ACACIA RESEARCH CORP 10-K

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS Our short and long-term success is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, many of which involve factors that are difficult to predict or beyond our control. As a result, an investment in our common stock involves risks. Our stockholders should carefully consider the risks described below, together with all of the other information included in this Annual Report, as well as in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), in evaluating our business. If any of these risks are realized, our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects could be materially adversely affected, and the trading price of our common stock may decline significantly. Furthermore, additional risks and uncertainties of which we are currently unaware, or which we currently consider to be immaterial, could have a material adverse effect on our business. Certain statements below constitute “forward-looking statements,” which are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including those described in this section. For additional information, refer to the section entitled “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” within this Annual Report. 6 Table of Contents Risks Related to Our Business, Business Strategy, and Platform We intend to grow our company by acquiring additional operating businesses and intellectual property assets which may not occur, and any acquisitions that we complete will be costly and could negatively affect our results of operations, and dilute our stockholders’ ownership, or cause us to incur significant expense, and we may not realize the expected benefits of our operating businesses because of difficulties related to integration. We intend to grow our company by acquiring additional operating businesses and intellectual property assets. A significant portion of growth and success will be dependent on identifying and acquiring operating companies and intellectual property at attractive prices to realize their intrinsic value. However, there can be no assurance that we will identify attractive acquisition targets, that acquisition opportunities we identify will be available on acceptable terms or at attractive prices, or that we will be able to obtain necessary financing or regulatory approvals to complete any acquisitions. Further, the success of any acquisition depends on, among other things, our ability to combine our business with the acquired business in a manner that does not materially disrupt existing relationships and allows us to achieve development and operational synergies. Acquisitions involve numerous risks and uncertainties, including: • difficulties in integrating and managing the combined operations, technology platforms, or offerings of any business we acquire, and realizing the anticipated economic, operational and other benefits of the acquisition in a timely manner, which could result in substantial costs and delays; • failure to execute on the intended strategy and synergies; • failure of the acquired operating businesses to achieve anticipated revenue, earnings, or cash flow; • diversion of our management’s attention or other resources from our existing business; • higher-than-expected earn-out payments, unforeseen transaction-related costs or delays or other circumstances such as disputes with or the loss of key or other personnel from acquired businesses; • our inability to maintain the key customers, business relationships, suppliers, and brand potential of acquired operating businesses; • uncertainty of entry into businesses or geographies in which we have limited or no prior experience or in which competitors have stronger positions; • unanticipated costs associated with pursuing acquisitions or greater than expected costs in integrating the acquired businesses; • responsibility for the liabilities of acquired businesses, including those that were not disclosed to us or exceed our estimates, such as liabilities arising out of the failure to maintain effective privacy, data protection and cybersecurity controls, and liabilities arising out of the failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, including tax laws; • difficulties in or costs associated with assigning or transferring to us the acquired operating business’ intellectual property or its licenses to third-party intellectual property; • inability to maintain our culture and values, ethical standards, controls, procedures, and policies; • challenges in integrating the workforce of acquired companies and the potential loss of key employees of the acquired companies; • challenges in integrating and auditing the financial statements of acquired companies that have not historically prepared financial statements in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; and 7 Table of Contents • potential accounting charges to the extent goodwill and intangible assets recorded in connection with an acquisition, such as trademarks, customer relationships, or intellectual property, are later determined to be impaired and written down in value. It is possible that the integration process of our acquired businesses could result in the loss of key employees; the disruption of our ongoing business or the ongoing business of the acquired operating businesses; or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures or policies that could adversely affect our ability to maintain relationships with third parties and employees or to achieve the anticipated benefits of the acquisition. Integration efforts between us and the acquired businesses will also require our management’s significant attention from other opportunities that could have been beneficial to our stockholders. An inability to realize the full extent of, or any of, the anticipated benefits of any acquisition, as well as any delays encountered in the integration process, could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations, which may affect the value of the shares of our common stock after the completion of our acquisitions. If we are unable to achieve these objectives, the anticipated benefits of the acquisition may not be realized fully or at all or may take longer to realize than expected. In particular, our acquisitions may not be accretive to our stock value in the near or long term. In addition, we may issue shares of our common stock or other equity securities in connection with future acquisitions of businesses and technologies. Any such issuances of shares of our common stock could result in material dilution to our existing stockholders. We expect to incur additional costs integrating the operations of any operating business and utilizing any intellectual property assets we acquire, as we incur higher development and regulatory costs, as the case may be, and must hire relevant personnel. If the total costs of the integration or utilization of our businesses or assets exceed the anticipated benefits of the acquisition, our financial results could be adversely affected. Accordingly, we may not succeed in addressing the risks associated with our acquisition of Printronix or any other operating business we acquire in the future. The inability to integrate successfully, or in a timely fashion, the business, technologies, products, personnel, or operations of any acquired business or utilization of any assets, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Our platform’s success is dependent on our ability to attract and retain employees and management teams of our operating businesses, the loss of any of whom could materially adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations. Our platform’s business model requires qualified and competent professionals and management teams to identify and develop advantaged opportunities and to direct day-to-day activities of our operating businesses, as the case may be. Accordingly, recruiting and retaining qualified personnel is important to our platform and our operating businesses’ operations. Additionally, although our operating businesses have adequate personnel for the current business environment, unpredictable increases in demand for goods and services may exacerbate the risk of not having sufficient numbers of trained or qualified personnel, which could have a negative impact on our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity. Our operating businesses also need qualified and competent personnel to execute their business plans and serve their customers, suppliers and other stakeholders. In order to compete, we must attract, retain, and motivate both executives and other key employees, and our failure to do so could harm our financial performance. Hiring and retaining qualified executives, engineers, technical staff, sales, marketing and support positions are and will be critical to businesses, and competition for experienced employees in the industries of our operating businesses can be intense. To help attract, retain, and motivate qualified employees, we must offer a competitive compensation package, including cash, cash-based incentive awards and share-based incentive awards, such as restricted stock units. Because our cash-based and share-based incentive awards are dependent upon the performance conditions relating to our performance and the performance of the price our common stock, the future value of such awards are uncertain. If the anticipated value of such incentive awards does not materialize, or if the total compensation package ceases to be viewed as competitive, our ability to attract, retain, and motivate employees could be weakened, which could harm our results of operations. Our success will further substantially depend on our ability to attract and retain key members of our management team and officers. If we lose one or more of these key employees, our results of operations, and in turn, the value of our common stock could be materially adversely