e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number 1-33579
INTERDIGITAL, INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
|
|
|
PENNSYLVANIA
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)
|
|
23-1882087
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.) |
781 Third Avenue, King of Prussia, PA 19406-1409
(Address of Principal Executive Offices and Zip Code)
(610) 878-7800
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (Section 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12
months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
(Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer þ
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuers classes of common stock, as of
the latest practicable date.
|
|
|
Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share
|
|
44,318,709 |
|
|
|
Title of Class
|
|
Outstanding at October 25, 2010 |
INTERDIGITAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PAGES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
25 |
|
EX-10.1 |
|
|
|
|
EX-10.2 |
|
|
|
|
EX-31.1 |
|
|
|
|
EX-31.2 |
|
|
|
|
EX-32.1 |
|
|
|
|
EX-32.2 |
|
|
|
|
EX-101 INSTANCE DOCUMENT |
|
|
|
|
EX-101 SCHEMA DOCUMENT |
|
|
|
|
EX-101 CALCULATION LINKBASE DOCUMENT |
|
|
|
|
EX-101 LABELS LINKBASE DOCUMENT |
|
|
|
|
EX-101 PRESENTATION LINKBASE DOCUMENT |
|
|
|
|
InterDigital® is a registered trademark and SlimChip
TM is a trademark of
InterDigital, Inc. All other trademarks, service marks and/or trade names appearing in this
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q are the property of their respective holders.
INTERDIGITAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
INTERDIGITAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(in thousands, except per share data)
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEPTEMBER 30, |
|
|
DECEMBER 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT ASSETS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
313,620 |
|
|
$ |
210,863 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
249,960 |
|
|
|
198,943 |
|
Accounts receivable, less allowances of $2,750 & $1,500 |
|
|
29,802 |
|
|
|
212,905 |
|
Deferred tax assets |
|
|
35,328 |
|
|
|
68,500 |
|
Prepaid and other current assets |
|
|
13,292 |
|
|
|
11,111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
642,002 |
|
|
|
702,322 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, NET |
|
|
8,350 |
|
|
|
10,399 |
|
PATENTS, NET |
|
|
127,493 |
|
|
|
119,170 |
|
DEFERRED TAX ASSETS |
|
|
90,994 |
|
|
|
31,652 |
|
OTHER NON-CURRENT ASSETS, NET |
|
|
44,824 |
|
|
|
44,942 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
271,661 |
|
|
|
206,163 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL ASSETS |
|
$ |
913,663 |
|
|
$ |
908,485 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT LIABILITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt |
|
$ |
286 |
|
|
$ |
584 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
9,546 |
|
|
|
6,284 |
|
Accrued compensation and related expenses |
|
|
18,288 |
|
|
|
10,592 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
157,997 |
|
|
|
193,409 |
|
Taxes payable |
|
|
32,340 |
|
|
|
33,825 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
5,959 |
|
|
|
7,866 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
224,416 |
|
|
|
252,560 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LONG-TERM DEBT |
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
468 |
|
LONG-TERM DEFERRED REVENUE |
|
|
373,143 |
|
|
|
474,844 |
|
OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES |
|
|
10,504 |
|
|
|
11,076 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES |
|
|
608,317 |
|
|
|
738,948 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock, $0.10 par value, 0 and 14,399 shares authorized
0 shares issued and outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock, $0.01 par value, 100,000 shares authorized,
67,764 and 66,831 shares issued and 44,194 and 43,261
shares outstanding |
|
|
677 |
|
|
|
668 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
507,556 |
|
|
|
491,068 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
366,076 |
|
|
|
246,771 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
277 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
874,593 |
|
|
|
738,784 |
|
Treasury stock, 23,570 shares of common held at cost |
|
|
569,247 |
|
|
|
569,247 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
305,346 |
|
|
|
169,537 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
$ |
913,663 |
|
|
$ |
908,485 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
3
INTERDIGITAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(in thousands, except per share data)
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FOR THE THREE MONTHS |
|
|
FOR THE NINE MONTHS |
|
|
|
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, |
|
|
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
REVENUES |
|
$ |
91,923 |
|
|
$ |
75,486 |
|
|
$ |
299,263 |
|
|
$ |
220,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPERATING EXPENSES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
|
7,223 |
|
|
|
4,925 |
|
|
|
21,750 |
|
|
|
19,166 |
|
Patent administration and licensing |
|
|
12,772 |
|
|
|
13,320 |
|
|
|
45,302 |
|
|
|
41,037 |
|
Development |
|
|
17,457 |
|
|
|
10,659 |
|
|
|
49,985 |
|
|
|
50,755 |
|
Repositioning |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,970 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,452 |
|
|
|
28,904 |
|
|
|
117,037 |
|
|
|
147,928 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations |
|
|
54,471 |
|
|
|
46,582 |
|
|
|
182,226 |
|
|
|
73,047 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER INCOME: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest and investment income, net |
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
531 |
|
|
|
2,045 |
|
|
|
1,985 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
55,027 |
|
|
|
47,113 |
|
|
|
184,271 |
|
|
|
75,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME TAX PROVISION |
|
|
(19,512 |
) |
|
|
(16,492 |
) |
|
|
(64,966 |
) |
|
|
(26,652 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCOME |
|
$ |
35,515 |
|
|
$ |
30,621 |
|
|
$ |
119,305 |
|
|
$ |
48,380 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE BASIC |
|
$ |
0.80 |
|
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
|
$ |
2.69 |
|
|
$ |
1.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEIGHTED AVERAGE NUMBER OF COMMON
SHARES OUTSTANDING BASIC |
|
|
44,076 |
|
|
|
43,083 |
|
|
|
43,889 |
|
|
|
43,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE DILUTED |
|
$ |
0.79 |
|
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
|
$ |
2.66 |
|
|
$ |
1.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEIGHTED AVERAGE NUMBER OF COMMON
SHARES OUTSTANDING DILUTED |
|
|
44,599 |
|
|
|
43,819 |
|
|
|
44,456 |
|
|
|
44,196 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
4
INTERDIGITAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands)
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FOR THE NINE MONTHS |
|
|
|
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
119,305 |
|
|
$ |
48,380 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
16,455 |
|
|
|
17,756 |
|
Deferred revenue recognized |
|
|
(209,115 |
) |
|
|
(164,944 |
) |
Increase in deferred revenue |
|
|
72,002 |
|
|
|
605,374 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(26,170 |
) |
|
|
(51,287 |
) |
Share-based compensation |
|
|
3,934 |
|
|
|
7,620 |
|
Non-cash repositioning charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,568 |
|
Other |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
(144 |
) |
Decrease (increase) in assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables |
|
|
183,103 |
|
|
|
(170,773 |
) |
