East and North America. The increase in royalty and license revenue in the Far East was primarily due to increased royalty and license revenue from licensees of mobile devices. The increase in royalty and license revenue in North America was primarily due to increased royalty and license revenue from gaming licensees and medical licensees.

Cost of Revenues — Our cost of revenues (exclusive of amortization and impairment or abandonment of intangibles) consists primarily of contract manufacturing and other overhead costs for product sales, and labor related costs for development contracts and other. The divestiture of the Endoscopy, Endovascular, and Laparoscopy medical simulation product lines was a major contributor to the overall reduction of cost of revenues for the second quarter ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the second quarter ended June 30, 2010. Specifically, the decrease in cost of revenues for 2011 as compared to 2010 was primarily due to decreased direct material costs and production costs of $468,000 and decreased physical inventory adjustment expense of $44,000 that did not recur in 2011. The decrease in direct material, production costs, and freight expense of approximately 72% was mainly due to a similar decrease in product sales. With the divestiture of certain medical simulation product lines, cost of revenues for medical products are expected to remain at reduced levels in the future.

The divestiture of certain medical simulation product lines was a major contributor to the overall reduction of cost of revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2010. Specifically, the decrease in cost of revenues for 2011 as compared to 2010 was primarily

due to decreased direct material costs and production costs of $1.2 million and decreased freight costs of $171,000. The decrease in direct material, production costs, and freight expense of approximately 70% was mainly due to a similar decrease in product sales.

Sales and Marketing — Our sales and marketing expenses are comprised primarily of employee compensation and benefits, advertising, public relations, trade shows, market development funds, travel, and an allocation of facilities costs. The decrease in sales and marketing expense for the second quarter ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the second quarter ended June 30, 2010 was primarily due to decreased compensation, benefits, and overhead of $199,000, partially offset by increased marketing, advertising, and public relations costs of $200,000. We expect that sales and marketing expenses will continue to be significant as we continue to invest in sales and marketing to further our focus on building greater market acceptance for our touch technologies.

The decrease in sales and marketing expense for the six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2010 was primarily due to the divestiture of the medical simulation product lines, resulting in reduced ongoing expenses. Specifically, the decrease in overall sales and marketing

expenses was mainly due to decreased compensation, benefits, and overhead of $644,000 primarily due to decreased sales and marketing headcount, decreased employee recruitment expense of $138,000, and decreased travel expense of $118,000 also due to decreased sales and marketing headcount, partially offset by increased marketing, advertising, and public relations costs of $322,000 and increased consulting of $41,000.

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. The increase in research and development expenses for the second quarter ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the second quarter ended June 30, 2010 was primarily due to increased compensation, benefits, and overhead of $263,000 mainly due to increased headcount. We believe that continued significant investment in research and development efforts are critical to our future success, and we expect to make increased investments in areas of research and technology development to support future growth.

The decrease in research and development expense for the six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2010 was primarily due to the divestiture of the medical simulation product lines. Specifically, the decrease in overall research and development expenses was primarily due to decreased compensation, benefits, and overhead of $66,000 mainly due to decreased headcount, a decreased loss on disposition of fixed assets of $22,000, and decreased travel expense of $14,000 mainly due to decreased headcount.

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. The decrease in general and administrative expenses for the second quarter ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the second quarter ended June 30, 2010 was primarily due to decreased legal, professional, and license fee expenses of $489,000 partially offset by increased compensation, benefits, and overhead of $448,000. The decreased legal and professional expenses were partially due to the decreased accounting, audit, legal, and consulting costs resulting from our internal investigation which was concluded in 2010. In addition, we had reduced patent expenses along with reduced litigation expenses as certain lawsuits were settled during 2010 which also contributed to the overall reduction in legal and professional expenses. The increased compensation, benefits, and overhead was mainly due to increased stock compensation expense primarily due to the timing of expense of stock options granted and additional general and administrative compensation expense. We expect that the dollar amount of general and administrative expenses will continue to be a significant component of our operating expenses. We will continue to incur costs related to litigation as we continue to assert our intellectual property and contractual rights and defend any lawsuits brought against us.

The decrease in general and administrative expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2010 was primarily due to decreased legal, professional, and license fee expenses of $3.2 million, partially offset by increased compensation, benefits, and overhead of $686,000. The decreased legal and professional expenses were primarily due to decreased accounting, audit, legal and consulting costs resulting from our internal investigation which was concluded in 2010. A decrease in litigation expenses as certain lawsuits have been settled during 2010 also contributed to the overall reduction in legal and professional expenses. The increased compensation, benefits, and overhead was primarily due to increased stock compensation expense mainly due to the timing of the expense of stock options granted.

Amortization and impairment or abandonment of Intangibles — Our amortization and impairment or abandonment of intangibles is comprised primarily of patent amortization and other intangible amortization along with impairment and write off of abandoned and expired patents. Amortization and impairment or abandonment of intangibles increased for the second quarter and six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the second quarter and six months ended June 30, 2010 mainly due to the write off of abandoned and expired patents.

Interest and Other Income — Interest and other income consist primarily of interest income from cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments, interest on notes receivable, gains on sales of short-term investments, and other income. Interest and other income decreased for the second quarter and six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the second quarter and six months ended June 30, 2010 primarily as a result of decreased interest income due to reduced interest rates on cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments.

Provision for Income Taxes — The income tax provision decreased for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 compared to the quarter ended June 30, 2010 primarily due to the change from a current period profit to a current period loss from continuing operations in the first and second quarters of 2011, respectively which caused a reduction to the provision for income taxes. The income tax provision for the six months ended June 30, 2011 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2010 increased primarily due to increased foreign withholding tax expense as a result of increased revenue in Asia.

Discontinued Operations — Gain on sales of discontinued operations net of taxes is primarily comprised of additional payments received from the sale of our 3D family of products. The decrease in the gain on sales of discontinued operations net of taxes for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 compared to the quarter ended June 30 2010 is primarily due to an increase in the tax provision allocated to discontinued operations. Gain on sales of discontinued operations net of taxes remained unchanged for the six months ended June 30, 2011 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2010 primarily due to an increase in payments from the sales of discontinued operations offset by an increase in the tax provision allocated to discontinued operations.

