LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
−Removed: Other than as discussed below, during the period covered by this report, there were no material developments in the legal proceedings disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.
+Added: Other than as discussed below, during the period covered by this report, there were no material developments in the legal proceedings disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 and our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2022.
Pegasystems Litigation
−Removed: As previously disclosed, on May 29, 2020, we filed a civil complaint against Pegasystems, Inc.
−Removed: (“Pegasystems”), and Youyong Zou, a Virginia resident, in the Circuit Court for Fairfax County, Virginia, alleging claims for trade secret misappropriation, violation of the Virginia Computer Crimes Act (“VCCA”), tortious interference, and statutory business and common law conspiracy.
+Added: On May 29, 2020, we filed a civil complaint against Pegasystems Inc.
+Added: (“Pegasystems”) and Youyong Zou, a Virginia resident, in the Circuit Court for Fairfax County, Virginia.
Pegasystems Inc.
1 unchanged sentence
2020-07216 (Fairfax Cty.
−Removed: On April 12, 2022, we voluntarily dismissed our tortious interference claim, and on April 13, 2022, the court denied Pegasystems’ motion to strike our claims after Appian concluded its case in chief, allowing the case to proceed to verdict.
−Removed: As of May 4, 2022, the trial is ongoing and set to be presented to the jury for deliberations imminently.
−Removed: Also, as previously disclosed, on July 3, 2019, Pegasystems filed a claim against us and BPM.com, Inc., a market analyst company, in U.S.
+Added: Ct.), and on May 9, 2022, the jury in the case awarded us $2.036 billion in damages for misappropriation of our trade secrets and $1 in damages for violating the Virginia Computer Crimes Act.
+Added: Pegasystems filed post-trial motions in which it seeks relief in the form of reducing the damages award or setting aside the jury’s verdict and either granting a new trial or entering judgment in Pegasystems’ favor.
+Added: One of these motions was denied on July 28, 2022.
+Added: We believe Pegasystems’ motions are without merit.
+Added: We simultaneously filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as post-judgment interest on any award of attorneys’ fees and costs, based on the jury's finding that our trade secrets were willfully and maliciously misappropriated.
+Added: On July 3, 2019, Pegasystems filed a claim against us and BPM.com, Inc., a market analyst company, in U.S.
District Court for the District of Massachusetts alleging, among other things, that we had engaged in false advertising by re-publishing a study by BPM.com comparing us favorably to Pegasystems and by failing to disclose we commissioned the study.
2 unchanged sentences
1:19-cv-11461 (D.
−Removed: On April 15, 2022, each of the parties filed motions for summary judgment with the court.
+Added: We filed counterclaims against Pegasystems for false advertising, alleging numerous marketing and advertising materials used by Pegasystems, including that a report purportedly authored by Jim Sinur, a former industry analyst, were false and/or misleading and, in the case of the Sinur report, Pegasystems failed to disclose that it had commissioned the report.
+Added: We also made a claim for defamation against Pegasystems based on public statements by Pegasystems’ executives.
+Added: On July 15, 2022, the Court heard oral argument on the parties’ summary judgment motions but has not yet entered an order on either party’s motion.
We continue to believe Pegasystems’ claims are without merit.
4 unchanged sentences
Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.