Deferred charges |
|
|
(5,137 |
) |
|
|
3,353 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
3,054 |
|
|
|
(622 |
) |
Increase (decrease) in liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
2,234 |
|
|
|
(2,977 |
) |
Accrued compensation |
|
|
6,801 |
|
|
|
(25,610 |
) |
Accrued taxes payable |
|
|
(1,485 |
) |
|
|
33,000 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
(1,907 |
) |
|
|
2,808 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
163,144 |
|
|
|
332,502 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of short-term investments |
|
|
(508,756 |
) |
|
|
(187,290 |
) |
Sales of short-term investments |
|
|
457,695 |
|
|
|
64,995 |
|
Purchases of property and equipment |
|
|
(1,738 |
) |
|
|
(2,412 |
) |
Capitalized patent costs |
|
|
(19,963 |
) |
|
|
(21,946 |
) |
Capitalized technology license costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,115 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(72,762 |
) |
|
|
(147,768 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net proceeds from exercise of stock options |
|
|
10,625 |
|
|
|
5,156 |
|
Payments on long-term debt, including capital lease obligations |
|
|
(512 |
) |
|
|
(1,803 |
) |
Repurchase of common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,020 |
) |
Tax benefit from share-based compensation |
|
|
2,262 |
|
|
|
2,560 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided (used) by
financing activities |
|
|
12,375 |
|
|
|
(19,107 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS |
|
|
102,757 |
|
|
|
165,627 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF PERIOD |
|
|
210,863 |
|
|
|
100,144 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF PERIOD |
|
$ |
313,620 |
|
|
$ |
265,771 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
5
INTERDIGITAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
September 30, 2010
(unaudited)
1. BASIS OF PRESENTATION:
In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited, condensed consolidated financial
statements contain all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for
a fair statement of the financial position of InterDigital, Inc. (individually and/or collectively
with its subsidiaries referred to as InterDigital, the Company, we, us or our, unless
otherwise indicated) as of September 30, 2010, and the results of our operations for the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 and our cash flows for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009. The accompanying unaudited, condensed consolidated financial
statements have been prepared in accordance with the instructions for Form 10-Q and, accordingly,
do not include all of the detailed schedules, information and notes necessary to state fairly the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP). The year-end condensed consolidated balance sheet data was derived
from audited financial statements, but does not include all disclosures required by GAAP for
year-end financial statements. Therefore, these financial statements should be read in conjunction
with the financial statements and notes thereto contained in the Companys Annual Report on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 (our 2009 Form 10-K) as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on February 26, 2010. The results of operations for
interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the entire year.
We have one reportable segment.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the financial statements, as
well as the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results
could differ from these estimates.
Change in Classification
The classification of certain prior period amounts have been changed to conform to the current
year presentation.
Change in Accounting Policies
There have been no material changes in our existing accounting policies from the disclosures
included in our 2009 Form 10-K.
New Accounting Guidance
Accounting Standards Updates: Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables
In September 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) finalized revenue
recognition guidance for Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables. By providing another
alternative for determining the selling price of deliverables, the Accounting Standard Update
related to revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables will allow companies to allocate
arrangement consideration in multiple deliverable arrangements in a manner that better reflects the
transactions economics. In addition, the residual method of allocating arrangement consideration
is no longer permitted under this new guidance. This guidance is effective for fiscal years
beginning on or after June 15, 2010. However, adoption is permitted as early as the interim period
ended September 30, 2009. The guidance may be applied either prospectively from the beginning of
the fiscal year for new or materially modified arrangements or retrospectively. We have not yet
adopted this guidance. We believe that revenue recognition related to new agreements with multiple
elements may be recorded earlier under the new guidance than under existing guidance.
Accounting
Standards Updates: Fair Value Measurements
In January 2010, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on improving disclosures about fair
value measurements. This guidance requires new disclosures about transfers in and out of Level 1
and 2 measurements and separate disclosures about activity relating to Level 3 measurements. In
addition, this guidance clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation
and the input and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The guidance only relates to
disclosure and does not impact the Companys consolidated financial statements. The Company adopted
this guidance in first quarter 2010. There was no significant impact to the Companys disclosures
upon adoption, as the Company does not have any such transfers.
2. SIGNIFICANT EVENTS:
Patent Licensing
In first quarter 2010, we entered into a worldwide, non-exclusive patent license agreement
with Casio Hitachi Mobile Communications Co., Ltd. (CHMC). The patent license agreement covers
the sale by CHMC of all wireless end-user terminal devices compliant with 2G and 3G cellular
standards through June 1, 2010. In addition, in first quarter 2010, we identified additional
royalty obligations in a routine audit of an existing customer. In first nine months 2010, we have
recognized revenue totaling $39.9 million, including $35.7 million related to past sales, in
connection with these two items.
6
Technology Solutions
In third quarter 2010, we entered into a technology license agreement to provide our
SlimChipTM 2G and 3G modem technology to a mobile chipset manufacturer in
mainland China. Under the non-exclusive, royalty-bearing technology delivery agreement,
InterDigital will license a dual mode core with 2G and 3G physical layer inclusive of HSPA,
compliant with the UMTS 3GPP Release 6 standard and provide engineering support. InterDigital will
receive milestone-based payments and will be compensated on a per-unit royalty basis on sales of
products containing the delivered technology.
We are accounting for portions of this and other technology solutions agreements using the
proportional performance method. During third quarter 2010 and third quarter 2009, we recognized
related revenue of $3.2 million and $0.0 million, respectively. As of September 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009, our deferred revenue balances associated with our technology solutions
agreements accounted for using proportional performance were $2.9 million and $0.0 million,
respectively. We did not have any amounts of unbilled accounts receivable at September 30, 2010 or
December 31, 2009.