affected. Although we may enter into employment agreements with our officers, there 8 Table of Contents can be no assurance that the entire term of any employment agreement will be served or that any employment agreement will be renewed upon expiration. The success of our platform and the integration of our operating businesses is dependent on our relationship with Starboard. Our strategic relationship with Starboard has provided, and we expect will continue to provide, us access to industry expertise, and operating partners and industry experts to evaluate potential acquisition opportunities and enhance the oversight and value creation of businesses we acquire. As part of our relationship, Starboard has assisted, and is expected to continue assisting, us with sourcing and evaluating appropriate acquisition opportunities. If we or Starboard were to discontinue this relationship, we may not be able to continue to adequately source acquisition opportunities. Additionally, the success of our platform depends on the continued availability of, and our access to, Starboard’s industry expertise and operating partners and industry experts. We do not have employment agreements with these individuals who are independent of Starboard and Starboard’s key personnel. If these individuals do not maintain their existing relationships with Starboard and its affiliates, we may not be able to identify appropriate replacements in order to continue to adequately source acquisition opportunities or manage our existing operating businesses. The due diligence process we undertake in connection with new acquisitions of operating businesses or intellectual property assets may not reveal all material facts. Before making acquisitions, we conduct due diligence that we deem reasonable and appropriate based on the facts and applicable circumstances. When conducting due diligence, we may be required to evaluate important and complex business, financial, tax, accounting, environmental and legal issues. Outside consultants, legal advisers, accountants and investment banks may be involved in the due diligence process in varying degrees depending on the type of business and transaction. Nevertheless, when conducting due diligence and making an assessment regarding an acquisition, we rely on the resources available to us, including information provided by the target of the transaction and, in some circumstances, third party investigations. The due diligence investigation that we carry out with respect to any opportunity may not reveal or highlight all relevant facts (including fraud) that may be necessary or helpful in evaluating such opportunity. Moreover, such an investigation will not necessarily result in the acquisition being successful. If we do not discover all material facts during due diligence, we may fail to integrate our operating businesses and execute our strategic goals, which may impact our financial performance. Our acquisition strategy may include acquisitions of privately held companies, which provide more limited information, may be dependent on the talents and efforts of only a few key portfolio company personnel, and have greater vulnerability to economic downturns when compared to public company targets. From time to time, we acquire, and may acquire, privately held companies. Generally, little public information exists about these companies, and we are required to rely on diligence efforts to obtain adequate information to evaluate the potential returns from investing in these companies. These companies and their financial information are not subject to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and other rules that govern public companies. If we are unable to uncover all material information about these companies, we may not make a fully informed decision, and we may lose money on our acquisition. If, in the future, we cease to control and operate our operating businesses, we may be deemed to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended. From time to time, we have made, and we may continue to make, investments in businesses that we will not operate or control. If we make significant investments in businesses we do not operate or control, or cease to operate and control our operating businesses, we may be deemed to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”). If we were deemed to be an investment company, we would have to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act, obtain exemptive relief from the SEC, or modify our investments or organizational structure or our contract rights to fall outside the definition of an investment company. Registered investment companies are subject to extensive, restrictive and potentially adverse regulations that impose, among other things, (i) limitations on capital structure, including the incurrence of indebtedness or the issuance of senior securities; (ii) restrictions on specified investments; (iii) prohibitions on transactions with affiliates; and (iv) compliance with reporting, record keeping, voting, proxy disclosure and other rules and regulations that would significantly change our 9 Table of Contents operations. Registered investment companies are not permitted to operate their business in the manner in which we currently operate and plan to operate our business in the future. We plan to monitor the value of our investments and structure our operations and transactions to qualify for exclusions under the Investment Company Act or to remain outside of the definition of an investment company. Accordingly, we may structure transactions in a less advantageous manner than if we did not have Investment Company Act concerns, or we may avoid otherwise economically desirable transactions due to those concerns. In addition, adverse developments with respect to our ownership of our operating subsidiaries, including significant appreciation or depreciation in the market value of certain of our publicly traded holdings, could result in our inadvertently becoming an investment company. If it were established that we were required to register as an investment company and failed to do so, there would be a risk, among other material adverse consequences, that we could become subject to monetary penalties or injunctive relief, or both, in an action brought by the SEC and that we would be prohibited from engaging in our business activities. In addition, any contracts that we entered into during the period in which we were deemed to be operating as an unregistered investment company would be unenforceable unless a court were to require enforcement, and a court could appoint a receiver to take control of us and liquidate our business. Our being deemed to be required to register as an investment company could also be an event of default under the terms of Notes that we have issued or may issue in the future or other material contracts. Recent changes in the Company’s management team and board of directors, as well as ongoing arbitration related to the Company's former Chief Executive Officer, may be disruptive to, or cause uncertainty in, the Company's business, results of operations and the price of the Company’s common stock. On September 9, 2021, the Company accepted the resignation of Alfred V. Tobia, Jr., President and Chief Investment Officer and a member of the Board of Directors of the Company (the "Board"). Mr. Tobia resigned from serving as an officer and director of the Board following his disclosure to the Company of trading in the securities of the Company and certain investments of the Company by a member of Mr. Tobia’s family. On March 10, 2022, Martin D. McNulty Jr. joined the Company as Chief Operating Officer and Head of M&A and Wesley L. Golby was appointed to serve as Chief Investment Officer of Acacia. In connection with the entry into the Recapitalization Agreement, on October 30, 2022, Gavin Molinelli, Partner and Portfolio Manager at Starboard was appointed as Chair of the Board to serve until the Company’s 2023 annual meeting of stockholders and until his successor is duly elected and qualified. Effective November 1, 2022, Clifford Press resigned as the Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, and as a member of the Board. In November 2022, the Board initiated an internal investigation into the potential misconduct of Mr. Press. The investigation, which was conducted by independent legal counsel under the direction of the Audit Committee of the Board (the “Audit Committee”) and has been completed. The investigation confirmed Mr. Press provided inaccurate information regarding certain corporate expenses and misused corporate funds for personal use, including travel and entertainment expenses. The investigation also confirmed that Mr. Press failed to follow the Board’s directive in relation to a material contract and misrepresented to the Board and his fellow Board members that he had complied with the Board’s directive. The Company has filed an arbitration demand against Mr. Press seeking restitution and other remedies for the benefit of the Company’s shareholders. Effective November 1, 2022, Martin D. McNulty Jr., the Company’s current Chief Operating Officer and Head of M&A, was appointed interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company and will serve as the Principal Executive Officer of the Company. The Board intends to commence a search for a permanent successor. Under the terms of the Recapitalization Agreement, (i) following the Closing (as defined below and in Note 8 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements) and until May 12, 2026, the maximum size of the Board will be increased to ten members, and (ii) effective as of the later of the Closing and the date on which none of the Notes (as defined in Note 8 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements) remain outstanding, the Governance Agreement (defined below) will be automatically terminated. Effective November 28, 2022, Mr. Golby mutually agreed with the Company to resign from his position as the Company’s Chief Investment Officer. On January 3, 2023, Richard Rosenstein tendered his resignation as the Chief Financial Officer, effective as of January 27, 2023 to pursue another professional opportunity. 