Our cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments consist primarily of money market funds and highly liquid commercial paper and U.S. Treasury securities. All of our short-term investments are classified as available-for-sale. The securities are stated at market value, with unrealized gains and losses reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income, within stockholders’ equity.

On June 30, 2011, our cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments totaled $64.9 million, an increase of 3.7 million from $61.2 million on December 31, 2010.

Net cash provided by operating activities during the six months ended June 30, 2011 was $3.1 million, an increase of $3.0 million from the $150,000 provided during the six months ended June 30, 2010, reflecting an increase of $2.9 million in net income adjusted for non-cash items including $1.8 million of non-cash stock-based compensation, $692,000 in amortization and impairment or abandonment of intangibles, and $485,000 in depreciation and amortization of property and equipment. In addition, cash improved by $188,000 from changes in other operating assets and liabilities including a tax refund of $3.2 million and an increase of $250,000 from a change in accounts payable due to the timing of payments to vendors. These increases were offset by a decrease of $1.6 million due to a change in accrued compensation and other current liabilities, a decrease of $1.1 million due to a change in deferred revenue and customer advances mainly due to recognition of deferred revenue, and $464,000 due to a change in accounts receivable from additional billings.

Net cash used in investing activities during the six months ended June 30, 2011 was $1.4 million, compared to the $5.1 million used in investing activities during the six months ended June 30, 2010, a decreased use of cash of $3.7 million. Net cash used in investing activities during the current period

consisted of purchases of short-term investments of $29.9 million and a $1.5 million increase in intangibles primarily due to capitalization of external patent filings and application costs offset by maturities of short-term investments of $30.0 million.

Net cash provided by financing activities during the six months ended June 30, 2011 was $1.9 million compared to the $60,000 provided during the six months ended June 30, 2010. Cash provided by financing activities during the six months ended June 30, 2011 was due to the exercise of stock options and the issuance of common stock under the employee stock purchase plan.

We believe that our cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments will be sufficient to meet our working capital needs for at least the next twelve months. We expect that there will likely be fewer needs of our working capital in 2011 compared to 2010 due to the divestiture of the medical simulation product lines. Our Board has approved a proposal to repurchase some of our shares of common stock under the previously authorized Stock Repurchase Program which currently has $31.6 million remaining. We will continue to protect and defend our extensive intellectual property portfolio, which could result in increased use of cash. We anticipate that capital expenditures for property and equipment for the full year ended December 31, 2011 will be less than $500,000. We anticipate that capitalization of external patent filing and application costs for the year ended December 31, 2011 will be approximately $3 million. Cash flows from our discontinued operations have been included in our consolidated statement of cash flows with continuing operations within each cash flow category. The absence of cash flows from discontinued operations is not expected to affect our future liquidity or capital resources. 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. Any of these events could result in substantial dilution to our stockholders. There is no assurance that such additional capital will be available on terms acceptable to us, if at all.

The following table reflects a summary of our contractual cash obligations and other commercial commitments as of December 31, 2010 (in thousands):

As of June 30, 2011, we had a liability for unrecognized tax benefits totaling $670,000 including interest of $42,000, of which approximately $241,000 could be payable in cash. Due to the uncertainties related to these tax matters, we are unable to make a reasonably reliable estimate of when cash settlement with a taxing authority will occur. Settlement of such amounts could require the utilization of working capital. Non-cancellable purchase obligations were approximately $400,000 at June 30, 2011.

See Note 1 to the condensed consolidated financial statements for information regarding the effect of new accounting pronouncements on our financial statements.

We are exposed to financial market risks, including changes in interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates. Changes in these factors may cause fluctuations in our earnings and cash flows. We evaluate and manage the exposure to these market risks as follows:

Cash Equivalents and Short-term Investments — We have cash equivalents and short-term investments of $62.4 million as of June 30, 2011. These securities are subject to interest rate fluctuations. An increase in interest rates could adversely affect the market value of our cash equivalents and short-term investments. A hypothetical 100 basis point increase in interest rates would result in a decrease of approximately $328,000 in the fair value of our cash equivalents and short-term investments as of June 30, 2011.

We limit our exposure to interest rate and credit risk by establishing and monitoring clear policies and guidelines for our cash equivalents and short-term investment portfolios. The primary objective of our policies is to preserve principal while at the same time maximizing yields, without significantly increasing risk. Our policy’s guidelines also limit exposure to loss by limiting the sums we can invest in any individual security and restricting investments to securities that meet certain defined credit ratings. We do not use derivative financial instruments in our investment portfolio to manage interest rate risk.

Foreign Currency Exchange Rates — A substantial majority of our revenue, expense, and capital purchasing activities are transacted in U.S. dollars. However, we do incur certain operating costs for our foreign operations in other currencies but these operations are limited in scope and thus we are not materially exposed to foreign currency fluctuations. Additionally we have some reliance on international and export sales that are subject to the risks of fluctuations in currency exchange rates. Because a substantial majority of our international and export revenues, as well as expenses, are typically denominated in U.S. dollars, a strengthening of the U.S. dollar could cause our products to become relatively more expensive to customers in a particular country, leading to a reduction in sales or profitability in that country. We have no foreign exchange contracts, option contracts, or other foreign currency hedging arrangements and we do not expect to have such arrangements in the foreseeable future.

Based on their evaluation as of June 30, 2011, our management with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, have concluded that 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) were effective to ensure that the information required to be disclosed by us in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q was (i) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and regulations and (ii) accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

There were no changes to internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended June 30, 2011 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect our internal controls 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 over financial reporting 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.

We are involved in legal proceedings relating to a class action lawsuit filed on November 9, 2001 in the U. S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 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.

In September and October 2009, various putative shareholder class action and derivative complaints were filed in federal and state court against us and certain current and former Immersion directors and officers.