3. REPOSITIONING:
On March 30, 2009, we announced a repositioning plan that included the expansion of our
technology development and licensing business, the cessation of further ASIC development of our
SlimChip modem and efforts to monetize the SlimChip technology investment through IP licensing and
technology sales. In connection with the repositioning, the Company incurred a charge of $38.6
million during 2009, of which $37.0 million was recognized in first nine months 2009. Of the total
charge of $38.6 million, approximately $30.6 million represents long-lived asset impairments for
assets used in the product and product development, including $21.2 million of acquired intangible
assets and $9.4 million of property, equipment, and other assets.
In addition, the repositioning resulted in a reduction in force of approximately 100 employees
across the Companys three locations, the majority of which were terminated effective April 3,
2009. Approximately $8.0 million of the total repositioning charge represents cash obligations
associated with severance and contract termination costs. Substantially all of the remaining
contract termination costs are scheduled to be paid by the end of the calendar year.
We did not incur any additional repositioning charges in first nine months 2010, nor do we
expect to incur any additional repositioning costs in the future in conjunction with the wind-down
activities related to our SlimChip product development.
The following table provides information related to our accrued liability for repositioning
costs through September 30, 2010, which is included on our balance sheet within Other accrued
expenses (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset |
|
|
Severance and |
|
|
Contract |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairments |
|
|
Related Costs |
|
|
Termination Costs |
|
|
Total |
|
Expected repositioning charge |
|
$ |
30,568 |
|
|
$ |
3,893 |
|
|
$ |
4,143 |
|
|
$ |
38,604 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued Liability for Repositioning Costs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
201 |
|
|
$ |
399 |
|
|
$ |
600 |
|
Payments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
103 |
|
|
$ |
393 |
|
|
$ |
496 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
346 |
|
|
$ |
346 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
304 |
|
|
$ |
304 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. INCOME TAXES:
In first nine months 2010, our effective tax rate was approximately 35.3% based on the
statutory federal tax rate net of discrete state and foreign taxes. During first nine months 2009,
our effective tax rate was approximately 35.5% based on the statutory federal tax rate net of
discrete state and foreign taxes.
During first nine months 2010 and first nine months 2009, we paid approximately $35.2 million
and $40.7 million, respectively, of foreign withholding tax. We previously accrued the first nine
months 2010 payment and established a corresponding deferred tax asset representing the associated
foreign tax credit that we expect to utilize to offset future U.S. federal income taxes.
Our future book tax expense may also be affected by charges associated with any share-based
tax shortfalls that may occur. However, we cannot predict if, when or to what extent this will
affect our future tax expense. If, in the course of future tax planning, we identify tax saving
7
opportunities that entail amending prior year returns in order to avail ourselves fully of credits
that we previously considered unavailable to us,
we will recognize the benefit of the credits in the period in which they are both identified and
quantified, thereby reducing the book tax expense in that period.
5. NET INCOME PER SHARE:
The following table sets forth a reconciliation of the shares and the net income applicable to
common shareholders used in the basic and diluted net income per share computations (in thousands,
except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
Basic |
|
|
Diluted |
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
35,515 |
|
|
$ |
35,515 |
|
|
$ |
30,621 |
|
|
$ |
30,621 |
|
Less: income applicable to participating securities |
|
|
(325 |
) |
|
|
(322 |
) |
|
|
(456 |
) |
|
|
(448 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Net income applicable to common shareholders |
|
$ |
35,190 |
|
|
$ |
35,193 |
|
|
$ |
30,165 |
|
|
$ |
30,173 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average shares outstanding: Basic |
|
|
44,076 |
|
|
|
44,076 |
|
|
|
43,083 |
|
|
|
43,083 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilutive effect of stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
523 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average shares outstanding: Diluted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,599 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,819 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings Per Share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income: Basic |
|
$ |
0.80 |
|
|
$ |
0.80 |
|
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
|
$ |
0.70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilutive effect of stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income: Diluted |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Nine Months Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
Basic |
|
|
Diluted |
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
119,305 |
|
|
$ |
119,305 |
|
|
$ |
48,380 |
|
|
$ |
48,380 |
|
Less: income applicable to participating securities |
|
|
(1,069 |
) |
|
|
(1,055 |
) |
|
|
(749 |
) |
|
|
(735 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Net income applicable to common shareholders |
|
$ |
118,236 |
|
|
$ |
118,250 |
|
|
$ |
47,631 |
|
|
$ |
47,645 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average shares outstanding: Basic |
|
|
43,889 |
|
|
|
43,889 |
|
|
|
43,353 |
|
|
|
43,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilutive effect of stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
567 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
843 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average shares outstanding: Diluted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,456 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,196 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings Per Share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income: Basic |
|
$ |
2.69 |
|
|
$ |
2.69 |
|
|
$ |
1.10 |
|
|
$ |
1.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilutive effect of stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income: Diluted |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2.66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For both three months and nine months ended September 30, 2010, options to purchase
less than 0.1 million shares of common stock were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings
per share because the exercise prices of these options were greater than the weighted-average
market price of our common stock during these periods and, therefore, their effect would have been
anti-dilutive.
For three months and nine months ended September 30, 2009, options to purchase approximately
0.7 million and 0.5 million shares of common stock, respectively, were excluded from the
computation of diluted earnings per share because the exercise prices of these options were greater
than the weighted-average market price of our common stock during these periods and, therefore,
their effect would have been anti-dilutive.
8
6. LITIGATION AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS:
Nokia United States International Trade Commission (USITC or the Commission) Proceeding and
Related Delaware District Court and Southern District of New York Proceedings
In August 2007, InterDigital filed a USITC complaint against Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc.
(collectively, Nokia) alleging that Nokia engaged in an unfair trade practice by selling for
importation into the United States, importing into the United States, and selling after importation
into the United States, certain 3G mobile handsets and components that infringe two of
InterDigitals patents. In November and December 2007, a third patent and fourth patent,
respectively, were added to our complaint against Nokia. The complaint seeks an exclusion order
barring from entry into the United States infringing 3G mobile handsets and components that are
imported by or on behalf of Nokia. Our complaint also seeks a cease-and-desist order to bar further
sales of infringing Nokia products that have already been imported into the United States.