10 Table of Contents Effective January 28, 2023, Kirsten Hoover, the Company’s Corporate Controller, was appointed as interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company. The Board intends to commence a search for a permanent successor. Past or future changes in the Company’s management team and to the Board, as well as the ongoing arbitration related to Mr. Press, may be disruptive to, or cause uncertainty in, the Company’s business, and any additional changes to the management team or the Board could have a negative impact on the Company’s ability to manage and grow its business effectively. Any such disruption or uncertainty or difficulty in efficiently and effectively filling key roles could have a negative impact on the Company’s results of operations and the price of the Company’s common stock. Both we and our operating businesses outsource a number of services to third-party service providers, which are subject to disruptions, delays, and decrease in our control, which could adversely impact our results of operations. Both we and our operating businesses outsource a number of services, including certain hosted software applications for confidential data storage and “cloud computing” technology for such storage to domestic and overseas third-party service providers. While outsourcing arrangements may lower our cost of operations, they also reduce our direct control over the services rendered. It is uncertain what effect such diminished control will have on the quality or quantity of products delivered or services rendered, on our ability to quickly respond to changing market conditions, or on our ability to ensure compliance with all applicable domestic and foreign laws and regulations. In addition, many of these outsourced service providers, including certain hosted software applications that we use for confidential data storage, employ “cloud computing” technology for such storage. These providers’ cloud computing systems may be susceptible to “cyber incidents,” such as intentional cyber-attacks aimed at theft of sensitive data or inadvertent cyber-security compromises that are outside of our control. If we do not effectively develop and manage our outsourcing strategies, if our third-party service providers do not perform as anticipated or do not adequately protect our data from cyber-related security breaches, or if there are delays or difficulties in enhancing business processes, we may experience operational difficulties (such as limitations on our ability to ship products), increased costs, service interruptions or delays, loss of intellectual property rights or other sensitive data, quality and compliance issues, and challenges in managing our product inventory or recording and reporting financial and management information, any of which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We may be limited in our ability to use our net operating losses and certain other tax attributes. Our ability to use our federal and state net operating losses to offset potential future taxable income and related income taxes that would otherwise be due is dependent upon our generation of future taxable income before the expiration dates of the net operating losses, and we cannot predict with certainty when, or whether, we will generate sufficient taxable income to use all or any portion of our net operating losses. In addition, utilization of net operating losses to offset potential future taxable income and related income taxes that would otherwise be due is subject to annual limitations under the “ownership change” provisions of Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and similar state provisions, which may result in the expiration of net operating losses before future utilization. In general, under the Code, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50% change (by value) in its equity ownership over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating losses and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research and development credit carryforwards) to offset its post-change taxable income or taxes may be limited. Changes in our stock ownership, some of which may be outside of our control, could in the future result in an ownership change. Although we have adopted a provision in our certificate of incorporation designed to discourage investors from acquiring ownership of our common stock in a manner that could trigger a Code Section 382 ownership change, and we have completed studies to provide reasonable assurance that a Code Section 382 ownership change limitation has not occurred, we cannot be certain that a taxing authority would reach the same conclusion. If, after a review or audit, a Code Section 382 ownership change limitation were deemed to have occurred, utilization of our domestic net operating losses and tax credit carryforwards could be limited in future periods and a portion of the carryforwards could expire before being available to reduce future income tax liabilities. 11 Table of Contents Data security and integrity are critically important to our business, and cybersecurity incidents, including cyberattacks, breaches of security, unauthorized access to or disclosure of confidential information, business disruption, or the perception that confidential information is not secure, could result in a material loss of business, regulatory enforcement, substantial legal liability and/or significant harm to their reputation, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Improper access to, misappropriation, destruction or disclosure of confidential, personal or proprietary data could result in significant harm to our reputation or the reputation of us or of any of our operating businesses. The security and protection of our and their data is one of our top priorities. We and our operating businesses have devoted significant resources to maintain and regularly upgrade the wide array of physical, technical and contractual safeguards that we and they employ to provide security around the collection, storage, use, access and delivery of information we and they possess. We and they have implemented various measures to manage their risks related to system and network security and disruptions, but an actual or perceived security breach, a failure to make adequate disclosures to the public or relevant agencies following any such event or a significant and extended disruption in the functioning of its information technology systems could damage our or one of our operating businesses’ reputation and cause us to lose opportunities or them to lose clients, adversely impact our operations, sales and results of operations and require us or them to incur significant expense to address and remediate or otherwise resolve such issues. Although neither we nor our business have incurred material losses or liabilities to date as a result of any breaches, unauthorized disclosure, loss or corruption of our or their data or inability of their clients to access their systems, such events could result in intellectual property or other confidential information being lost or stolen, including client, employee or business data, disrupt their operations, subject us or them to substantial regulatory and legal proceedings and potential liability and fines, result in a material loss of business and/or significantly harm our or their reputation. If we are unable to efficiently manage the vulnerability of our systems and effectively maintain and upgrade system safeguards, we and they may incur unexpected costs and certain of our or their systems may become more vulnerable to unauthorized access. Due to concerns regarding data security and integrity, a growing number of legislative and regulatory bodies have adopted breach notification and other requirements in the event that information subject to such laws is accessed by unauthorized persons and additional regulations regarding the use, access, accuracy and security of such data are possible. Complying with such numerous and complex regulations can be expensive and difficult, and failure to comply with these regulations could subject us to regulatory scrutiny and liability. In many jurisdictions, including North America and the European Union, Printronix is subject to laws and regulations relating to the collection, use, retention, security and transfer of this information including the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). California also enacted legislation, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”) and the related California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”) that afford California residents expanded privacy protections and a private right of action for security breaches affecting their personal information. These and other similar laws and regulations are frequently changing and are becoming increasingly complex and sometimes conflict among the various jurisdictions and countries in which Printronix provides services both in terms of substance and in terms of enforceability. This makes compliance challenging and expensive. For example, Printronix’s failure to adhere to or successfully implement processes in response to changing regulatory requirements in this area could result in legal liability or impairment to our reputation in the marketplace. If we or they are unable to protect our or their computer systems, software, networks, data and other technology assets it could have a material adverse effect on our or their business, financial condition and results of operations, and ultimately the value of our businesses. Public health threats such as COVID-19 or other future pandemics could have a material adverse effect on our operations, the operations of our business partners, and the global economy as a whole. Public health threats and other highly communicable diseases, outbreaks of which have already occurred in various parts of the world, could adversely impact our operations, as well as the operations of our licensees and other business partners. We have taken precautions in the operation of our own business and maintain an up-to-date disaster recovery and business continuity policy as well as have the systems and support to have our workforce work remotely for an indefinite period of time. However, any further spread of the COVID-19 outbreak, or the occurrence of other similar outbreaks or epidemics, could have a material adverse effect on our business, operations and financial results. 