On September 2, 2009, a securities class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against us and certain of our current and former directors and officers. Over the following five weeks, four additional class action complaints were filed. (One of these four actions was later voluntarily dismissed.) The securities class action complaints name us and certain current and former Immersion directors and officers as defendants and allege violations of federal securities laws based on our issuance of allegedly misleading financial statements. The various complaints assert claims covering the period from May 2007 through July 2009 and seek compensatory damages allegedly sustained by the purported class members.

On December 21, 2009, these class actions were consolidated by the court as In Re Immersion Corporation Securities Litigation. On the same day, the court appointed a lead plaintiff and lead plaintiff’s counsel. Following our restatement of financial statements, lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint on April 9, 2010. Defendants moved to dismiss the action on June 15, 2010 and that motion was granted on March 11, 2011. Lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint on April 29, 2011. Defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint on July 1, 2011.

On September 15, 2009, a putative shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, purportedly on behalf of us and naming certain of our current and former directors and officers as individual defendants. Thereafter, two additional putative derivative complaints were filed in the same court.

The derivative complaints arise from the same or similar alleged facts as the federal securities actions and seek to bring state law causes of action on behalf of us against the individual defendants for breaches of fiduciary duty, gross negligence, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, breach of contract, waste of corporate assets, unjust enrichment, as well as for violations of federal securities laws. The federal derivative complaints seek compensatory damages, corporate governance changes, unspecified equitable and injunctive relief, the imposition of a constructive trust, and restitution. On November 17, 2009, the court consolidated these actions as In re Immersion Corporation Derivative Litigation and appointed lead counsel. The court has issued an order staying this action.

On October 7, 2009, a putative shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara, purportedly on behalf of us, seeking compensatory damages, equitable and injunctive relief, and restitution. The complaint names certain current and former directors and officers of us as individual defendants. This complaint arises from the same or similar alleged facts as the federal securities actions and seeks to bring causes of action on behalf of us against the individual defendants for breaches of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment. On April 4, 2011, plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the action, with prejudice, and an order of dismissal was entered that same day.

On May 5, 2010, an action was filed in Delaware Chancery Court by a shareholder seeking to enforce a demand to inspect certain of our records pursuant to Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, as a possible prelude to the shareholder bringing a derivative action. We filed our answer on June 14, 2010, questioning whether a proper purpose for the records inspection had been stated and raising other defenses concerning the scope of the demand, among other deficiencies. Following a one-day trial on December 2, 2010, the Court significantly narrowed the scope of the demand and we have responded accordingly.

We cannot predict the ultimate outcome of the above-mentioned federal and state actions, and we are unable to estimate any potential liability we may incur.

As previously discussed, our actual results could differ materially from our forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to those discussed below. These and many other factors described in this report could adversely affect our operations, performance and financial condition.

The uncertain economic environment could reduce our revenues and could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The current economic conditions could materially hurt our business in a number of ways including, longer sales and renewal cycles, delays in adoption of our products or technologies, increased risk of competition, higher overhead costs as a percentage of revenue, delays in signing or failing to sign customer agreements, or signing customer agreements with reduced royalty rates. In addition, our customers,

potential customers, and business partners are facing similar challenges, which could materially and adversely affect the level of business they conduct with us or in the level of sales of products that include our technology. Adverse economic conditions can lead to a reduction in corporate, university, or government budgets for research and development in sectors including the automotive, aerospace, mobility, and medical sectors, which use our products. Sales of our products or technology may be adversely affected by cuts in these research and development budgets.

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 partially 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:

A limited number of customers account for a significant portion of our revenue, and the loss of major customers could harm our operating results.

Three customers accounted for approximately 44% and 32% of our total revenues for the second quarter ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Three customers accounted for approximately 44% and 35% of our total revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively. We cannot be certain that customers that have accounted for significant revenue in past periods, individually or as a group, will continue to generate revenue in any future period. If we lose a major customer or group of customers, our revenue could decline if we are unable to replace revenue from other sources.

We had an accumulated deficit of $104 million as of June 30, 2011, have a history of losses, and may not achieve or maintain profitability in the future.

Since 1997, we have incurred losses in all but six quarters. As of June 30, 2011, we had an accumulated deficit of $104 million. We need to generate significant ongoing revenue to achieve and maintain consistent profitability. We anticipate that we will continue to incur expenses as we:

If our revenues grow more slowly than we anticipate or if our operating expenses exceed our expectations, we may not achieve or maintain profitability.

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 second quarter ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, 88% and 74%, respectively, of our total revenues were royalty and license revenues. For the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, 87% and 70%, respectively, of our total revenues were royalty and license revenues. 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, nor can we control consolidation within an industry which could either reduce the number of licensing products available or reduce royalty rates for the combined 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, achieve commercial acceptance, or otherwise 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. If our licensees’ products fail to achieve commercial success or if products are recalled because of quality control problems, our revenues will not grow and could decline.

Peak demand may fluctuate from quarter to quarter for products that incorporate our technologies, especially in the video console gaming and computer gaming peripherals market. If our licensees do not ship products incorporating our touch-enabling technologies in a timely fashion or fail to achieve strong sales, we may not receive related royalty and license revenue.

We have limited engineering, customer service, technical support, quality assurance and operations resources to design and fulfill favorable product delivery schedules and sufficient levels of quality in

support of our different product areas. Products and services may not be delivered in a timely way, with sufficient levels of quality, or at all, which may reduce our revenue.

Engineering, customer service, technical support, quality assurance, and operations resources are deployed against a variety of different projects and programs to provide sufficient levels of quality necessary for channels and customers. Success in various markets may depend on timely deliveries and overall levels of sustained quality and customer service. Failure to provide favorable product and program deliverables and quality and customer service levels, or provide them at all, may disrupt channels and customers, harm our brand, and reduce our revenues.

Catastrophic events, such as natural disasters (including the recent earthquake and tsunami in Japan), war, and acts of terrorism could disrupt the business of our customers, which could harm our business and results of operations.