In addition, on the same date as our filing of the USITC action referenced above, we also
filed a complaint in the Delaware District Court alleging that Nokias 3G mobile handsets and
components infringe the same two InterDigital patents identified in the original USITC complaint.
This Delaware action was stayed on January 10, 2008, pursuant to the mandatory, statutory stay of
parallel district court proceedings at the request of a respondent in a USITC investigation. Thus,
this Delaware action is stayed with respect to the patents in this case until the USITCs
determination on these patents becomes final, including any appeals. The Delaware District Court
permitted InterDigital to add to the stayed Delaware action the third and fourth patents
InterDigital asserted against Nokia in the USITC action. Nokia, joined by Samsung Electronics Co.,
Ltd. (Samsung), moved to consolidate the Nokia USITC proceeding with an investigation we had
earlier initiated against Samsung in the USITC. On October 24, 2007, the Honorable Paul J. Luckern,
the Administrative Law Judge overseeing the two USITC proceedings against Samsung and Nokia,
respectively, issued an order to consolidate the two pending investigations. Pursuant to the order,
the schedules for both investigations were revised to consolidate proceedings and set a unified
evidentiary hearing on April 21-28, 2008, the filing of a single initial determination by Judge
Luckern by July 11, 2008, and a target date for the consolidated investigations of November 12,
2008, by which date the USITC would issue its final determination (the Target Date).
On December 4, 2007, Nokia moved for an order terminating or, alternatively, staying the USITC
investigation as to Nokia, on the ground that Nokia and InterDigital must first arbitrate a dispute
as to whether Nokia is licensed under the patents asserted by InterDigital against Nokia in the
USITC investigation. On January 8, 2008, Judge Luckern issued an order denying Nokias motion and
holding that Nokia has waived its arbitration defense by instituting and participating in the
investigation and other legal proceedings. On February 13, 2008, Nokia filed an action in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York (the Southern District Action), seeking to
preliminarily enjoin InterDigital from proceeding with the USITC investigation with respect to
Nokia, in spite of Judge Luckerns ruling denying Nokias motion to terminate the USITC
investigation. Nokia raised in this preliminary injunction action the same arguments it raised in
its motion to terminate the USITC investigation, namely that InterDigital allegedly must first
arbitrate its alleged license dispute with Nokia and that Nokia has not waived arbitration of this
defense. In the Southern District Action, Nokia also sought to compel InterDigital to arbitrate its
alleged license dispute with Nokia and, in the alternative, sought a determination by the District
Court that Nokia is licensed under the patents asserted by InterDigital against Nokia in the USITC
investigation. On March 7, 2008, InterDigital filed a motion to dismiss Nokias claim in the
alternative that Nokia is licensed under the patents asserted by InterDigital against Nokia in the
USITC investigation.
On February 8, 2008, Nokia filed a motion for summary determination in the USITC that
InterDigital cannot show that a domestic industry exists in the United States as required to obtain
relief. Samsung joined this motion. InterDigital opposed this motion. On February 14, 2008,
InterDigital filed a motion for summary determination that InterDigital satisfies the domestic
industry requirement based on its licensing activities. On February 26, 2008, InterDigital filed a
motion for summary determination that it has separately satisfied the so-called economic prong
for establishing that a domestic industry exists based on InterDigitals chipset product that
practices the asserted patents. Samsung and Nokia opposed these motions. On March 17, 2008, Samsung
and Nokia filed a motion to strike any evidence concerning InterDigitals product and to preclude
InterDigital from introducing any such evidence in relation to domestic industry at the evidentiary
hearing. On March 26, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge granted InterDigitals motion for summary
determination that it has satisfied the so-called economic prong for establishing that a domestic
industry exists based on InterDigitals chipset product that practices the asserted patents and
denied Samsungs motion to strike and preclude introduction of evidence concerning InterDigitals
domestic industry product.
On March 17, 2008, Nokia and Samsung jointly moved for summary determination that U.S. Patent
No. 6,693,579, which was asserted against both Samsung and Nokia, is invalid. InterDigital opposed
this motion. On April 14, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge denied Nokias and Samsungs joint
motion for summary determination that the 579 patent is invalid.
On March 20, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, ruling from
the bench, decided that Nokia is likely to prevail on the issue of whether Nokias alleged
entitlement to a license is arbitrable. The Court did not consider or rule on whether Nokia is
entitled to such a license. As a result, the Court entered a preliminary injunction requiring
InterDigital to participate in arbitration of the license issue and requiring InterDigital to cease
participation in the USITC proceeding by April 11, 2008, but only with respect to Nokia. The Court
further ordered Nokia to post a $500,000 bond by March 28, 2008, which Nokia did. InterDigital
promptly filed a request for a stay of the preliminary injunction and for an expedited appeal with
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which transferred the appeal to the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The preliminary injunction became effective on April 11, 2008,
and, in accordance with the Courts order, InterDigital filed a motion with the Administrative Law
Judge to stay the USITC proceeding against Nokia pending InterDigitals appeal of the District
Courts decision or, if that appeal were unsuccessful, pending the Nokia TDD Arbitration (described
below). On April 14, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge ordered that the date for the commencement
of the evidentiary hearing, originally
9
scheduled for April 21, 2008, be suspended until further
notice from the Administrative Law Judge. The Administrative Law Judge did not at that point change
the scheduled date of July 11, 2008 for his initial determination in the investigation or the
scheduled Target Date of November 12, 2008 for a decision by the USITC. InterDigitals motion for a
stay of the preliminary injunction and for an expedited appeal was considered by a panel of the
Second Circuit on April 15, 2008. On April 16, 2008, the Second Circuit denied the motion for stay
but set an expedited briefing schedule for resolving InterDigitals appeal on the merits of whether
the District Courts order granting the preliminary injunction should be reversed.
On April 17, 2008, InterDigital filed a motion with the USITC to separate the consolidated
investigations against Nokia and Samsung in order for the investigation to continue against Samsung
pending the expedited appeal or, if the appeal is unsuccessful, pending the Nokia TDD Arbitration.