12 Table of Contents Risks Related to the Recapitalization The transactions contemplated by the Recapitalization Agreement may be delayed or not occur at all for a variety of reasons, which could prevent the Company from achieving the desired capital structure and have other adverse consequences. Pursuant to the Recapitalization Agreement, and subject to the receipt of stockholder approval at the Company’s next annual meeting of stockholders, the Company will cause the Amended and Restated Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, dated as of January 7, 2020 (the “Certificate of Designations”) to be amended and restated in the form attached to the Recapitalization Agreement in order to remove the “4.89% blocker” provision and, on or prior to July 14, 2023, Starboard will convert an aggregate amount of 350,000 shares of our Series A Convertible Preferred Stock Preferred Stock (the “Series A Preferred Stock”) into common stock in accordance with the terms of the Certificate of Designations. There is a possibility that our stockholders may not approve the amendment to the Certificate of Designations and therefore the conversion of the Series A Preferred Stock will remain subject to the “4.89% blocker” in accordance with the Certificate of Designations. The consummation of the Series B Warrant Exercise (as defined in Note 8 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements), pursuant to the Recapitalization Agreement, is subject to certain conditions, which may not be satisfied, including but not limited to: (i) the absence of any law or order prohibiting the consummation of the transaction as contemplated by the Recapitalization Agreement; (ii) the representations and warranties of the Company and Starboard being true and correct, subject to the materiality standards contained in the Recapitalization Agreement; and (iii) the Company and Starboard having complied in all material respects with their respective obligations under the Recapitalization Agreement. Moreover, both the Company and Starboard have the right to terminate the Recapitalization Agreement under certain circumstances, including if (i) the parties agree to terminate by mutual consent, (ii) a governmental entity issues an order permanently prohibiting the Recapitalization, (iii) there is an uncured breach of the Recapitalization Agreement by the other party that results in a condition to closing not being capable of being satisfied, or (iv) the Closing does not occur on or before July 31, 2023. Failure to complete the transactions contemplated by the Recapitalization Agreement could adversely affect our business and the market price of our common stock in a number of ways, including: the market price of our common stock may decline to the extent that the current market price reflects an assumption that these transactions will be completed; we have incurred, and will continue to incur, significant expenses for professional services in connection with these transactions for which we will have received little or no benefit if the transactions contemplated by the Recapitalization Agreement are not consummated; and a failure of these transactions to be completed may result in negative publicity and/or give a negative impression of us in the investment community or business community generally. Upon the completion of the transactions pursuant to the Recapitalization Agreement, Starboard will beneficially own a significant portion of our outstanding common stock, and therefore have significant influence over the outcome of matters subject to stockholder approval, including a change of control, which could make our common stock less attractive to some investors or otherwise harm our stock price. As a result of the completion of the transactions contemplated by the Recapitalization Agreement, including the issuance of 15,000,000 shares of common stock in the Concurrent Private Rights Offering (as defined herein), 31,506,849 shares of common stock in the Series B Warrants Exercise (as defined herein) and 9,589,042 shares of common stock in the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock conversion, Starboard may hold up to 61.3% of our common stock, representing up to 61.3% of the voting power of our common stock, based on 43,484,867 shares outstanding as of December 31, 2022. Recognizing Starboard's significant ownership following the conclusion of the transactions contemplated under the Recapitalization Agreement, we agreed to certain governance provisions with Starboard including that for a period from the date of the Recapitalization Agreement until May 12, 2026 (the “Applicable Period”), the Board will include at least two (2) directors that are independent of, and not affiliates (as defined in Rule 144 of the Securities Act as amended) of, Starboard, with current Board members Maureen O’Connell and Isaac T. Kohlberg satisfying this initial condition. We and Starboard also agreed that Katharine Wolanyk will continue to serve as a director of the Company until at least May 12, 2024 (or such earlier date if Ms. Wolanyk is unwilling or unable to serve as a director for any reason or resigns as a director). The Company and Starboard also agreed that, following the closing of the Series B Warrants Exercise (the 13 Table of Contents “Closing”) until the end of the Applicable Period, the number of directors serving on the Board will not exceed 10 members. The Recapitalization Agreement also includes a “fair price” provision requiring, in addition to any other stockholder vote required by the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation or Delaware law, the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the outstanding voting stock held by stockholders of the Company other than Starboard and its affiliates, by or with whom or on whose behalf, directly or indirectly, a business combination is proposed, in order to approve such a business combination; provided , that the additional majority voting requirement would not be applicable if either (x) the business combination is approved by the Board by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the directors who are unaffiliated with Starboard or (y) (i) the consideration to be received by stockholders other than Starboard and its affiliates meets certain minimum price conditions, and (ii) the consideration to be received by stockholders other than Starboard and its affiliates is of the same form and kind as the consideration paid by Starboard and its affiliates. Starboard will have significant influence over matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, including the election of directors, the approval of any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets, other decisions affecting our capital structure; amendments to our certificate of incorporation or our bylaws; and our winding up and dissolution. This concentration of voting power might delay, defer or prevent a change in control or delay or prevent a merger, consolidation, takeover or other business combination involving us on terms that other stockholders may desire, which, in each case, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Starboard may seek to cause us to take courses of action that, in its judgment, could enhance its investment in us, but which might involve risks to our other stockholders or adversely affect us or our other stockholders. As a result, the market price of our common stock could decline or stockholders might not receive a premium over the then-current market price of our common stock upon a change in control. In addition, this concentration of share ownership may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock because investors may perceive disadvantages in owning shares in a company with significant stockholders. Upon the completion of the transactions pursuant to the Recapitalization Agreement, we may become a "controlled company" within the meaning of the Nasdaq listing standards and, as a result, may qualify for, and may decide to rely on, exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements. If we decide to rely on those exemptions, our stockholders will not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to such requirements. Upon the completion of the transactions pursuant to the Recapitalization Agreement, Starboard may control a majority of the voting power of our outstanding common stock. As a result, we may qualify as a “controlled company” within the meaning of the corporate governance standards of Nasdaq. Under these rules, a listed company of which more than 50% of the voting power is held by an individual, group or another company is a “controlled company” and may avail itself of certain corporate governance exemptions afforded to controlled companies, including the requirements that a majority of the Board consist of independent directors, we have a nominating and corporate governance committee that is composed entirely of independent directors, and we have a compensation committee that is composed entirely of independent directors. If we become a controlled company upon the completion of the transactions pursuant