The production processes and operations of our customers are susceptible to the occurrence of catastrophic events, such as natural disasters (including the recent earthquake and tsunami in Japan), war, and acts of terrorism, all of which are outside of our control. Any such events could cause a serious business disruption to our customers’ ability to manufacture, distribute and sell products incorporating our touch-enabling technologies upon which we generate royalty revenue, which disruption may adversely affect our business and results of operation.

We may not be able to continue to derive significant revenues from makers of peripherals for popular video gaming platforms.

A significant portion of our 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. If third-party peripheral makers cannot 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 or somehow restrict or impede the ability of third parties to make touch-enabling peripherals, it may very well lead our gaming licensees to stop making products with touch-enabling capabilities, thereby significantly reducing our gaming royalty revenues.

Under the terms of our agreement with Sony, Sony receives a royalty-free license to our worldwide portfolio of patents. This license permits Sony to make, use, and sell hardware, software, and services covered by our patents in its PS1, PS2, and PS3 systems for a fixed license payment. The PS3 console system was launched in late 2006 in the United States and Japan without force feedback capability. Sony has since released new PS3 controllers with vibration feedback. We do not know to what extent Sony will allow third-party peripheral makers to make licensed PS3 gaming products with vibration feedback to interface with the PS3 console. To the extent Sony selectively limits their licensing to leading third-party controller makers to make PS3 controllers with vibration feedback, our licensing revenue from third-party PS3 peripherals will continue to be severely limited. Our third party licensees continue to sell licensed PS2 peripherals. However, U.S. sales of PS2 peripherals continue to decline as more consumers switch to the PS3 console system and other next-generation console systems like the Nintendo Wii and Microsoft Xbox 360.

Both the Microsoft Xbox 360 and Nintendo Wii include touch-enabling capabilities. For the Microsoft Xbox 360 video console system launched in November 2005, Microsoft has, to date, not yet broadly licensed third parties to produce peripherals for its Xbox 360 game console. To the extent Microsoft does not fully license third parties, Microsoft’s share of all aftermarket Xbox 360 game controller sales will likely remain high or increase, which we expect will limit our gaming royalty revenue.

Our business depends in part on access to third-party platforms or technologies, and if the access is withdrawn, denied, or is not available on terms acceptable to us, or if the platforms or technologies change without notice to us, our business and operating results could be adversely affected.

Our product portfolio includes current and future products designed for use with third-party platforms or software. Our business in these categories relies on our access to the platforms of third parties, which can be withdrawn, denied or not be available on terms acceptable to us.

Our access to third-party platforms may require paying a royalty, which lowers our product margins, or may otherwise be on terms that are not acceptable to us. In addition, the third-party platforms or technologies used to interact with our product portfolio can be delayed in production or can change without prior notice to us, which can result in our having lower margins.

If we are unable to access third-party platforms or technologies, or if our access is withdrawn, denied, or is not available on terms acceptable to us, or if the platforms or technologies are delayed or change without notice to us, our business and operating results could be adversely affected.

Because we have a fixed payment license with Microsoft, our royalty revenue from licensing in the gaming market and other consumer markets has previously declined and may further do so 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 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, PDAs, and portable music players. Microsoft has significantly greater financial, sales, and marketing resources, as well as greater name recognition and a larger customer base than some of 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.

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 our 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 company, 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 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 customers 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:

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:

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 caused us to expend, and may cause us to expend in future periods, significant financial resources as well as divert management’s time and efforts. From time to time, we initiate claims against third parties that we believe infringe our intellectual property 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 difficult to pursue in certain venues, and distracting to management and potential customers 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 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 may not be able to develop non-infringing technologies or license the infringed or similar technologies on a timely and cost-effective basis, our expenses could increase and our revenues could decrease.

While we attempt to avoid infringing known proprietary rights of third parties, 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 may receive similar letters from these or other companies from time to time. 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 licensing agreements. 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 for indemnification.

The legal principles applicable to patents and patent licenses continue to change and evolve. Legislation and judicial decisions that make it easier for patent licensees to challenge the validity, enforceability, or infringement of patents, or make it more difficult for patent licensors to obtain a permanent injunction, obtain enhanced damages for willful infringement, or to obtain or enforce patents, may adversely affect our business and the value of our patent portfolio. Furthermore, our prospects for future revenue growth through our royalty and licensing based businesses could be diminished.

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 claims that we have granted rights to one licensee which are inconsistent with the rights that we have granted to another licensee.

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 any agreement, we may have granted rights that will preclude or restrict our exploitation of new opportunities that arise after the execution of the agreement.

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 or timely. 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:

Our ability to achieve revenue growth also depends on our continuing ability to improve and reduce the cost of our technologies, to improve their ease of integration in both hardware and software, 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.

The higher cost of products incorporating our touch-enabling technologies may inhibit or prevent their widespread adoption.

Mobile devices, touchscreens, personal computer and console gaming peripherals, 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., BMW, LG Electronics, Logitech, Microsoft, Nokia, Samsung, and Sony have licensed our technologies, the greater expense of development and production of products containing our touch-enabling technologies, together with the higher price to the end customer, may be a significant barrier to their widespread adoption and sale. Accordingly, we may not receive a material amount of royalties from more expensive products.

Our customers may have difficulties obtaining the components necessary to manufacture haptic-based products, which could harm our business and results of operations.

In order to manufacture haptic-based products, our customers require components such as actuators and amplifiers. The inability of suppliers to deliver adequate supplies of these components could disrupt our customers’ production processes which would harm our business and results of operations. In addition, our newer products require new types of components that we expect will be developed and sold by our ecosystem partners. Failure of our ecosystem partners to bring these products to market in a timely fashion and at attractive price points may affect our ability to secure customers for these newer products which could harm our business and results of operations.

If we are unable to develop open source compliant products, our ability to license our technologies and generate revenues would be impaired.

We have seen, and believe that we will continue to see, an increase in customers requesting that we develop products that will operate in an “open source” environment. Developing open source compliant products, without imperiling the intellectual property rights upon which our licensing business depends, may prove difficult under certain circumstances, thereby placing us at a competitive disadvantage for new product designs. As a result, our revenues may not grow and could decline.

