Commitments And Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2011

Commitments And Contingencies

Commitments And Contingencies

NOTE 17 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Patent Litigation. On August 27, 2010, we filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Utah against Centrify Corporation and Likewise Software alleging that Centrify's DirectControl software and Likewise's Enterprise software infringe Quest's United States Patent No. 7,617,501 (the "'501 Patent"). Our complaint seeks money damages, costs, attorneys' fees, and the entry of permanent injunctions against each defendant. A trial date in the '501 Patent litigation has been set for April 9, 2012.

On August 30, 2010, Centrify filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against Quest alleging that our Authentication Services software infringes Centrify's United States Patent No. 7,591,005 (the "'005 Patent"). Centrify's complaint seeks an unspecified amount of money damages, costs, attorneys' fees, and a permanent injunction. On October 21, 2010, we filed a motion to dismiss Centrify's complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. On November 15, 2010, Centrify filed an amended complaint amending its allegations that our Authentication Services software infringes Centrify's '005 Patent. A trial date in the '005 Patent litigation has been set for September 24, 2012. We believe the claims asserted against Quest by Centrify are without merit and we intend to defend vigorously against Centrify's infringement claims.

On August 31, 2010, we filed a petition with the United States Patent and Trademark Office alleging that Centrify's '005 Patent is invalid and requesting the United States Patent and Trademark Office to commence an inter partes reexamination of the patentability of Centrify's '005 Patent. On November 15, 2010, the United States Patent and Trademark Office granted our petition for inter partes reexamination of the patentability of Centrify's '005 Patent and issued a first office action rejecting all claims of Centrify's '005 Patent. On January 18, 2011, Centrify filed a response to the United States Patent and Trademark Office's first office action. On September 30, 2010, Centrify filed a petition with the United States Patent and Trademark Office alleging that our '501 Patent is invalid and requesting the United States Patent and Trademark Office to commence an inter partes reexamination of the patentability of our '501 Patent. On November 30, 2010, the United States Patent and Trademark Office granted Centrify's petition for inter partes reexamination of the patentability of our '501 Patent. On January 21, 2011, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued a first office action rejecting all claims of our '501 Patent. Our response to the United States Patent and Trademark Office was filed on March 21, 2011. We believe that our '501 patent is valid and enforceable and intend to vigorously defend the patentability of the '501 Patent.

On May 2, 2011, Quest and Likewise agreed to the terms of a Settlement Agreement under which Quest agreed to dismiss the lawsuit against Likewise in exchange for a permanent injunction preventing Likewise (and its subsidiaries, affiliates, successors and assigns) from making, using, selling, offering to sell, importing, exporting, or supporting products or services that constitute technology covered by Quest's '501 patent or that utilize or embody the method covered by Quest's '501 patent. On May 23, 2011, the Utah Court entered the mutually agreed upon permanent injunction against Likewise, ending the case against Likewise.

General. The Company and its subsidiaries are also involved in other legal proceedings, claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. The foregoing discussion includes material developments that occurred during the three months ended June 30, 2011 or thereafter in our material legal proceedings.

In the normal course of our business, we enter into certain types of agreements that require us to indemnify or guarantee the obligations of other parties. These commitments include (i) intellectual property indemnities to licensees of our software products, (ii) indemnities to certain lessors under office space leases for certain claims arising from our use or occupancy of the related premises, or for the obligations of our subsidiaries under leasing arrangements, (iii) indemnities to customers, vendors and service providers for claims based on negligence or willful misconduct of our employees and agents, (iv) indemnities to our directors and officers to the maximum extent permitted under applicable law, and (v) letters of credit and similar obligations as a form of credit support for our international subsidiaries and certain resellers. The terms and duration of these commitments varies and, in some cases, may be indefinite, and certain of these commitments do not limit the maximum amount of future payments we could become obligated to make there under; accordingly, our actual aggregate maximum exposure related to these types of commitments cannot be reasonably estimated. Historically, we have not been obligated to make significant payments for obligations of this nature, and no liabilities have been recorded for these obligations in our financial statements included in this report.