to the Recapitalization Agreement, we may decide to rely on some or all of these exemptions. Accordingly, if we decide to rely on those exemptions our stockholders will not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to all of the corporate governance requirements of Nasdaq. Risks Related to our Intellectual Property Business and Industry Our intellectual property business is reliant on the strength of our patent portfolios and is subject to evolving legislation, regulations, and rules associated with patent law. The success of our intellectual property business is heavily dependent obtaining and enforcing patents. Patent acquisition and enforcement is costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. Obtaining and enforcing patents across various industries, including the life science industry, involves a high degree of technological and legal complexity. Our patent rights may be affected by developments or uncertainty in U.S. or foreign patent statutes, patent case law, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") rules and regulations and the rules and regulations of foreign patent offices. In addition, the United States may, at any time, enact changes to U.S. patent law and regulations, including by legislation, by regulatory 14 Table of Contents rulemaking, or by judicial precedent, that adversely affect the scope of patent protection available and weaken the rights of patent owners to obtain patents, enforce against patent infringement and obtain injunctions and/or damages. For example, over the past several years, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court issued various opinions, and the USPTO modified its guidance for practitioners on multiple occasions, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. Other countries may likewise enact changes to their patent laws in ways that adversely diminish the scope of patent protection and weaken the rights of patent owners to obtain patents, enforce against patent infringement, and obtain injunctions and/or damages. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. We cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in our patents or in third-party patents, and whether Congress or other foreign legislative bodies may pass patent reform legislation that is unfavorable to us, which, may in turn, affect the value of our patent assets. Further, the United States and other governments may, at any time, enact changes to law and regulation that create new avenues for challenging the validity of issued patents. For example, the America Invents Act created new administrative post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter-partes review, and derivation proceedings that allow third parties to challenge the validity of issued patents. This applies to all of our U.S. patents, even those issued before March 16, 2013. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in U.S. federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future. Additionally, new rules regarding the burden of proof in patent enforcement actions could significantly increase the cost of our enforcement actions, and new standards or limitations on liability for patent infringement could negatively impact our revenue derived from such enforcement actions. In addition, recent federal court decisions have lowered the threshold for obtaining attorneys’ fees in patent infringement cases and increased the level of deference given to a district court’s fee-shifting determination. These decisions may make it easier for district courts to shift a prevailing party’s attorneys’ fees to a non-prevailing party if the district court believes that the case was weak or conducted in an abusive manner. As a result, defendants in patent infringement actions brought by non-practicing entities may elect not to settle because these decisions make it much easier for defendants to get attorneys’ fees. Finally, it is difficult to predict the outcome of patent enforcement litigation at the trial level and outcomes can be unfavorable. It can be difficult to understand complex patented technologies, and as a result, this may lead to a higher rate of unfavorable litigation outcomes. Moreover, in the event of a favorable outcome, there is often a higher rate of successful appeals in patent enforcement litigation than more standard business litigation. Such appeals are expensive and time consuming, resulting in increased costs and a potential for delayed or foregone revenue opportunities in the event of modification or reversal of favorable outcomes. Although we diligently pursue enforcement litigation, we cannot predict with reliability the decisions made by juries and trial courts. We expect patent-related legal expenses to continue to fluctuate from period to period. Our patent-related legal expenses may fluctuate based on the factors summarized herein, in connection with future trial dates, international enforcement, strategic patent portfolio prosecution and our current and future patent portfolio investment, prosecution, licensing and enforcement activities. The pursuit of enforcement actions in connection with our licensing and enforcement programs can involve certain risks and uncertainties, including the following: • Increases in patent-related legal expenses associated with patent infringement litigation, including, but not limited to, increases in costs billed by outside legal counsel for discovery, depositions, economic analyses, damages assessments, expert witnesses and other consultants, re-exam and inter partes review costs, case-related audio/video presentations and other litigation support and administrative costs could increase our operating costs and decrease our profit generating opportunities; 15 Table of Contents • Our patented technologies and enforcement actions are complex and, as a result, we may be required to appeal adverse decisions by trial courts in order to successfully enforce our patents. Moreover, such appeals may not be successful; • New legislation, regulations or rules related to enforcement actions, including any fee or cost shifting provisions, could significantly increase our operating costs and decrease our profit generating opportunities. Increased focus on the growing number of patent-related lawsuits may result in legislative changes which increase our costs and related risks of asserting patent enforcement actions; • Courts may rule that our subsidiaries have violated certain statutory, regulatory, federal, local or governing rules or standards by pursuing such enforcement actions, which may expose us and our operating subsidiaries to material liabilities, which could harm our operating results and our financial position; • The complexity of negotiations and potential magnitude of exposure for potential infringers associated with higher quality patent portfolios may lead to increased intervals of time between the filing of litigation and potential revenue events (i.e., markman dates, trial dates), which may lead to increased legal expenses, consistent with the higher revenue potential of such portfolios; and • Fluctuations in overall patent portfolio related enforcement activities, which are impacted by the portfolio intake challenges discussed above that could harm our operating results and our financial position. Patent litigation is inherently risky because courts may find our patents invalid, not infringed, or unenforceable, and the USPTO, or other relevant patent office, may either invalidate our patents or materially narrow the scope of their claims during the course of a reexamination, opposition or other such proceeding. Patent litigation is inherently risky and may result in the invalidation of our patents, even if we are the plaintiff in an underlying action. It is difficult to predict the outcome of patent enforcement litigation at any level. Although we diligently pursue enforcement litigation, we cannot predict with significant reliability the decisions made by juries and trial courts. At the trial level, it is often difficult for juries and trial judges to understand complex, patented technologies, and as a result, there is a higher rate of successful appeals in patent enforcement litigation than more standard business litigation. The defendant to any case we bring may file as many appeals as allowed by right, including to District Court, the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court. Such appeals are expensive and time-consuming, and the outcomes of such appeals are sometimes unpredictable, resulting in increased costs and reduced or delayed revenue which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. These appeals may also result in the invalidation of our patents, which may have an adverse impact on our operations and financial performance. The enforcement of our intellectual property depends in part upon our ability to retain the best legal counsel in order to achieve favorable outcomes from litigation, and we may become conflicted out of such representation. The success of our intellectual property business depends in part upon our ability to retain the best legal counsel to coordinate our patent infringement litigation matters. As our intellectual property business evolves, we expect it will become more difficult to find the best legal counsel to handle all of our patent matters due in part to potential conflicts of interest. This is because, from time to time, the counterparties to our litigation matters have previously engaged world class law firms that are specialized to the industries of the patents at issue in such matters. These previous engagements may have, or may in the future, result in these firms being conflicted out of representing us. In addition, counterparties in our patent litigation matters may devote a substantial amount of resources to avoid or limit a finding that they are liable for infringing on our patents or, in the event liability is found, to avoid or limit the amount of associated damages. There is a risk these counterparties may file inter-partes reviews, reexaminations or other proceedings with the USPTO or other government agencies in the United States or abroad in an attempt to invalidate, narrow the scope or render unenforceable the patents we own or control. If this were to occur, it may have a significant negative impact on the operations of our intellectual property business. 