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 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.

The markets in which we participate or may target in the future are intensely competitive, and if we do not compete effectively, our operating results could be harmed.

Our target markets are rapidly evolving and highly competitive. Many of our competitors and potential competitors are larger and have greater name recognition, much longer operating histories, larger marketing budgets, and significantly greater resources than we do, and with the introduction of new technologies and market entrants, we expect competition to intensify in the future. 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. If we fail to compete effectively, our business will be harmed. Some of our principal competitors offer their products or services at a lower price, which has resulted in pricing pressures. If we are unable to achieve our target pricing levels, our operating results would be negatively impacted. In addition, pricing pressures and increased competition generally could result in reduced sales, reduced margins, losses, or the failure of our application suite to achieve or maintain more widespread market acceptance, any of which could harm our business.

We face competition from internal design teams of existing and potential OEM customers. In addition, as a result of their licenses to our patent portfolios, we could face competition from Microsoft and Sony. Our licensees or other third parties may also seek to develop products using our intellectual property or develop alternative designs that attempt to circumvent our intellectual property or that 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.

Additionally, if haptic technology gains market acceptance, more research by universities and/or corporations or other parties may be performed potentially leading to strong intellectual property positions by third parties in certain areas of haptics or the launch of haptics products before we commercialize our own technology.

Many of our current and potential competitors, including Microsoft, are able to devote greater resources to the development, promotion, and sale of their products and services. In addition, many of our competitors have established marketing relationships or access to larger customer bases, distributors, and other business partners. As a result, our competitors might be able to respond more quickly and effectively than we can to new or changing opportunities, technologies, standards or customer requirements. Further, some potential customers, particularly large enterprises, may elect to develop their own internal solutions. For all of these reasons, we may not be able to compete successfully against our current and future competitors.

Winning business is subject to a competitive selection process that can be lengthy and requires us to incur significant expense, and we may not be selected.

Our primary focus is on winning competitive bid selection processes, known as “design wins,” so that haptics will be included in our customers’ equipment. These selection processes can be lengthy and can require us to incur significant design and development expenditures. We may not win the competitive selection process and may never generate any revenue despite incurring significant design and development expenditures. Because we typically focus on only a few customers in a product area, the loss of a design win can sometimes result in our failure to get haptics added to new generation products. This can result in lost sales and could hurt our position in future competitive selection processes because we may not be perceived as being a technology leader.

After winning a product design for one of our customers, we may still experience delays in generating revenue from our products as a result of the lengthy development and design cycle. In addition, a delay or cancellation of a customer’s plans could significantly adversely affect our financial results, as we may have incurred significant expense and generated no revenue. Finally, if our customers fail to successfully market and sell their equipment it could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations as the demand for our products falls.

Automobiles and medical devices incorporating our touch-enabling technologies are subject to lengthy product development periods, making it difficult to predict when and whether we will receive automotive and medical devices royalties.

The product development process for automobiles and medical devices is very lengthy, sometimes longer than four years. We may not earn royalty revenue on our automotive/medical devices technologies unless and until automobiles/medical devices featuring our technologies are shipped to customers, which may not occur until several years after we enter into an agreement with manufacturer or a supplier to a manufacturer. Throughout the product development process, we face the risk that a manufacturer or supplier may delay the incorporation of, or choose not to incorporate, our technologies into its automobiles/medical devices, making it difficult for us to predict the 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.

Our international expansion efforts subject us to additional risks and costs.

We currently have sales personnel in Finland, Japan, Korea, Switzerland, Taiwan and Canada and we intend to expand our international activities. International operations are subject to a number of difficulties and special costs, including:

Our international operations could also increase our exposure to international laws and regulations. If we cannot comply with foreign laws and regulations, which are often complex and subject to variation and unexpected changes, we could incur unexpected costs and potential litigation. For example, the governments of foreign countries might attempt to regulate our products or levy sales or other taxes relating to our activities. In addition, foreign countries may impose tariffs, duties, price controls, or other restrictions on foreign currencies or trade barriers, any of which could make it more difficult for us to conduct our business.

We might be unable to retain or recruit necessary personnel, which could slow the development and deployment of our technologies.

Our technologies are complex and we rely upon the continued service of our existing personnel to support licensees, enhance existing technologies, and develop new technologies. Accordingly, 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. Furthermore, we believe that there are a limited number of engineering and technical personnel that are experienced in haptics. 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. Additionally some of our executive officers and key employees hold stock options with exercise prices above the current market price of our common stock or that are largely vested. Each of these factors may impair our ability to retain the services of our executive officers and key employees.

Our current litigation 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.

We are currently a party to various legal proceedings. Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, we cannot accurately predict how these cases will ultimately be resolved. We anticipate that currently pending litigation will continue to be costly and that future litigation or investigations will result in additional legal expenses, and there can be no assurance that we will be successful or able to recover the costs we incur in connection with litigation or investigations. We expense litigation and investigatory costs as incurred, and only accrue for costs that have been incurred but not paid to the vendor as of the financial statement date. Litigation and investigations have diverted, and could 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 or concluded, litigation and investigations could adversely affect our business. Further, any unfavorable outcome could adversely affect our business. For additional background on this and our other litigation, please see Note 15 to the condensed consolidated financial statements and Item 1 “Legal Proceedings” of Part II.

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, property 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. In addition, even though we have transitioned from the medical products business,

we could face product liability claims for products that we have sold or that our successors may sell in the future. Defending any claims against us, regardless of merit, would be time-consuming, expensive to defend, and distracting to management, and could result in damages and injure our reputation, the reputation of our technology and services, 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 addition, if our business liability insurance coverage proves inadequate or future coverage is unavailable on acceptable terms or at all, our business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected.

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. While we have not experienced any product liability claims to date, we could face such claims in the future, which could harm our business and reputation. 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.

Our products are complex and may contain undetected errors, which could harm our reputation and future product sales.