Samsung and Nokia opposed InterDigitals motion. On May 16, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge
deconsolidated the investigations against Samsung and Nokia and set an evidentiary hearing date in
the investigation against Samsung (337-TA-601) to begin on July 8, 2008.
On May 20, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge denied without prejudice all pending motions in
the consolidated investigation (337-TA-613).
On June 17, 2008, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit heard oral
argument on InterDigitals appeal from the order of the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York preliminarily enjoining InterDigital from proceeding against Nokia in the
consolidated investigation. On July 31, 2008, the Second Circuit reversed the preliminary
injunction, finding that Nokias litigation conduct resulted in a waiver of any right to arbitrate
its license dispute. InterDigital promptly notified the Administrative Law Judge in the Nokia
investigation (337-TA-613) of the Second Circuits decision. On August 14, 2008, Nokia filed a
petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc of the Second Circuits decision, and on
September 15, 2008, the Second Circuit denied Nokias petitions. The mandate from the Second
Circuit issued to the Southern District of New York on September 22, 2008. Notwithstanding the
Second Circuits decision, on October 17, 2008 Nokia filed a request for a status conference with
the District Court to establish a procedural schedule for Nokia to pursue a permanent injunction
requiring InterDigital to arbitrate Nokias alleged license defense, and arguing that the Second
Circuits decision does not bar such an action. On October 23, 2008, InterDigital filed a response
with the District Court asserting that the Second Circuits waiver finding was dispositive, and
seeking the dismissal of Nokias complaint in its entirety. On March 5, 2009, the Court in the
Southern District Action granted InterDigitals request and dismissed all of Nokias claims in the
Southern District Action, but delayed issuing a final judgment pending a request by InterDigital
seeking to collect against the $500,000 preliminary injunction bond posted by Nokia. On April 3,
2009, InterDigital filed a motion to collect against the preliminary injunction bond, contending
that InterDigital was damaged by at least $500,000 as a result of the wrongfully obtained
preliminary injunction. On March 10, 2010, the District Court denied InterDigitals motion to
collect against the preliminary injunction bond. On April 9, 2010, InterDigital filed a notice of
appeal with the District Court, indicating that InterDigital is appealing the denial of its motion
to collect against the preliminary injunction bond to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit. InterDigital filed its opening brief in the appeal on July 28, 2010. Nokias brief is due
to be filed by November 29, 2010, absent any extension. InterDigital may file a reply brief within
14 days after Nokias brief is filed, absent any extension. The Second Circuit has not yet entered
a schedule for oral argument.
On September 24, 2008, InterDigital filed a motion to lift the stay of the Nokia investigation
(337-TA-613) based on the issuance of the Second Circuits mandate reversing the preliminary
injunction granted to Nokia. The Administrative Law Judge granted InterDigitals motion on
September 25, 2008 and lifted the stay. On October 7, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge issued an
order in the Nokia investigation setting the evidentiary hearing for May 26-29, 2009. On October
10, 2008, the Administrative Law Judge issued an order resetting the Target Date for the USITCs
Final Determination in the Nokia investigation to December 14, 2009, and requiring a final Initial
Determination by the Administrative Law Judge to be entered no later than August 14, 2009.
On January 21, 2009, Nokia filed a motion to schedule a claim construction hearing in the
USITC proceeding in early February 2009, and on January 29, 2009, InterDigital filed an opposition
to the motion for a claim construction hearing. On February 9, 2009, the Administrative Law Judge
denied Nokias motion for a claim construction hearing.
On February 13, 2009, InterDigital filed a renewed motion for summary determination that
InterDigital has satisfied the domestic industry requirement based on its licensing activities, and
on February 27, 2009, Nokia filed an opposition to the motion. On March 10, 2009, the
Administrative Law Judge granted InterDigitals motion, finding that InterDigital has established,
through its licensing activities, that a domestic industry exists in the United States as required
to obtain relief before the USITC. On April 9, 2009, the Commission issued a notice that it would
not review the Administrative Law Judges Order granting summary determination of a licensing-based
domestic industry, thereby adopting the Administrative Law Judges decision.
The evidentiary hearing for the USITC investigation with respect to Nokia was held from May
26, 2009 through June 2, 2009.
On August 14, 2009, the Administrative Law Judge issued an Initial Determination finding no
violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The Initial Determination found that
InterDigitals patents were valid and enforceable, but that Nokia did not infringe these patents.
In
10
the event that a Section 337 violation were to be found by the Commission, the Administrative
Law Judge recommended the issuance of a limited exclusion order barring entry into the United
States of infringing Nokia 3G WCDMA handsets and components as well as the issuance of appropriate
cease and desist orders.
On August 31, 2009, InterDigital filed a petition for review of certain issues raised in the
August 14, 2009 Initial Determination. On that same date, Nokia also filed a contingent petition
for review of certain issues in the Initial Determination. Responses to both petitions were filed
on September 8, 2009.
On October 16, 2009, the Commission issued a notice that it had determined to review in part
the Initial Determination, and that it affirmed the Administrative Law Judges determination of no
violation and terminated the investigation. The Commission determined to review the claim
construction of the patent claim terms synchronize and access signal and also determined to
review the Administrative Law Judges validity determinations. On review, the Commission modified
the Administrative Law Judges claim construction of access signal and took no position with
regard to the claim term synchronize or the validity determinations. The Commission determined
not to review the remaining issues decided in the Initial Determination.
On November 30, 2009, InterDigital filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit a petition for review of certain rulings by the Commission. In the appeal, neither
the construction of the term synchronize nor the issue of validity can be raised because the
Commission took no position on these issues in its determination. On December 17, 2009, Nokia filed
a motion to intervene in the appeal, which was granted by the Court on January 4, 2010.