16 Table of Contents The inability to retain the best legal counsel to represent our operating businesses in infringement actions may result in unfavorable or adverse outcomes, which may result in losses, exhaustion of financial resources or other adverse effects which could encumber our ability to effectively operate our business or execute our business strategy. We cannot ensure that any of our current or prospective patent prosecution or litigation matters will result in a favorable outcome for us. We may experience delays in successful prosecution, enforcement, and licensing of our patent portfolio. The value of our patent portfolios is dependent upon the issuance of patents in a timely manner. More patent applications are filed each year, resulting in longer delays in getting patents issued by the USPTO. We believe this increase in patent applications has resulted in longer delays in obtaining approval of pending patent applications. If the USPTO experiences reductions in funding, it could have an adverse impact on the cost of processing pending patent applications and the value of those pending patent applications, negatively impacting the value of our patent portfolio pipeline. Further, reductions in funding from Congress could result in higher patent application filing and maintenance fees charged by the USPTO, causing an increase in our expenses. Application delays could cause delays in recognizing revenue from these patents and could cause us to miss opportunities to license patents before other competing technologies are developed or introduced into the market. After prosecuting our patents, our Intellectual Property business can incur significant general and administrative and legal expense prior to entering into license agreements and generating license revenues. We spend considerable resources educating prospective licensees on the benefits of a license arrangement with us. As such, we may incur significant losses in any particular period before any associated revenue stream begins. We are frequently engaged in litigation to enforce the terms of our existing license agreements, protect our trade secrets, or determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others. Enforcement proceedings are typically protracted and complex. The costs are typically substantial, and the outcomes are unpredictable. Enforcement actions divert our managerial, technical, legal and financial resources from business operations and there are no assurances that such enforcement actions will result in favorable results for us. Patent litigation schedules in general, and in particular trial dates, are subject to routine adjustment, and in most cases delay, as courts adjust their calendars or respond to requests from one or more parties. Trial dates often are rescheduled by the court for various reasons that are often unrelated to the underlying patent assets and typically for reasons that are beyond our control. As a result, to the extent such events are an indicator of possible future revenue opportunities for us, or other outcome determinative events, they may and often do change which can result in delay of the expected scheduled event. Any such delay could be significant and could affect the corresponding future revenue opportunities, thus adversely impacting our business, results of operations and financial condition. Further, federal courts are becoming more crowded, and as a result, patent enforcement litigation is taking longer. Our patent enforcement actions are almost exclusively prosecuted in federal court. Federal trial courts that hear our patent enforcement actions also hear criminal cases. Criminal cases tend to take priority over our actions. As a result, it is difficult to predict the length of time it will take to complete an enforcement action. Moreover, we believe there is a trend in increasing numbers of civil lawsuits and criminal proceedings before federal judges and, as a result, we believe that the risk of delays in our patent enforcement actions will have a greater negative effect on our business in the future unless this trend changes. Risks Related to our Operating Businesses Certain of our operating businesses rely, or may rely in the future, on their intellectual property and licenses to use others’ intellectual property for competitive advantage. If our operating businesses are unable to protect their intellectual property or obtain or retain licenses to use other’s intellectual property, or if they infringe upon or are alleged to have infringed upon others’ intellectual property, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, business and results of operations. Certain of our operating businesses’ success depend in part on their, or licenses to use others’, brand names, proprietary technology and manufacturing techniques. These businesses rely on a combination of patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions to protect their intellectual property rights. The steps they have taken to protect their intellectual property rights may not prevent third parties from using their intellectual property and other proprietary information without their authorization or independently developing intellectual property and other 17 Table of Contents proprietary information that is similar. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our businesses’ intellectual property rights effectively or to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Stopping unauthorized use of our operating businesses’ proprietary information and intellectual property and defending claims that they have made unauthorized use of others’ proprietary information or intellectual property, may be difficult, time consuming, and costly. The use of their intellectual property and other proprietary information by others, and the use by others of their intellectual property and proprietary information, could reduce or eliminate any competitive advantage they have developed, cause them to lose sales or otherwise harm their business. Our operating businesses may become involved in legal proceedings and claims in the future either to protect their intellectual property or to defend allegations that they have infringed upon others’ intellectual property rights. These claims and any resulting litigation could subject them to significant liability for damages and invalidate their property rights. In addition, these lawsuits, regardless of their merits, could be time consuming and expensive to resolve and could divert management’s time and attention. The costs associated with any of these actions could be substantial and could have a material adverse effect on their financial condition, business, and results of operations. Certain of our operating businesses’ inability to develop new products and enhance existing products to meet customer product requirements on a cost competitive basis may negatively impact our results of operations. The future results of operations of our operating businesses, including Printronix, may be adversely affected if they are unable to continue to develop, manufacture and market products that are reliable, competitive, and meet customers’ needs. The markets for matrix printers, associated supplies and software are aggressively competitive, especially with respect to pricing and the introduction of new technologies and products offering improved features and functionality. In addition, the introduction of any significant new and/or disruptive technology or business model by a competitor that substantially changes the markets into which our operating businesses sell their products or demand for the products they sell could severely impact sales of their products and our results of operations. The impact of competitive activities on the sales volumes or our revenue, or our inability to effectively deal with these competitive issues, could have a material adverse effect on our ability to attract and retain customers and maintain or grow market share. The competitive pressure to develop technology and products and to increase our investment in research and development and marketing expenditures also could cause significant changes in the level of our operating expense. Certain of our operating businesses are dependent on a limited number of customers to derive a large portion of their revenue, and the loss of one of these customers may adversely affect the financial condition, business and results of operations of these businesses. Printronix derives a significant amount of revenue from a concentrated number of retailers, distributors, and manufacturers. Any negative change involving these retailers, distributors, and manufacturers, including industry consolidation, store closings, reduction in purchasing levels or bankruptcies, could negatively impact the sales of these businesses and may have a material adverse effect on the results of operations, financial condition and cash flows of these businesses. Certain of our operating businesses have limited suppliers for key product components and services they rely on and any interruption in supply could impair their ability to make and deliver their signature products, adversely affecting our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Outsourced providers and component suppliers have played, and will continue to play, a key role in Printronix’s manufacturing operations, field installation and support, and many of its transactional and administrative functions, such as information technology, facilities