15. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

The Company leases certain of its office and manufacturing space. The future minimum rental commitments under non-cancelable operating leases with remaining terms in excess of one year are as follows (in thousands):


Year
2018	$	1,742
2019		1,152
2020		872
2021		467
2022 and thereafter		1,002

Rent expense was approximately $1,889,000, $1,866,000 and $1,902,000 in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The Company also pays tenant-related executory costs such as taxes, maintenance, and insurance.

On January 28, 2011, SynQor, Inc. (“SynQor”) filed a complaint for patent infringement against Ericsson, Inc. (“Ericsson”), Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”) and the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (the “Texas Action”). Ericsson and Cisco subsequently settled with SynQor and are no longer parties to the Texas Action. With respect to the Company, SynQor’s complaint in the Texas Action alleged that the Company’s products, including but not limited to unregulated bus converters used in intermediate bus architecture power supply systems, infringe SynQor’s U.S. patent numbers 7,072,190, 7,272,021, and 7,564,702 (“the ‘190 patent”, “the ‘021 patent” and “the ‘702 patent”, respectively). SynQor’s complaint sought an injunction against further infringement and an award of unspecified compensatory and enhanced damages, interest, costs and attorney fees. On September 20, 2011, SynQor filed an amended complaint in the Texas Action that further alleged that the Company’s products, including, but not limited to, unregulated bus converters used in intermediate bus architecture power supply systems, infringe SynQor’s U.S. patent number 8,023,290 (“the ‘290 patent”). The Company responded to SynQor’s amended complaint in the Texas Action by denying its products infringe any of the SynQor patents, and asserting that the SynQor patents are invalid. The Company further alleged that the SynQor ‘290 patent is unenforceable due to inequitable conduct by SynQor or its agents during the examination of the ‘290 patent at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). The Company also asserted counterclaims seeking damages against SynQor for deceptive trade practices and tortious interference with prospective economic advantage arising from SynQor’s attempted enforcement of its patents against the Company.

The Company initiated administrative review proceedings at the USPTO challenging the validity of certain claims of the SynQor patents asserted in the Texas Action, including all claims that were asserted against the Company by SynQor. Regarding the ‘190 patent, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the USPTO issued a decision upholding the validity of the ‘190 patent claims. That decision was appealed by the Company to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the Federal Circuit”), which issued a decision on March 13, 2015 reversing the PTAB, determining that certain claims were invalid, and remanding the matter to the PTAB for further proceedings. On May 2, 2016, the PTAB issued a decision determining that all but one of the remaining claims of the ‘190 patent were invalid and remanding the remaining claim to a patent examiner for further examination. On June 22, 2017, the examiner issued a determination under 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(d), finding that the remaining claim of the ‘190 patent was unpatentable. That decision is expected to be further reviewed by the PTAB pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(f).

On May 2, 2016, the PTAB also issued decisions finding all challenged claims of SynQor’s ‘021 patent invalid and upholding the validity of all challenged claims of SynQor’s ‘702 and ‘290 patents. On May 23, 2016, the Texas Court issued an order staying the Texas Action until the completion of all of the administrative review proceedings concerning the asserted SynQor patents, including any appeals from such proceedings to the Federal Circuit.

On August 30, 2017, the Federal Circuit issued rulings with regard to PTAB’s reexamination decisions for the ‘021, ‘702 and ‘290 patents. With respect to the ‘021 patent, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s determination that all of the challenged claims of the ‘021 patent were invalid. The Federal Circuit remanded the case to the PTAB for further consideration of the patentability of certain claims that had been added by amendment during the reexamination. With respect to the ‘702 patent, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s determination that all of the challenged claims of the ‘702 patent were patentable. With respect to the ‘290 patent, the Federal Circuit vacated the PTAB’s decision upholding the patentability of the ‘290 patent claims, and remanded the case to the PTAB for further consideration.

On October 31, 2017, the Company filed a request with the USPTO for ex parte reexamination of the ‘702 patent, based on different prior art references than had been at issue in the previous inter parte reexamination of the ‘702 patent. On December 6, 2017, the USPTO issued a decision granting the Company’s request for ex parte reexamination of the ‘702 patent, finding that the Company’s request was warranted because it raised substantial new questions of patentability of the ‘702 patent.

The Company continues to believe none of its products, including its unregulated bus converters, infringe any valid claim of the asserted SynQor patents, either alone or when used in an intermediate bus architecture implementation. The Company believes SynQor’s claims lack merit and, therefore, continues to vigorously defend itself against SynQor’s patent infringement allegations. The Company does not believe a loss is probable for this matter. If a loss were to be incurred, however, the Company cannot estimate the amount of possible loss or range of possible loss at this time.

In addition to the SynQor matter, the Company is involved in certain other litigation and claims incidental to the conduct of its business. While the outcome of lawsuits and claims against the Company cannot be predicted with certainty, management does not expect any current litigation or claims will have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.