ACACIA RESEARCH CORP 10-K

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS In the ordinary course of business, we are the subject of, or party to, various pending or threatened legal actions, including various counterclaims in connection with our patent enforcement activities. We believe that any liability arising from these actions will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Our operating subsidiaries are often required to engage in litigation to enforce their patents and patent rights. Certain of our operating subsidiaries are parties to ongoing patent enforcement related litigation, alleging infringement by third-parties of certain of the patented technologies owned or controlled by our operating subsidiaries. In connection with any of our patent enforcement actions, it is possible that a defendant may claim and/or a court may rule that we have violated statutory authority, regulatory authority, federal rules, local court rules, or governing standards relating to the substantive or procedural aspects of such enforcement actions. In such event, a court may issue monetary sanctions against us or our operating subsidiaries or award attorney’s fees and/or expenses to a defendant(s), which could be material, and if required to be paid by us or our operating subsidiaries, could materially harm our operating results and our financial position. We spend a significant amount of our financial and management resources to pursue our current litigation matters. We believe that these litigation matters and others that we may in the future determine to pursue could continue for years and continue to consume significant financial and management resources. The counterparties to our litigation are sometimes large, well-financed companies with substantially greater resources than us. We cannot assure you that any of our current or future litigation matters will result in a favorable outcome for us. In addition, in part due to the appeals process and other legal processes, even if we obtain favorable interim rulings or verdicts in particular litigation matters, they may not be predictive of the ultimate resolution of the dispute. Also, we cannot assure you that we will not be exposed to claims or sanctions against us which may be costly or impossible for us to defend. Unfavorable or adverse outcomes may result in losses, exhaustion of financial resources or other adverse effects which could encumber our ability to effectively and efficiently monetize our assets. On September 6, 2019, Slingshot Technologies, LLC, or Slingshot, filed a lawsuit in Delaware Chancery Court against the Company and Acacia Research Group, LLC, or collectively, the Acacia Entities , Monarch Networking Solutions LLC (“Monarch”) , Acacia board member Katharine Wolanyk, and Transpacific IP Group, Ltd., or Transpacific. Slingshot alleges that the Acacia Entities and Monarch misappropriated its confidential and proprietary information, purportedly furnished to the Acacia Entities and Monarch by Ms. Wolanyk, in acquiring a patent portfolio from Transpacific after Slingshot’s exclusive option to purchase the same patent portfolio from Transpacific had already expired. Slingshot seeks monetary damages, as well as equitable and injunctive relief related to its alleged right to own the portfolio. On March 15, 2021, the court issued orders granting Monarch’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and Ms. Wolanyk’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Acacia Entities maintain that Slingshot’s allegations are baseless, that the Acacia Entities neither had access to nor used Slingshot’s information in acquiring the portfolio, that the Acacia Entities acquired the portfolio as a result of the independent efforts of its IP licensing group, and that Slingshot suffered no damages given its exclusive option to purchase the portfolio had already ended and it has proven itself incapable of closing on the portfolio purchase. ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES None. 19 PART II