management, and certain elements of our finance organization. These providers and suppliers might suffer financial setbacks, be acquired by third parties, become subject to exclusivity arrangements that preclude further business with us or be unable to meet our requirements or expectation due to their independent business decisions, or force majeure events that could interrupt or impair their continued ability to perform as we expect. Although our operating businesses may attempt to select reputable providers and suppliers and attempt to secure their performance on terms documented in written contracts, it is possible that one or more of these providers or suppliers could fail to perform as we expect, or fail to secure or protect intellectual property rights, and such failure could have an adverse impact on our business. In some cases, the requirements of our business mandate that we obtain certain components and sub-assemblies included in our products from a single supplier or a limited group of suppliers. Where practical, we endeavor to establish alternative sources to mitigate the risk that the failure of any single provider or supplier will adversely affect our business, but this is not feasible in all circumstances. There is therefore a risk that a prolonged inability to obtain 18 Table of Contents certain components or secure key services could impair our ability to manage operations, ship products and generate revenues, which could adversely affect our results of operations and damage our customer relationships. Failure of certain of our operating businesses to manage inventory levels or production capacity may negatively impact our results of operations. Printronix’s financial performance depends in part upon their ability to successfully forecast the timing and extent of customer demand and reseller demand to manage worldwide distribution and inventory levels. Unexpected fluctuations in customer demand or in reseller inventory levels could disrupt ordering patterns and may adversely affect our financial results, inventory levels and cash flows. In addition, the financial failure or loss of a key customer, reseller or supplier could have a material adverse impact on our financial results. We must also address production and supply constraints, including product disruptions caused by quality issues, and delays or disruptions in the supply of key components necessary for production. Such delays, disruptions or shortages may result in lost revenue or in additional costs to meet customer demand. Our future results of operations and ability to effectively grow or maintain market share may be adversely affected if we are unable to address these issues on a timely basis. Certain of our operating businesses’ inability to perform satisfactorily under service contracts for managed print services may negatively impact our financial performance and results of operations. Printronix continuously seeks to develop new services and products that complement or leverage the underlying design or process technology of its traditional product and service offerings. Printronix makes significant investments in service and product technologies and anticipate expending significant resources for new software-led services and product development over the next several years. There can be no assurance that Printronix’s service and product development efforts will be successful, it will be able to cost effectively develop or manufacture these new services and products, or will be able to successfully market these services and products or that margins generated from sales of these services and products will recover costs of development efforts. Further, Printronix’s inability to perform satisfactorily under service contracts for managed print services and other customer services may result in the loss of customers, loss of reputation and/or financial consequences that may have a material adverse impact our financial results and strategy. Decreased consumption of supplies could negatively impact the results of operations of certain of our operating businesses. Printronix expects approximately 48.0% of its revenue for its fiscal year ending March 31, 2023 will be derived from the sale of supplies. Our future results of operations may be adversely affected if the consumption of Printronix’s supplies by end users of its products is lower than expected or declines, if there are declines in pricing, unfavorable mix and/or increased costs. Further, changes of printing behavior driven by adoption of electronic processes and/or use of mobile devices such as tablets and smart phones by businesses could result in a reduction in printing, which could adversely impact consumption of supplies. Due to the international nature of certain of our operating businesses, changes in a country’s or region’s political or economic conditions or other factors could negatively impact the results of operations of certain of our operating businesses. We expect revenue derived from international sales will comprise approximately 53.3% of Printronix’s revenue for its fiscal year ending March 31, 2023. Accordingly, Printronix’s future results could be adversely affected by a variety of factors, including changes in a specific country’s or region’s political or economic conditions; foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations; conflict and war; trade protection measures; local labor regulations; import, export or other licensing requirements; requirements related to making foreign direct investments; and unexpected changes in legal or regulatory requirements. As an example, in addition to indirectly raising transportation costs of the raw materials Printronix uses to manufacture its products, the invasion of Ukraine by Russia in March 2022 required Printronix to adapt its operations and require its customers in the region to pre-pay expenses such that Printronix can avoid accruing accounts receivable. The duration and magnitude of the impacts of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Printronix’s business remain uncertain, and we will continue to monitor the situation and adapt our operations accordingly. In addition, changes in tax laws and the ability to repatriate cash accumulated outside the United States in a tax efficient manner may adversely affect Printronix’s financial results, investment flexibility and operations. Moreover, margins on 19 Table of Contents international sales tend to be lower than those on domestic sales, and we believe international operations in emerging geographic markets will be less profitable than operations in the U.S. and European markets, in part, because of the higher investment levels for marketing, selling and distribution required to enter these markets. In many foreign countries, particularly those with developing economies, it is common for local business practices to be prohibited by laws and regulations applicable to Printronix, such as employment laws, fair trade laws or the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Although Printronix implements policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance with these laws, our employees, contractors and agents, as well as those business partners to which Printronix outsources certain business operations, may take actions in violation of these policies. Any such violation, even if prohibited by our policies, could have a material adverse effect on our business and reputation. Because of the challenges in managing a geographically dispersed workforce, there also may be additional opportunities for employees to commit fraud or personally engage in practices which violate our policies and procedures. Risks Related to our Common Stock Our quarterly performance may be volatile, which in turn may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock. Due to the nature of our intellectual property business and reliance on our operating businesses on intellectual property, legal expenses associated with acquisitions, uncertainties regarding the amount and timing of our receipt of license and other fees from potential infringers, stemming primarily from uncertainties regarding the outcome of enforcement actions, rates of adoption of our patented technologies, the growth rates of our existing licensees, and certain other factors, our revenues may vary significantly from quarter to quarter and period to period, which could make our business difficult to manage, adversely affect our business and results of operations, and cause our quarterly and periodic results to fall below market expectations. As a result of these factors, quarter-to-quarter comparisons of our financial results, especially in the short term, may have limited utility as an indicator of future performance. Significant variation in our quarterly performance, compounded by the thin trading volume of our common stock, could significantly and adversely affect the trading price of our common stock. Future sales of our common stock could reduce the market price of our common stock . In the future, we may issue securities to raise cash for operations and patent portfolio investments, or pay for interests in additional subsidiary companies by using shares of our common stock or a combination of cash and shares of our common stock. We may also issue securities convertible into our common stock. Any of these events may dilute stockholders’ ownership interests in our company and have an adverse impact on the price of our common stock. Sales of a substantial amount of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that these sales may occur, could reduce the market price of our common stock. This could also impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of our securities. Delaware law and our charter documents contain provisions that could discourage or prevent a potential takeover of our company that might otherwise result in our stockholders receiving a premium over the market price of their shares . Provisions of Delaware law and our certificate of incorporation and bylaws could make the acquisition of our company by means of a tender offer, proxy contest or otherwise, and the removal of incumbent officers and directors, more difficult. These provisions include: • Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which prohibits a merger with a 15%-or-greater stockholder, such as a party that has completed a successful tender offer, until three years after that party became a 15%-or-greater stockholder; • the authorization in our certificate of incorporation of undesignated preferred stock, which could be issued without stockholder approval in a manner designed to prevent or discourage a takeover; and • the general restriction in our certificate of incorporation on any direct or indirect transfers of our common stock if the effect would be to (i) increase the direct or indirect ownership of our common stock by any person or group from less than 4.899% to 4.899% or more of our common stock; or (ii) increase the percentage of our common stock owned directly or indirectly by a person or group owning or deemed to own 4.899% or more of our common stock. 