Commitments and Contingencies

Litigation

The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of its business. Although the amount of any liability that could arise with respect to these actions cannot be determined with certainty, in the Company’s opinion, any such liability will not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, consolidated results of operations or liquidity.

Shareholders Class Action: On August 5, 2013, VTBH and the Company (f/k/a Parametric) announced that they had entered into the Merger Agreement pursuant to which VTBH would acquire an approximately 80% ownership interest and existing shareholders would maintain an approximately 20% ownership interest in the combined company. Following the announcement, several shareholders filed class action lawsuits in California and Nevada seeking to enjoin the Merger. The plaintiffs in each case alleged that members of the Company’s Board of Directors breached their fiduciary duties to the shareholders by agreeing to a Merger that allegedly undervalued the Company. VTBH and the Company were named as defendants in these lawsuits under the theory that they had aided and abetted the Company's Board of Directors in allegedly violating their fiduciary duties. The plaintiffs in both cases sought a preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin closing of the Merger, which, by agreement, was heard by the Nevada court with the California plaintiffs invited to participate. On December 26, 2013, the court in the Nevada cases denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. Following the closing of the Merger, the Nevada plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, which made essentially the same allegations and sought monetary damages as well as an order rescinding the Merger. The California plaintiffs dismissed their action without prejudice, and sought to intervene in the Nevada action, which was granted. Subsequent to the intervention, the plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint, which made essentially the same allegations as prior complaints and sought monetary damages. On June 20, 2014, VTBH and the Company moved to dismiss the action, but that motion was denied on August 28, 2014. On September 14, 2017, a unanimous en banc panel of Nevada Supreme granted defendants’ petition for writ of mandamus and ordered the trial court to dismiss the complaint but provided a limited basis upon which plaintiffs could seek to amend their complaint. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on December 1, 2017 to assert the same claims in a derivative capacity on behalf of the Company, as a well as in a direct capacity, against VTBH, Stripes Group, LLC, SG VTB Holdings, LLC, and the former members of the Company’s Board of Directors. All defendants moved to dismiss this amended complaint on January 2, 2018, and those motions were denied on March 13, 2018. Defendants petitioned the Nevada Supreme Court to reverse this ruling on April 18, 2018.

Commercial Dispute: On July 20, 2016, Bigben Interactive S.A. (“BigBen”) filed a statement of claim before the Regional Court of Berlin, Germany against VTB, which statement of claim was formally serviced upon VTB on June 28, 2017. The statement of claim alleges that VTB’s termination of a distribution agreement by and between BigBen and VTB breached the terms thereof and was invalid, and that BigBen is entitled to damages amounting to €5.0 million plus accrued interests thereon plus certain additional damages as a result of such invalid termination. VTB filed its statement of defense with the court on September 21, 2017. VTB maintains that its termination of the agreement was valid and that BigBen’s claims against it are without merit. VTB's statement of defense was submitted to the plaintiff. BigBen submitted additional written pleadings on January 4, 2018 and on April 19, 2018. VTB submitted further written pleadings on March 20, 2018 and March 29, 2018. VTB argues inter alia that the courts of Berlin do not have jurisdiction. On April 23rd, 2018, an oral hearing was held at the Regional Court of Berlin that focused exclusively on the question of jurisdiction. VTB and BigBen are currently waiting for the court to render an interim judgment on the question whether it accepts jurisdiction or not.

The Company will continue to vigorously defend itself in the foregoing matters. However, litigation and investigations are inherently uncertain. Accordingly, the Company cannot predict the outcome of these matters. The Company has not recorded any accrual at March 31, 2018 for contingent losses associated with these matters based on its belief that losses, while possible, are not probable. Further, any possible range of loss cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. The unfavorable resolution of these matters could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. The Company is engaged in other legal actions not described above arising in the ordinary course of its business and, while there can be no assurance, believes that the ultimate outcome of these other legal actions will not have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.

Warranties

We warrant our products against certain manufacturing and other defects. These product warranties are provided for specific periods of time depending on the nature of the product. Warranties are generally fulfilled by replacing defective products with new products. The following table provides the changes in our product warranties, which are included in accrued liabilities:



	Three Months Ended
	March 31,
	2018			2017
	(in thousands)
Warranty, beginning of period	$	472		$	639
Warranty costs accrued	234			60
Settlements of warranty claims	(172		)	(110		)
Warranty, end of period	$	534		$	589