InterDigitals opening brief was filed on April 12, 2010. In its appeal, InterDigital seeks
reversal of the Commissions claim constructions and non-infringement findings with respect to
certain claim terms in U.S. Patent Nos. 7,190,966 and 7,286,847, vacatur of the Commissions
determination of no Section 337 violation, and a remand for further proceedings before the
Commission. InterDigital is not appealing the Commissions determination of non-infringement with
respect to U.S. Patent Nos. 6,973,579 and 7,117,004. Nokia and the Commission filed their briefs on
July 13, 2010. In their briefs, Nokia and the Commission argue that the Commission correctly
construed the claim terms asserted by InterDigital in its appeal and that the Commission properly
determined that Nokia did not infringe the patents on appeal. Nokia also argues that the
Commissions finding of noninfringement should be affirmed based on an additional claim term. Nokia
further argues that the Commission erred in finding that InterDigital could satisfy the domestic
industry requirement based solely on its patent licensing activities and without proving that an
article in the United States practices the claimed inventions, and that the Commissions finding of
no Section 337 violation should be affirmed on that additional basis. InterDigital filed its reply
brief on August 30, 2010. The Court has
scheduled oral argument for December 9, 2010.
InterDigital has no obligation as a result of the above matter and we have not recorded a
related liability in our financial statements.
Other
We are party to certain other disputes and legal actions in the ordinary course of business.
We do not believe that these matters, even if adversely adjudicated or settled, would have a
material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
7. REPURCHASE OF COMMON STOCK:
In March 2009, our Board of Directors authorized a $100.0 million share repurchase program
(the 2009 Repurchase Program). The Company can repurchase shares under the program through open
market purchases, pre-arranged trading plans, or privately negotiated purchases. During 2009, we
repurchased approximately 1.0 million shares for $25.0 million under the 2009 Repurchase Program,
of which approximately 0.4 million shares were repurchased for $10.3 million during third quarter
2009. We did not make any share repurchases during first nine months 2010 or from October 1, 2010
through October 29, 2010.
11
8. COMPREHENSIVE INCOME:
The following table summarizes comprehensive income for the periods presented (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
35,515 |
|
|
$ |
30,621 |
|
Unrealized (loss) gain on investments |
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income |
|
$ |
35,482 |
|
|
$ |
30,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Nine Months Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
119,305 |
|
|
$ |
48,380 |
|
Unrealized gain on investments |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income |
|
$ |
119,312 |
|
|
$ |
48,554 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9. CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT RISK AND FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND FINANCIAL
LIABILITIES:
Concentration of Credit Risk and Fair Value of Financial Instruments
Financial instruments that potentially subject us to concentration of credit risk consist
primarily of cash equivalents, short-term investments, and accounts receivable. We place our cash
equivalents and short-term investments only in highly rated financial instruments and in United
States government instruments.
Our accounts receivable are derived principally from patent license and technology solutions
agreements. At September 30, 2010, four customers comprised 84% of our net accounts receivable
balance. At December 31, 2009, one customer represented 94% of our net accounts receivable balance.
We perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers, who generally include large, multinational,
wireless telecommunications equipment manufacturers. We believe that the carrying value of our
financial instruments approximate their fair values.
Fair Value Measurements
Effective January 1, 2008, we adopted the provisions of the FASB fair value measurement
guidance that relate to our financial assets and financial liabilities. We adopted the guidance
related to non-financial assets and liabilities as of January 1, 2009. We use various valuation
techniques and assumptions when measuring fair value of our assets and liabilities. We utilize
market data or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability,
including assumptions about risk and the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique.
This guidance established a hierarchy that prioritizes fair value measurements based on the types
of input used for the various valuation techniques (market approach, income approach and cost
approach). The levels of the hierarchy are described below:
Level 1 Inputs Level 1 includes financial instruments for which quoted market prices for
identical instruments are available in active markets.
Level 2 Inputs Level 2 includes financial instruments for which there are inputs other than
quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the instrument such as quoted
prices for similar instruments in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar
instruments in markets with insufficient volume or infrequent transactions (less active markets)
or model-driven valuations in which significant inputs are observable or can be derived
principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data, including market interest rate
curves, referenced credit spreads and pre-payment rates.
Level 3 Inputs Level 3 includes financial instruments for which fair value is derived from
valuation techniques including pricing models and discounted cash flow models in which one or
more significant inputs are unobservable, including the Companys own assumptions. The pricing
models incorporate transaction details such as contractual terms, maturity and, in certain
instances, timing and amount of future cash flows, as well as assumptions related to liquidity
and credit valuation adjustments of marketplace participants.
Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement
requires judgment and may affect the valuation of financial assets and financial liabilities and
their placement within the fair value hierarchy. We use quoted market prices for similar assets
to estimate the fair value of our Level 2 investments. Our financial assets that are accounted
for at fair value on a recurring basis are presented in the tables below (in thousands):
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value as of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market and demand accounts (a) |
|
$ |
196,708 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
196,708 |
|
Commercial paper (b) |
|
|
20,228 |
|
|
|
149,873 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
170,101 |
|
U.S. government agencies |
|
|
18,188 |
|
|
|
157,678 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
175,866 |
|
Corporate bonds |
|
|
7,523 |
|
|
|
13,382 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,905 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
242,647 |
|
|
$ |
320,933 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
563,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Included within cash and cash equivalents |
|
(b) |
|
Includes $116.9 million of commercial paper that is included within cash and cash equivalents. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value as of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market and demand accounts (a) |
|
$ |
132,968 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
132,968 |
|
Commercial paper (b) |
|
|
11,065 |
|
|
|
127,823 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
138,888 |
|
U.S. government agencies |
|
|
27,095 |
|
|
|
90,960 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
118,055 |
|
Corporate bonds |
|
|
7,026 |
|
|
|
12,869 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,895 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
178,154 |
|
|
$ |
231,652 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
409,806 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Included within cash and cash equivalents |
|
(b) |
|
Includes $77.9 million of commercial paper that is included within cash and cash equivalents. |
10. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS:
Technology Solutions Agreements
In first quarter 2010, we entered into a technology transfer and license agreement with
Beceem Communications Inc. (Beceem). Beceem was granted non-exclusive, worldwide licenses to
certain 2G and 3G signal processing technologies to develop, implement, and use in multimode 4G
chips. In fourth quarter 2010, Broadcom Corporation (Broadcom) signed a definitive agreement to acquire Beceem. The
transaction is expected to close in either fourth quarter 2010 or first quarter 2011. Pending
closing of the transaction, InterDigitals technology solutions agreement with Beceem will continue
in accordance with its terms, including all payment obligations. However, we have agreed to
suspend ongoing development work and engineering services until a date certain. Upon closing of the
announced Broadcom/Beceem transaction, the agreement will terminate under mutually agreeable
financial terms and Beceem/Broadcom will have no license to sell products incorporating our
technology or to otherwise use our technology and Beceem will fully remove our technology from all
of its products. Should the Broadcom/Beceem transaction fail to close by the date certain, we will
resume development work under the terms of our existing agreement.
Compensation Programs
As discussed in Other Information
in Part II, Item 5 of the Form 10-Q, the compensation committee of InterDigitals board of directors
approved certain changes to the companys compensation programs on October 26,
2010. The company intends that such changes to its compensation structure will decrease
the proportion of compensation that is time-based relative to the proportion that is
performance-based and, as a result, expects that the changes will result in a slight
decrease in the total compensation paid to the named executive officers as well as to the companys
employees as a whole. Whether the net effect of the changes is an increase or a decrease in total
compensation, however, will ultimately depend on the companys level of achievement of the applicable performance goals.
13
Item 2. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.
OVERVIEW
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the unaudited, condensed
consolidated financial statements and notes thereto contained in Part I, Item 1 of this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q, in addition to our 2009 Form 10-K, other reports filed with the SEC and the
Statement Pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 Forward-Looking
Statements below. Please refer to the Glossary of Terms in our 2009 Form 10-K for a list and
detailed descriptions of the various technical, industry and other defined terms that are used in
this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
Patent Licensing
Patent licensing royalties of $86.1 million in third quarter 2010 increased $1.0
million or 1% over second quarter 2010. This sequential increase was driven by a $5.2 million
increase in fixed fee and per-unit royalties from existing customers, partly offset by a $4.2
million decrease in past sales. The increase in fixed fee and per-unit royalties resulted from
strong sales from our customers with concentrations in smart phones, while past sales decreased due
to the second quarter 2010 renewal of a patent license agreement that contributed to per-unit
revenue in both periods and past sales in second quarter 2010 only.
Technology Solutions
Technology solutions revenue in third quarter 2010 of $5.8 million decreased $0.3 million or
5% from second quarter 2010. The decrease was driven by a $0.8 million decrease in technology
solutions royalties, partly offset by a $0.5 million increase in revenue from technology solutions
customers added in 2010.
Intellectual Property Enforcement
Please see Note 6, Litigation and Legal Proceedings, in the Notes to Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements included in Part I, Item 1 of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for a full
discussion of the following matter and other matters:
On October 16, 2009, it was announced that in the U.S. International Trade Commission
(USITC) investigation initiated by us against Nokia, the USITC issued a notice that it reviewed
in part the Initial Determination (ID) by the Chief Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) and found no
violation of Section 337 and has terminated the investigation. In the ID, the ALJ found
InterDigitals patents valid and enforceable, but also determined that the patents were not
infringed by Nokias 3G products. The USITC action originated in August 2007, when we filed a
complaint with the USITC alleging that Nokia engaged in unfair trade practices by selling for
importation into the United States, importing, and selling after importation, certain 3G handsets
and components that infringe four of our U.S. patents.
On November 30, 2009, we filed an appeal of the USITCs decision to the United States Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On December 17, 2009, Nokia filed a motion to intervene in the
appeal, which was granted by the Court on January 4, 2010. InterDigitals opening brief was filed
on April 12, 2010. In its appeal, InterDigital seeks reversal of the USITCs claim constructions
and non-infringement findings with respect to certain claim terms in U.S. Patent Nos. 7,190,966 and
7,286,847, vacatur of the USITCs determination of no Section 337 violation, and a remand for
further proceedings before the USITC. InterDigital is not appealing the USITCs determination of
non-infringement with respect to U.S. Patent Nos. 6,973,579 and 7,117,004. Nokia and the USITC
filed their briefs on July 13, 2010. In their briefs, Nokia and the USITC argue that the USITC
correctly construed the claim terms asserted by InterDigital in its appeal and that the USITC
properly determined that Nokia did not infringe the patents on appeal. Nokia also argues that the
USITCs finding of non-infringement should be affirmed based on an additional claim term. Nokia
further argues that the USITC erred in finding that InterDigital could satisfy the domestic
industry requirement based solely on its patent licensing activities and without proving that an
article in the United States practices the claimed inventions, and that the USITCs finding of no
Section 337 violation should be affirmed on that additional basis. InterDigital filed its reply
brief on August 30, 2010. The Court has scheduled oral argument for December 9, 2010.
Comparability of Financial Results
When comparing third quarter 2010 financial results against other periods, the following items
should be taken into consideration:
|
|
|
Our third quarter 2010 revenue included $0.7 million of past sales, primarily related to
the signing of a new patent license agreement. |
|
|
|
Our third quarter 2010 operating expenses included a charge of $0.6 million to increase
a bad debts reserve related to one of our technology solutions customers. |
|
|
|
Our third quarter 2009 revenue included $0.5 million of past sales, primarily related to
the signing of a new patent license agreement. |
|
|
|
Our third quarter 2009 operating expenses were reduced by $4.0 million based on revised
expectations for the anticipated payout associated with a long-term performance-based
incentive program; this adjustment reduced third quarter 2009 development expense, selling,
general and administrative expense, and patent administration and licensing costs by $2.4
million, $1.1 million, and $0.5 million, respectively. |
14
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES
Our significant accounting policies are described in Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in our 2009 Form 10-K. A discussion of our critical accounting
policies, and the estimates related to them, are included in Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in our 2009 Form 10-K. There have been no material
changes in our existing critical accounting policies from the disclosures included in our 2009 Form
10-K. Refer to Note 1, Basis of Presentation, in the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements included in Part I, Item 1 of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for updates related to
new accounting pronouncements.
FINANCIAL POSITION, LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS
Our primary sources of liquidity are cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, as
well as cash generated from operations. We have the ability to obtain additional liquidity through
debt and equity financings, but have not had a significant debt or equity financing in over 10
years and do not anticipate a need for such financings in the next twelve months. Based on our past
performance and current expectations, we believe our available sources of funds, including cash,
cash equivalents and short-term investments and cash generated from our operations, will be
sufficient to finance our operations, capital requirements, our existing stock repurchase program
and any stock repurchase or dividend program that we may initiate in the next twelve months.