20 Table of Contents Together, these provisions may make the removal of management more difficult and may discourage transactions that could otherwise involve payment of a premium over prevailing market prices for our common stock. We do not currently intend to pay dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future, and consequently, your ability to achieve a return on your investment will depend on appreciation in the price of our common stock. We do not anticipate paying any cash dividends to holders of our common stock in the foreseeable future. Consequently, investors must rely on sales of their common stock after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any future gains on their investments. There is no guarantee that shares of our common stock will appreciate in value or even maintain the price at which our stockholders have purchased their shares. The issuance of the Starboard Securities (defined below) to Starboard and its permitted transferees dilutes the ownership and relative voting power of holders of our common stock and Starboard's sale of Company securities may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Pursuant to a Securities Purchase Agreement with Starboard, dated November 18, 2019, the Company sold to Starboard (i) 350,000 shares of its newly designated Series A Preferred Stock and Series A Warrants to purchase up to 5 million shares of common stock in 2019, and (ii) Series B Warrants to purchase up to 100 million shares of common stock in 2020. The investment by Starboard is referred to herein as the “Starboard Investment,” and the Series A Preferred Stock, Series A Warrants and Series B Warrants are referred to herein as, collectively, the “Starboard Securities.” The Se ries A Preferred Stock held by Starboard represents approximately 17.1% of our outstanding common stock on an as-converted basis. Because holders of our Series A Preferred Stock are entitled to vote, on an as-converted basis, together with holders of our common stock on all matters submitted to a vote of the holders of our common stock, the issuance of the Series A Preferred Stock to Starboard effectively reduces the relative voting power of the holders of our common stock. In addition, the conversion and/or exercise of the Starboard Securities into common stock would dilute the ownership interest of existing holders of our common stock. Furthermore, any sales in the public market of the common stock issuable upon conversion or exercise of the Starboard Securities could adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common stock. On February 14, 2023, we entered into an amended and restated registration rights agreement (the “Registration Rights Agreement”) with Starboard and certain of its affiliates, as contemplated by the Recapitalization Agreement. Pursuant to the Registration Rights Agreement, the Company has agreed to file a registration statement covering the resale of certain shares of our common stock issuable or issued to Starboard and such affiliates pursuant to or in accordance with Section 1.1 of the Recapitalization Agreement, including the shares issued to Starboard in the Concurrent Private Rights Offering (as defined below), within 90 days after a written request made prior to the first anniversary of the Closing Date (as defined in the Registration Rights Agreement). The Registration Rights Agreement also provides Starboard and such affiliates with additional rights to require that the Company file a registration statement in other circumstances. These registrations may facilitate the resale of such securities into the public market, and any such resale would increase the number of shares of our common stock available for public trading. Sales by Starboard of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that such sales might occur, could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Our Series A Preferred Stock has rights, preferences and privileges that are not held by, and are preferential to, the rights of, our common stockholders, which could adversely affect our liquidity and financial condition, result in the interests of holders of our Series A Preferred Stock differing from those of our common stockholders and delay or prevent an attempt to take over the Company. Starboard and the other holders of our Series A Preferred Stock have a liquidation preference entitling them to be paid, before any payment may be made to holders of our common stock in connection with a liquidation event, an amount per share of Series A Preferred Stock equal to the greater of (i) the stated value thereof plus accrued and unpaid dividends, and (ii) the amount that would have been received had such share of Series A Preferred Stock been converted into common stock immediately prior to such liquidation event. Holders of Series A Preferred Stock are entitled to a preferential cumulative dividend at the rate of 3.0% per annum, payable quarterly in arrears. Upon the consummation of a suitable investment or acquisition by the Company, such investment to be identified and approved by each of the Company and Starboard, the dividend rate will increase to 8.0% per annum. 21 Table of Contents The holders of our Series A Preferred Stock also have certain redemption rights, including the right to require us to repurchase all or any portion of the Series A Preferred Stock during certain specified periods and subject to certain conditions set forth in the Certificate of Designations, Preferences, and Rights of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, or the Certificate of Designations. Holders of the Series A Preferred Stock also have the right, subject to certain exceptions, to require us to repurchase all or any portion of the Series A Preferred Stock upon certain change of control events. These dividend and share repurchase obligations could impact our liquidity and reduce the amount of cash flows available for working capital, capital expenditures, growth opportunities, acquisitions, and other general corporate purposes. The preferential rights could also result in divergent interests between Starboard and holders of our common stock. Furthermore, a sale of our Company, as a change of control event, may require us to repurchase Series A Preferred Stock, which could have the effect of making an acquisition of the Company more expensive and potentially deterring proposed transactions that may otherwise be beneficial to our stockholders. Subject to the receipt of stockholder approval at the Company’s next annual meeting of stockholders, (i) the Company will cause the Amended and Restated Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, dated as of January 7, 2020 (the “Certificate of Designations”) to be amended and restated in the form attached to the Recapitalization Agreement in order to remove the “4.89% blocker” provision and (ii) on or prior to July 14, 2023,Starboard will convert an aggregate amount of 350,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock into Common Stock in accordance with the terms of the Certificate of Designations. We agreed to certain Governance Provisions with Starboard. In connection with the Starboard Investment, the Company and Starboard entered into a Governance Agreement, dated as of November 18, 2019 and amended on January 7, 2020, (the "Governance Agreement"), which granted to Starboard certain consent and other governance rights. Under the Recapitalization Agreement, we agreed with Starboard that for a period from the date of the Recapitalization Agreement until May 12, 2026 (the “Applicable Period”), the Board will include at least two (2) directors that are independent of, and not affiliates (as defined in Rule 144 of the Securities Act as amended) of, Starboard, with current Board members Maureen O’Connell and Isaac T. Kohlberg satisfying this initial condition. We and Starboard also agreed that Katharine Wolanyk will continue to serve as a director of the Company until at least May 12, 2024 (or such earlier date if Ms. Wolanyk is unwilling or unable to serve as a director for any reason or resigns as a director). Additionally, within five (5) business days following the date of the Recapitalization Agreement, the Company appointed Gavin Molinelli as a Board member and as Chair of the Board. The Company and Starboard also agreed that, following the closing of the Series B Warrants Exercise (the “Closing”) until the end of the Applicable Period, the number of directors serving on the Board will not exceed 10 members. Following the Closing, the Governance Agreement shall be automatically terminated and of no further force and effect without any further action by any party thereto. ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS None.