Commitments and Contingencies
|6 Months Ended|
Jun. 30, 2022
|Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]|
|Commitments and Contingencies||
Note 15. Commitments and Contingencies
In connection with our 2007 acquisition of certain intellectual property, we agreed to pay royalties upon production and sale of PHA. The royalty is $0.05 per pound for the first 500 million pounds of PHA sold and decreases to $0.025 per pound for cumulative sales in excess of that amount until the underlying patents expire. We incurred approximately $0.2 million in royalties during each of the six months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021.
We have open purchase orders related to our Kentucky Facility Phase II expansion and our Greenfield plant construction totaling $90.6 million with anticipated delivery at various dates through December 2024.
In November 2015, we terminated a former executive and terminated our contract with an advisory firm (“Advisory Contract”), pursuant to which we, through the advisory firm, engaged the individual as an executive of the Company. In December 2015, we deemed the Advisory Contract, together with all related arrangements in connection therewith, void, including any share issuances in connection with such arrangements. We filed suit against the former executive and the advisory firm during 2016, and various counterclaims were filed by the former executive and the advisory firm. During the third quarter of 2020, this matter was settled, we agreed to pay $8 million
to resolve all outstanding claims, the executive agreed to the cancellation of any shares issued to him pursuant to the Advisory Contract and related arrangements, and the parties exchanged of mutual releases. The remaining unpaid liabilities of $0.6 million and $1.25 million at June 30, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively, are included in accrued liabilities.
On May 14, 2021 a class action complaint was filed by Darryl Keith Rosencrants in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, on May 18, 2021, a class action complaint was filed by Carlos Caballeros in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, on May 18, 2021 a class action complaint was filed by Dennis H. Wilkins also in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, and on May 19, 2021, a class action complaint was filed by Elizabeth and John Skistimas in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Each plaintiff or plaintiffs brought the action individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated against the Company.
The alleged class varies in each case but covers all persons and entities other than Defendants who purchased or otherwise acquired our securities between October 5, 2020 and May 4, 2021 (“Class Period”). Plaintiffs are seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants’ alleged violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The complaints are substantially similar and are each premised upon various allegations that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding, among other things, our business, operations and compliance policies.
Plaintiffs seek the following remedies: (i) determining that the lawsuits may be maintained as class actions under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, (ii) certifying a class representative, (iii) requiring Defendants to pay damages allegedly sustained by plaintiffs and the class members by reason of the acts alleged in the complaints, and (iv) awarding pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as well as reasonable attorneys’ fees, expert fees and other costs.
On July 29, 2021, the Georgia court transferred the Georgia cases to New York, and all four class actions have been consolidated into a single lawsuit in the Eastern District of New York.
On January 19, 2022, a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint (“Amended Complaint”) was filed in the Eastern District of New York, naming as defendants the Company, its directors and certain of its officers as well as certain former directors (collectively, “Defendants”). The Amended Complaint is brought on behalf of a class consisting of (i) purchasers of shares of the Company during the period October 5, 2020 to May 4, 2021, (ii) all holders of the Company’s Class A common stock entitled to vote on the merger transaction between the Company and Meredian Holdings Group, Inc. consummated on December 28, 2020 and (iii) purchasers of Company securities pursuant to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 that was declared effective on December 16, 2020 or the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 that was declared effective on February 16, 2021. The Amended Complaint asserts claims for violations of Sections 10(b), 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 10(b)-5(a)-(c) promulgated thereunder and Sections 11, 12 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). Plaintiffs seek the following remedies: (a) a determination that the lawsuit is a proper class action pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and certifying Plaintiffs as class representative, (b) awarding compensatory and punitive damages allegedly sustained by the class members by reason of the acts set forth in the Amended Complaint and (c) awarding pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and experts’ fees and other costs.
The Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint on May 20, 2022. Plaintiffs served their opposition papers to the motion to dismiss on July 21, 2022, and Defendants’ reply is due by September 6, 2022. In their opposition papers, Plaintiffs have now confirmed that, based on Defendants’ arguments in the motion to dismiss, Plaintiffs have dropped seven of the nine counts, eliminating all of the Securities Act counts specifically relating to the proxy solicitation, registration statements and related control person claims, and all that now remains are the first two counts under Rules 10(b)-5(a)-(c) of the Exchange Act and control person liability. Additionally, all of the Defendants other than Danimer and three of its current or former officers or directors have been dismissed from the case.
On May 24, 2021, a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware by Richard Delman on behalf of the Company, alleging breach of fiduciary duty against the Company’s directors. On October 6, 2021, a shareholders derivative lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware by Ryan Perri on behalf of the Company, alleging breach of fiduciary duty against the Company’s directors. Both derivative lawsuits have been stayed pending the outcome of Defendants’ motion to dismiss the securities class actions. These derivative complaints repeat certain allegations which are already in the public domain. Defendants deny the allegations of the above complaints, believe the lawsuits are without merit and intend to defend them vigorously.
Since we are unable to estimate the likelihood of incurring a loss, or the amount of loss, if any, related to these matters, we have not accrued any losses for these matters at June 30, 2022.
On May 5, 2021, we received a letter from the Atlanta regional office of the SEC, in connection with a non-public, fact-finding inquiry, requesting that we voluntarily produce certain specified information. On July 14, 2021, we timely and voluntarily produced the information requested by the SEC. On January 26, 2022, we received a follow-up request from the SEC for additional documents and
information. By April 8, 2022, we timely and voluntarily produced the additional information requested by the SEC. On June 27, 2022, we received a follow-up request from the SEC for additional information. By August 5, 2022, we timely and voluntarily produced such additional information requested by the SEC as we were able to provide.
In the ordinary course of business, we may be a party to various other legal proceedings from time to time.
The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.
Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef