CONTINGENCIES

9 Months Ended

Apr. 30, 2022

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

CONTINGENCIES

CONTINGENCIES

On April 13, 2018, a purported stockholder, Donald Reith, filed a verified complaint, Reith v. Lichtenstein, et al., 2018-277 (Del. Ch.) in the Delaware Court of Chancery ("Chancery Court"). The complaint alleges class and derivative claims for breach of fiduciary duty and/or aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment against the Board, Warren G. Lichtenstein, Glen M. Kassan, William T. Fejes, Jack L. Howard, Jeffrey J. Fenton, Philip E. Lengyel and Jeffrey S. Wald; and stockholders Steel Holdings, Steel Partners, Ltd., SPHG Holdings, Handy & Harman Ltd. ("Handy & Harman") and WHX CS Corp. (collectively, the "Steel Parties") in connection with the acquisition of $35.0 million of the Series C Convertible Preferred Stock by SPHG Holdings and equity grants made to Messrs. Lichtenstein, Howard and Fejes on December 15, 2017 (collectively, the "Challenged Transactions"). The Company is named as a nominal defendant. The complaint alleges that although the Challenged Transactions were approved by a special committee consisting of the independent members of the Board (Messrs. Fenton, Lengyel and Wald), the Steel Parties dominated and controlled the special committee, who approved the Challenged Transactions in breach of their fiduciary duty. Plaintiff alleges that the Challenged Transactions unfairly diluted stockholders and therefore unjustly enriched Steel Holdings, SPHG Holdings and Messrs. Lichtenstein, Howard and Fejes. The complaint also alleges that the Board made misleading disclosures in the Company's proxy statement for the 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders in connection with seeking approval to amend the 2010 Incentive Award Plan to authorize the issuance of additional shares to accommodate certain shares underlying the equity grants. Remedies requested include rescission of the Series C Convertible Preferred Stock and equity grants, disgorgement of any unjustly obtained property or compensation and monetary damages. On June 8, 2018, defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to plead demand futility and failure to state a claim. On June 28, 2019, the Court denied most of the motion to dismiss allowing the matter to proceed.

On August 13, 2021, the Company, together with certain of its current and former directors of the Board, Warren Lichtenstein, Glen Kassan, William Fejes, Jr., Jack Howard, Jeffrey Fenton and Jeffrey Wald, as well as other named defendants (collectively, the “Defendants”), entered into a memorandum of understanding (the “MOU”) with Donald Reith (the “Plaintiff”) in connection with the settlement of the Reith v. Lichtenstein, et al., C.A. No. 2018-0277-MTZ (Del. Ch. 2018) class and derivative action. Pursuant to the MOU, the Defendants agreed to cause their directors’ and officers’ liability insurance carriers to pay to the Company $2.75 million in cash. The payment will be paid into an escrow account within 14 business days of the later of (i) the entry of the scheduling order in connection with the stipulation of the settlement; or (ii) the date on which Plaintiff’s counsel provides to the Defendants’ counsel written payment and wire instructions.

Additionally, under the MOU and separate letter agreements between the Company and such individuals (the “Surrender Agreements”), Messrs. Lichtenstein, Howard and Fejes agreed to surrender to the Company an aggregate of 3.3 million shares, which they had initially received in December 2017 in consideration for services to the Company. The surrenders and cancellations are in the following amounts: for Mr. Lichtenstein, 1,833,333 vested shares and 300,000 unvested shares; for Mr. Howard, 916,667 vested shares and 150,000 unvested shares; and for Mr. Fejes, 100,000 vested shares. Such amounts are to be adjusted to give effect to the one-for-ten reverse stock split voted on by the Company’s stockholders at the annual meeting on July 26, 2021 (if such reverse stock split is effected prior to the surrender of such shares). The surrenders and cancellations will be completed no later than seven calendar days following final approval of the settlement by the court and the exhaustion of any appeals therefrom or the expiration of time to appeal. On August 17, 2021, Mr. Lichtenstein and Mr. Howard surrendered the shares required under their respective Surrender Agreements and all such shares were subsequently cancelled. Pursuant to the MOU, the Company has also agreed to pay the Plaintiff’s counsel legal fees for this matter.

On February 18, 2022, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement, proposed notice to stockholders, proposed scheduling order, and proposed form of final judgment (collectively, the “Stipulation”), setting forth the settlement terms previously set forth in the MOU. On March 17, 2022, the Chancery Court granted, with modifications, a scheduling order (the “Scheduling Order”) in connection with the Stipulation. Pursuant to the Scheduling Order, during April 2022 the insurers completed the wiring of the settlement payments into an account jointly controlled by counsel for the Plaintiff and the Company, where the funds are to remain until final court approval of the settlement. In addition, the Stipulation reflects the parties’ agreement that the amount of the legal fees for which Plaintiff's counsel would apply, and that the Company would pay if approved by the court, would be $2.05 million. The settlement requires court approval, and there can be no assurances that such approval will be granted. Per the Scheduling Order, a settlement hearing is currently scheduled for August 12, 2022, prior to which time the parties may file additional settlement papers. The settlement also provides that the Company will pay the legal fees and costs of Plaintiff's counsel

of $2.05 million, subject to court approval of that payment, after the Company receives the settlement amount of $2.75 million from the account described above.