Any failure to provide high quality and reliable products, whether caused by our own failure or failures of our suppliers or OEM customers, could damage our reputation and reduce demand for our products. Our products have in the past contained, and may in the future contain, undetected errors or defects. Some errors in our products may only be discovered after a product has been shipped to customers. Any errors or defects discovered in our products after commercial release could result in loss of revenue, loss of customers, and increased service and warranty costs, any of which could adversely affect our business.

The nature of some of our products may also subject us to export control regulation by the U.S. Department of State and the Department of Commerce. Violations of these regulations can result in monetary penalties and denial of export privileges.

Our sales to customers or sales by our customers to their end customers in some areas outside the United States could be subject to government export regulations or restrictions that prohibit us or our licensees from selling to customers in some countries or that require us to obtain licenses or approvals to export such products internationally. Delays or denial of the grant of any required license or approval, or changes to the regulations, could make it difficult or impossible to make sales to foreign customers in some countries and could adversely affect our revenue. In addition, we could be subject to fines and penalties for violation of these export regulations if we were found in violation. Such violation could result in penalties, including prohibiting us from exporting our products to one or more countries, and could materially and adversely affect our business.

Compliance with directives that restrict the use of certain materials may increase our costs and limit our revenue opportunities.

Our products and packaging must meet all safety, electrical, labeling, marking, or other requirements of the countries into which we ship products or our resellers sell our products. We have to assess each product and determine whether it complies with the requirements of local regulations or whether they are exempt from meeting the requirements of the regulations. If we determine that a product is not exempt and does not comply with adopted regulations, we will have to make changes to the product or its documentation if we want to sell that product into the region once the regulations become effective. Making such changes may be costly to perform and may have a negative impact on our results of operations. In addition, there can be no assurance that the national enforcement bodies of the regions adopting such regulations will agree with our assessment that certain of our products and documentation comply with or are exempt from the regulations. If products are determined not to be compliant or exempt,

we will not be able to ship them in the region that adopts such regulations until such time that they are compliant, and this may have a negative impact on our revenue and results of operations.

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. A substantial portion of our research and development activities, operations, 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. An earthquake at or near our facilities could disrupt our operations 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.

We use contract manufacturers and may have difficulties obtaining the products that we need. This could harm our ability to meet our customers’ demand for our products.

We rely on a limited number of contract manufacturers and suppliers for our products. The inability of such contract manufacturers or suppliers to deliver adequate inventory could make it difficult to ship products ordered by our customers. We also have limited influence on contract manufacturers operations. There is risk that the manufacture, quality control, operations, controls, and distribution might not be up to our standards. The occurrence of any of these could harm our business and results of operations.

If we fail to establish and maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis could be impaired, which would adversely affect our consolidated operating results, our ability to operate our business and our stock price.

We have in the past had material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. Ensuring that we have adequate internal financial and accounting controls and procedures in place to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis is a costly and time-consuming effort that needs to be re-evaluated frequently. Any failure on our part to remedy identified material weaknesses, or any additional delays or errors in our financial reporting, could cause our financial reporting to be unreliable and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, or financial condition and could have a substantial adverse impact on the trading price of our common stock.

We do not expect that our internal control over financial reporting will prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within our company will have been detected.

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.

Changes in financial accounting standards or practices may cause adverse, unexpected financial reporting fluctuations and affect our reported results of operations.

A change in accounting standards or practices can have a significant effect on our reported results and may even affect our reporting of transactions completed before the change is effective. New accounting pronouncements and varying interpretations of accounting pronouncements have occurred and may occur in the future. Changes to existing rules or the questioning of current practices may adversely affect our reported financial results or the way we conduct our business.

Our business is subject to changing regulations regarding corporate governance and other compliance areas that will increase both our costs and the risk of noncompliance.

As a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the recently enacted Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd-Frank Act, and the rules and regulations of The NASDAQ Stock Market. The requirements of these rules and regulations have increased and we expect will continue to increase our legal, accounting and financial compliance costs, will make some activities more difficult, time-consuming and costly and may also place undue strain on our personnel, systems and resources.

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; changes by game console manufacturers to not include touch-enabling capabilities in their products; 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; stock repurchase activity; 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.

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 board of directors or management, including the following:

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.

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. The pursuit of potential acquisitions may divert the attention of management and cause us to incur various expenses in identifying, investigating, and pursuing suitable acquisitions, whether or not they are consummated.

If we consummate acquisitions through the issuance of our securities, our stockholders could suffer significant dilution. Acquisitions could also create risks for us, including:

Any acquisitions, even if successfully completed, might not generate significant additional revenue or provide any benefit to our business.

As our business grows, such growth may place a significant strain on our management and operations and, as a result, our business may suffer.

We plan to continue expanding our business, and any significant growth could place a significant strain on our management systems, infrastructure and other resources. We are in the process of considering implementing additional automated system functionality. If we go forward with these system enhancements, we may encounter problems with the implementation of these systems or we may have difficulties preparing or tracking internal information which could adversely affect our financial results. We will need to continue to invest the necessary capital to upgrade and improve our operational, financial and management reporting systems. If our management fails to manage our growth effectively, we could experience increased costs, declines in product quality, or customer satisfaction, which could harm our business.

The exhibits listed in the accompanying “Exhibit Index” are filed or incorporated by reference as part of this Form 10-Q.

Pursuant to the requirements 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.


