XML 23 R14.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.22.2
Commitments and Contingencies
6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies Commitments and Contingencies
Lease Arrangements

The Company leases office, manufacturing, and clinical centers under non-cancelable operating leases, which expire on various dates through 2031. These leases generally contain scheduled rent increases or escalation clauses and renewal options. Operating lease right-of-use assets and lease liabilities are recognized based on the present value of the future minimum lease payments over the lease term at the commencement date. The operating lease right-of-use assets also include any lease payments made to the lessor at or before the commencement date, as well as variable lease payments, which are based on a consumer price index. The Company is also subject to variable lease payments related to janitorial services and electricity, which are not included in the operating lease right-of-use asset as they are based on actual usage. The Company recognizes operating lease expense on a straight-line basis over the lease period. The total operating lease cost recognized during the six months ended June 30, 2022 was $6.4 million, primarily consisting of lease payments and common area maintenance costs. Cash paid for operating leases during the six months ended June 30, 2022, was $6.5 million.

On October 4, 2018, the Company entered into the San Francisco Lease to rent approximately 117,560 rentable square feet in San Francisco, California, which became the Company’s new headquarters in October 2019. The term of the San Francisco Lease began on May 13, 2019, and expires on August 31, 2031. The Company has the option to extend the San Francisco Lease for an additional five-year term.

On October 29, 2009, the Company entered into a lease for a clinic (“Lincolnshire Lease”) to rent approximately 41,500 rentable square feet in Lincolnshire, Illinois, which became the Company’s clinical operational facilities. The term of the Lincolnshire Lease began on November 1, 2009, and expires on July 31, 2022.

On March 18, 2021, the Company entered into an office/industrial lease (“Cypress Lease”) to rent approximately 68,933 rentable square feet in Cypress, California, which became the Company’s new office and warehouse facilities. The term of the Cypress Lease began on October 25, 2021, and expires on April 30, 2032. The Company has the option to extend the Cypress Lease for an additional five-year term, subject to certain requirements.

In December 2021, the Company entered into a lease for 44,616 rentable square feet in Deerfield, Illinois (“Deerfield Lease”) to replace the Lincolnshire Lease as the Company's clinical operations facility in Illinois. The effective term of the Deerfield Lease began on January 2, 2022 and will expire on June 1, 2033. The Company has the option to extend the Deerfield Lease for an additional five-year term.

On February 14, 2022, the Company entered into a lease for 3,238 rentable square feet in Encinitas, California (“Encinitas Lease”) for office space for the Company's San Diego based employees. The term of the Encinitas Lease began on March 1, 2022, and expires on February 28, 2024.

On February 15, 2022, the Board agreed to pursue a sublease of the majority of space on one floor (approximately 50%) of the San Francisco Lease. The Company recorded $0 million and $20.5 million in impairment charges on its ROU asset during the three and six months ended June 30, 2022, respectively. See Note 6. Impairment and Restructuring for further details.

As of June 30, 2022, maturities of operating lease liabilities were as follows (in thousands):
Period Ending June 30:
2022$3,091 
202313,995 
202414,265 
202514,681 
202615,108 
Thereafter75,393 
Total lease payments136,533 
Less: imputed interest(40,286)
Total lease liabilities$96,247 
The weighted average remaining lease term of the Company's operating leases as of June 30, 2022, was 9.34 years. The weighted average discount rate of the Company's operating leases was 7.29% as of June 30, 2022.
Legal Proceedings
From time to time, the Company is involved in claims and legal proceedings or investigations that arise in the ordinary course of business. Such matters could have an adverse impact on the Company's reputation, business, and financial condition and divert the attention of its management from the operation of its business. These matters are subject to many uncertainties and outcomes that are not predictable.

On February 1, 2021, a putative class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California alleging that the Company and its former Chief Executive Officer, Kevin M. King, violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder (“Securities Class Action Lawsuit”). On August 2, 2021, the lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint and filed a further amended complaint on September 24, 2021. The amended complaint names as defendants, in addition to the Company and Mr. King, the Company's former Chief Executive Officer, Michael J. Coyle, and current Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer, Douglas J. Devine. The purported class in the amended complaint includes all persons who purchased or acquired the Company's common stock between August 4, 2020 and July 13, 2021, and seeks unspecified damages purportedly sustained by the class. On October 27, 2021, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The motion to dismiss was fully briefed, and the Court held a hearing on the motion on February 4, 2022, after which the Court took the matter under submission. On March 31, 2022, the Court issued an order granting the Company’s motion to dismiss the Securities Class Action Lawsuit, without allowing the plaintiff further leave to amend, and entered judgment in favor of the Company and the other defendants. On April 29, 2022, the plaintiff that filed the initial complaint in the action filed a notice of appeal and briefs for the appeal are now due in September and October 2022. The Company believes the class action to be without merit and plans to defend itself vigorously.

On March 26, 2021, the Company received a grand jury subpoena from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California requesting information related to communications with the Food and Drug Administration and the Company’s products. On October 14, 2021, the Company received a second subpoena requesting additional information. The Company is cooperating fully and is providing the requested information.
Development Agreement
On September 3, 2019, the Company entered into a Development Collaboration Agreement (the “Development Agreement”) with Verily Life Sciences LLC (“Verily”). The Development Agreement involves joint development and production of intellectual property between the Company and Verily. Each participant has primary responsibility for certain aspects of development and approval, with all processes to be performed at each respective party’s own cost. Costs incurred by the Company in connection with the Development Agreement will be expensed as research and development expense in accordance with ASC 730, Research and Development.

    The Company and Verily will develop certain next-generation atrial fibrillation (“AF”) screening, detection, or monitoring products pursuant to the Development Agreement, which products will involve combining Verily and the Company’s technology platforms and capabilities. Under the terms of the Development Agreement, the Company paid Verily an upfront fee of $5.0 million in 2019. In addition, the Company agreed to make additional cash payments to Verily up to an aggregate of $12.75 million in milestone payments upon achievement of various development and regulatory milestones over the term of the Development Agreement. We have achieved milestones tied to payments totaling $11.0 million to date and expect to make additional payments over the term of the Development Agreement of $1.75 million, subject to the achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones including provisioning of the Zio Watch and completion of market evaluation scheduled to begin in 2023.

No payment-triggering milestones were achieved during the six months ended June 30, 2022.

    The Development Agreement provides each party with licenses to use certain intellectual property of the other party for development activities in the field of AF screening, detection, or monitoring. Ownership of developed intellectual property will be allocated to the Company or Verily depending on the subject matter of the underlying developed intellectual property, and, for certain subject matter, shall be jointly owned.
Indemnifications
In the ordinary course of business, the Company enters into agreements pursuant to which it agrees to indemnify customers, vendors, lessors, business partners, and other parties with respect to certain matters, including losses arising out of the breach of such agreements, services to be provided by the Company, or from intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties. Pursuant to such agreements, the Company may indemnify, hold harmless and defend an indemnified party for losses suffered or incurred by the indemnified party. Some of the provisions will limit losses to those arising from third-party actions. In some cases, the indemnification will continue after the termination of the agreement. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these provisions is not determinable. The Company has also entered into indemnification agreements with its directors and officers that may require the Company to indemnify its directors and officers against liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law. The Company currently has directors’ and officers’ insurance. The Company has never incurred material costs to defend lawsuits or settle claims related to these indemnification provisions, and believes that the estimated fair value of these indemnification obligations is not material and it has not accrued any amounts for these obligations.