Delaware		94-3180138
(State or other jurisdiction of		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
incorporation or organization)


Large accelerated filer ¨		Accelerated filer x

Non-accelerated filer ¨	(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	Smaller Reporting Company ¨


			Page

PART I				3
FINANCIAL INFORMATION				3
	Item 1.	Financial Statements		3

		Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010		3

		Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Three Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2011 and 2010		4

		Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Six Months Ended June 30, 2011 and 2010		5

		Unaudited Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements		6

	Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		25

	Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk		39

	Item 4.	Controls and Procedures		39

PART II				40
OTHER INFORMATION				40

	Item 1.	Legal Proceedings		40

	Item 1A.	Risk Factors		41

	Item 6.	Exhibits		56

	SIGNATURES			57


	June 30,			December 31,
	2011			2010
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	15,899		$	12,243
Short-term investments		48,971			48,961
Accounts and other receivables (net of allowances for doubtful accounts as of:
June 30, 2011 — $29 and December 31, 2010 — $97)		1,299			815
Inventories		448			406
Deferred income taxes		342			342
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		617			3,821

Total current assets		67,576			66,588
Property and equipment, net		1,466			1,931
Intangibles and other assets, net		13,199			12,356

Total assets	$	82,241		$	80,875


LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	764		$	393
Accrued compensation		2,374			3,507
Other current liabilities		968			1,488
Deferred revenue and customer advances		5,057			4,429

Total current liabilities		9,163			9,817
Long-term deferred revenue		14,795			16,494
Deferred income tax liabilities		342			342
Other long-term liabilities		478			538

Total liabilities		24,778			27,191
Contingencies (Note 15)
Stockholders’ equity:
Common stock and additional paid-in capital — $0.001 par value; 100,000,000 shares authorized; shares issued: June 30, 2011 — 31,548,668 and December 31, 2010 — 31,016,812; shares outstanding: June 30, 2011 — 28,760,459 and December 31, 2010 — 28,228,603		180,194			176,515
Accumulated other comprehensive income		142			120
Accumulated deficit		(104,475	)		(104,553	)
Treasury stock at cost: June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 — 2,788,209 shares		(18,398	)		(18,398	)

Total stockholders’ equity		57,463			53,684

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	82,241		$	80,875


	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	June 30,						June 30,
	2011			2010			2011			2010
Revenues:
Royalty and license	$	5,882		$	6,304		$	14,235		$	12,707
Product sales		546			1,850			1,547			4,818
Development contracts and other		254			321			668			659

Total revenues		6,682			8,475			16,450			18,184

Costs and expenses:
Cost of revenues (exclusive of amortization, impairment, and abandonment of intangibles shown separately below)		247			761			721			2,130
Sales and marketing		1,909			1,911			3,759			4,264
Research and development		2,243			2,005			4,342			4,466
General and administrative		3,061			3,084			6,172			8,800
Amortization and impairment or abandonment of intangibles		335			204			692			439

Total costs and expenses		7,795			7,965			15,686			20,099

Operating income (loss)		(1,113	)		510			764			(1,915	)
Interest and other income		52			63			114			142


Income (loss) from continuing operations before provison for income taxes		(1,061	)		573			878			(1,773	)
Provision for income taxes		(267	)		(423	)		(861	)		(762	)

Income (loss) from continuing operations		(1,328	)		150			17			(2,535	)
Discontinued operations (Note 10) :
Gain on sales of discontinued operations net of provision for income taxes of $12, $0, $39 and $1		18			30			61			61

Net income (loss)	$	(1,310	)	$	180		$	78		$	(2,474	)


Basic net income (loss) per share
Continuing operations		(0.05	)		0.01			0.00			(0.09	)
Discontinued operations		0.00			0.00			0.00			0.00

Total	$	(0.05	)	$	0.01		$	0.00		$	(0.09	)


Shares used in calculating basic net income (loss) per share		28,610			28,101			28,431			28,093


Diluted net income (loss) per share
Continuing operations		(0.05	)		0.01			0.00			(0.09	)
Discontinued operations		0.00			0.00			0.00			0.00

Total	$	(0.05	)	$	0.01		$	0.00		$	(0.09	)


Shares used in calculating basic net income (loss) per share		28,610			28,519			29,241			28,093


IMMERSION CORPORATION CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (In thousands) (unaudited)
	Six Months Ended
	June 30,
	2011			2010
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income (loss)	$	78		$	(2,474	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment		485			583
Amortization and impairment or abandonment of intangibles		692			439
Stock-based compensation		1,765			1,533
Allowance (recovery) for doubtful accounts		(20	)		(82	)
Loss on disposal of equipment		3			79
Loss on divestiture		0			42
Gain on sales of discontinued operations		(61	)		(61	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts and other receivables		(464	)		1,101
Inventories		(42	)		595
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		3,204			348
Other assets		(54	)		0
Accounts payable		250			532
Accrued compensation and other current liabilities		(1,602	)		(1,230	)
Deferred revenue and customer advances		(1,071	)		(1,371	)
Other long-term liabilities		(33	)		116

Net cash provided by operating activities		3,130			150

Cash flows used in investing activities:
Purchases of available-for-sale investments		(29,927	)		(29,965	)
Proceeds from maturities of available-for-sale investments		30,000			25,000
Net proceeds from divestiture		0			964
Additions to intangibles		(1,522	)		(981	)
Proceeds from sale of property and equipment		0			160
Purchases of property and equipment		(39	)		(289	)
Proceeds from sales of discontinued operations		100			60

Net cash used in investing activities		(1,388	)		(5,051	)

Cash flows provided by financing activities:
Issuance of common stock under employee stock purchase plan		65			0
Exercise of stock options		1,849			60

Net cash provided by financing activities		1,914			60

Net increase in cash and cash equivalents		3,656			(4,841	)
Cash and cash equivalents:
Beginning of the period		12,243			19,828

End of the period	$	15,899		$	14,987

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid (received) for taxes	$	(3,320	)	$	6

Supplemental disclosure of non-cash investing and financing activities:
Amounts accrued for property and equipment, and intangibles	$	630		$	279

Shares issued under company stock plan	$	1,257		$	428

		0000000		0000000		0000000		0000000
	June 30, 2011 Fair value measurements using
	Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1)		Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2)		Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)		Total
	(In thousands)
Assets:
U.S. Treasury securities	$	48,971	$	0	$	0	$	48,971
Money market accounts		13,415		0		0		13,415

Total assets at fair value	$	62,386	$	0	$	0	$	62,386


	June 30, 2011
	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Holding Gains		Gross Unrealized Holding Losses		Fair Value
	(In thousands)
U.S. Treasury securities	$	48,938	$	33	$	0	$	48,971

Total	$	48,938	$	33	$	0	$	48,971


	December 31, 2010
	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Holding Gains		Gross Unrealized Holding Losses		Fair Value
	(In thousands)
U.S. Treasury securities	$	48,942	$	19	$	0	$	48,961

Total	$	48,942	$	19	$	0	$	48,961


	June 30, 2011		December 31, 2010
	(In thousands)

Trade accounts receivable	$	908	$	459
Receivables from vendors and other		391		356

Accounts and other receivables	$	1,299	$	815


	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011		2010		2011		2010
	(In thousands)				(In thousands)
Amortization of Intangibles - excluding impairments or abandonments	$	217	$	204	$	414	$	419


	Estimated Amortization Expense
	(In thousands)
Remainder of 2011	$	500
2012		1,100
2013		1,300
2014		1,400
2015		1,400
Thereafter		7,200

Total	$	12,900


	June 30, 2011
Common stock shares available for grant		4,979,263
Common stock options outstanding		3,819,922
Restricted stock awards outstanding		18,000
Restricted stock units outstanding		502,782


	Six Months Ended June 30, 2011
Shares purchased under ESPP		13,412
Average price of shares purchased under ESPP	$	4.87
Intrinsic value of shares purchased under ESPP	$	14,000


	Six Months Ended June 30, 2011			Year Ended December 31, 2010
Beginning outstanding balance		4,000,526			5,041,235
Granted		269,413			662,185
Exercised		(348,226	)		(130,135	)
Forfeited and cancelled		(101,791	)		(1,572,759	)

Ending outstanding balance		3,819,922			4,000,526


Aggregate intrinsic value of options exercised	$	887,000		$	308,000
Weighted average fair value of options granted		3.95			3.11


	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Exercise Price		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life (years)		Aggregate Intrinsic Value (In millions)
June 30, 2011
Options outstanding		3,819,922	$	6.31		6.44	$	10.3
Options vested and expected to vest using estimated forfeiture rates		3,681,156		6.32		6.28		9.9
Options exercisable		2,502,994		6.81		5.28		6.0

December 31, 2010
Options outstanding		4,000,526	$	6.26		6.39	$	5.5
Options vested and expected to vest using estimated forfeiture rates		3,798,092		6.32		6.25		5.1
Options exercisable		2,541,701		6.80		5.03		2.9


	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
Options	2011			2010			2011			2010
Expected life (in years)		5.2			5.2			5.2			5.2
Volatility		68	%		67	%		68	%		67	%
Interest rate		2.0	%		2.1	%		2.0	%		2.1	%
Dividend yield		0.0	%		0.0	%		0.0	%		0.0	%

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
Employee Stock Purchase Plan	2011			2010			2011			2010
Expected life (in years)		N/A			N/A			0.5			N/A
Volatility		N/A			N/A			50	%		N/A
Interest rate		N/A			N/A			0.2	%		N/A
Dividend yield		N/A			N/A			0.0	%		N/A


	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life (years)		Aggregate Intrinsic Value (In millions)
June 30, 2011
RSUs outstanding		502,782		1.42	$	4.3
RSUs vested and expected to vest using estimated forfeiture rates		395,280		1.37		3.4

December 31, 2010
RSUs outstanding		417,923		1.13	$	2.8
RSUs vested and expected to vest using estimated forfeiture rates		330,038		1.00		2.2


	Six Months Ended June 30, 2011			Year Ended December 31, 2010
Beginning outstanding balance		18,000			27,000
Awarded		30,000			22,500
Released		(21,000	)		(31,500	)
Forfeited		(9,000	)		0

Ending outstanding balance		18,000			18,000


Weighted average grant date fair value of restricted stock awarded	$	6.61		$	5.59
Total fair value of restricted stock awards released		159,000			147,000

		000000		000000		000000		000000
	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011		2010		2011		2010
	(In thousands)				(In thousands)
Statement of Operations Classifications
Cost of product sales	$	0	$	0	$	0	$	10
Sales and marketing		70		226		245		392
Research and development		233		202		437		397
General and administrative		678		510		1,083		734

Total	$	981	$	938	$	1,765	$	1,533

		0000			0000			0000			0000
	June 30,						Change			% Change
INTEREST AND OTHER INCOME	2011			2010
	(In thousands)
Three months ended:
Interest and other income	$	52		$	63		$	(11	)		(17	)%
% of total revenue		1	%		1	%		0	%

Six months ended:

Interest and other income	$	114		$	142		$	(28	)		(20	)%
% of total revenue		1	%		1	%		0	%

		00000			00000			00000			00000
	June 30,						Change			% Change
DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS	2011			2010
	(In thousands)
Three months ended:

Gain on sales from discontinued operations (net of provision for income taxes)	$	18		$	30		$	(12	)		(40	)%
% of total revenue		0	%		0	%

Six months ended:

Gain on sales from discontinued operations (net of provision for income taxes)	$	61		$	61		$	0			0	%
% of total revenue		0	%		0	%


Contractual Obligations	Total		Less Than 1 Year		1-3 Years		3-5 Years		More Than 5 Years

Operating Leases	$	2,573	$	748	$	1,322	$	503	$	0
Purchase Obligations		884		884		0		0		0

Total	$	3,457	$	1,632	$	1,322	$	503	$	0


IMMERSION CORPORATION

By		/s/ Shum Mukherjee
		Shum Mukherjee
		Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer


Exhibit Number		Description

10.1*		2011 Equity Incentive Plan.

10.2*		Form of Stock Option Award Agreement for Immersion Corporation 2011 Equity Incentive Plan.

10.3*		Form of Award Agreement (Restricted Stock Units) to the Immersion Corporation 2011 Equity Incentive Plan.

10.4*		Form of Restricted Stock Agreement for Immersion Corporation 2011 Equity Incentive Plan.

31.1		Certification of Victor Viegas, Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2		Certification of Shum Mukherjee, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.1		Certification of Victor Viegas, Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.2		Certification of Shum Mukherjee, Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

101.1		Part 1, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q formatted in XBRL.