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments
At September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, we had the following amounts of cash, cash
equivalents and short-term investments (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase / |
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
313,620 |
|
|
$ |
210,863 |
|
|
$ |
102,757 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
249,960 |
|
|
|
198,943 |
|
|
|
51,017 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments |
|
$ |
563,580 |
|
|
$ |
409,806 |
|
|
$ |
153,774 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments increased $153.8 million in
first nine months 2010. The increase was primarily due to our receipts of the third and fourth of
four $100.0 million installments from Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Samsung) under our patent
license agreement signed in January 2009. After using these and other receipts to fund our
operations and working capital requirements in first nine months 2010, we invested the excess in
short-term investments.
Cash flows from operations
We generated the following cash flows from our operating activities in first nine months 2010
and 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Nine Months Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase / |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
(Decrease) |
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
$ |
163,144 |
|
|
$ |
332,502 |
|
|
$ |
(169,358 |
) |
The positive operating cash flow in first nine months 2010 arose principally from
receipts of approximately $344.6 million related to patent license and technology solutions
agreements. These receipts included the third and fourth of four $100.0 million installments from
Samsung under our January 2009 license agreement. We also received $6.7 million of fixed fee
payments and $125.1 million of per-unit royalty payments, including past sales and prepayments,
from other existing and new customers. Cash receipts from our technology solutions agreements
totaled $12.8 million, primarily related to royalties and other license fees associated with our
SlimChip modem core. These receipts were partially offset by cash operating expenses (operating
expenses less depreciation of fixed assets, amortization of intangible assets, and non-cash
compensation) of $96.6 million, cash payments for foreign source withholding taxes of $35.2 million
primarily related to the Samsung installments, and estimated federal tax payments of $53.0 million.
The positive operating cash flow in first nine months 2009 arose principally from receipts of
approximately $492.0 million related to patent license and technology solutions agreements. These
receipts included the first two of four installments of $100.0 million from Samsung under our
January 2009 license agreement. We also received prepayments of $182.4 million from two existing
customers, per-unit royalty payments of $61.6 million from other existing customers, other fixed
fee payments of $37.1 million, and cash receipts from our technology solutions agreements totaling
$10.9 million, primarily related to royalties associated with our SlimChip modem core. These
receipts were partially offset by cash operating expenses (operating expenses less depreciation of
fixed assets, amortization of intangible assets, non-cash repositioning charges and non-cash
compensation) of $92.0 million, cash payments for foreign source withholding taxes of $40.7 million
related to cash receipts under the Samsung agreement and our patent license agreement with Pantech
Co., Ltd and Pantech & Curitel
15
Communications, Inc. (Pantech) signed in September 2009, an estimated federal tax payment of
$4.0 million, and changes in working capital during first nine months 2009.
Working capital
We believe that working capital, adjusted to exclude cash, cash equivalents, short-term
investments, current maturities of debt, and current deferred revenue provides additional
information about non-cash assets and liabilities that might affect our near-term liquidity. Our
adjusted working capital, a non-GAAP financial measure, reconciles to working capital, the most
directly comparable GAAP financial measure, at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 (in
thousands) as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
Increase / (Decrease) |
|
Current assets |
|
$ |
642,002 |
|
|
$ |
702,322 |
|
|
$ |
(60,320 |
) |
Current liabilities |
|
|
(224,416 |
) |
|
|
(252,560 |
) |
|
|
28,144 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Working capital |
|
|
417,586 |
|
|
|
449,762 |
|
|
|
(32,176 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Subtract) Add |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(313,620 |
) |
|
|
(210,863 |
) |
|
|
(102,757 |
) |
Short-term investments |
|
|
(249,960 |
) |
|
|
(198,943 |
) |
|
|
(51,017 |
) |
Current portion of long-term debt |
|
|
286 |
|
|
|
584 |
|
|
|
(298 |
) |
Current deferred revenue |
|
|
157,997 |
|
|
|
193,409 |
|
|
|
(35,412 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted working capital |
|
$ |
12,289 |
|
|
$ |
233,949 |
|
|
$ |
(221,660 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $221.7 million decrease in adjusted working capital is primarily attributable to the
decrease in accounts receivable associated with the third and fourth of four $100.0 million
installments from Samsung, which we received during first nine months 2010. Additionally, our
satisfaction of estimated federal tax obligations reduced our short-term deferred tax assets and
contributed to the decrease in adjusted working capital. An $11.0 million increase in accrued
compensation and accounts payable also reduced our adjusted working capital during first nine
months 2010. The increase in accrued compensation is primarily attributable to our long-term
performance-based cash incentive program, a payout under which is scheduled to be paid within
twelve months from the current balance sheet date. The increase in accounts payable is primarily
associated with sublicense obligations incurred in conjunction with our new technology solutions
agreements signed in first nine months 2010.
Cash Used in or Provided by Investing and Financing Activities
We used net cash in investing activities of $72.8 million and $147.8 million in first
nine months 2010 and 2009, respectively. We purchased $51.1 million and $122.3 million of
short-term marketable securities, net of sales, in first nine months 2010 and 2009, respectively.
This decrease in net purchases was driven by higher cash needs to make estimated tax payments
during 2010. Purchases of property and equipment and technology licenses decreased to $1.7 million
in first nine months 2010 from $3.5 million in first nine months 2009 due to the lower levels of
development tools and engineering equipment needed in first nine months 2010 as a result of our
cessation of further SlimChip product development. Investment costs associated with patents
decreased to $20.0 million in the first nine months 2010 from $21.9 million for first nine months
2009.
Net cash provided (used) by financing activities increased by $31.5 million primarily due
to our first nine months 2009 share repurchase activity, which did not recur in first nine months
2010, and higher levels of proceeds from stock option exercises.
Other
Our combined short-term and long-term deferred revenue balance at September 30, 2010 was
approximately $531.1 million, a decrease of $137.1 million from December 31, 2009. We have no
material obligations associated with such deferred revenue. In first nine months 2010, deferred
revenue decreased $209.1 million due to the deferred revenue recognition of $146.3 million related
to the amortization of fixed fee royalty payments and $62.8 million related to per-unit exhaustion
of prepaid royalties (based upon royalty reports provided by our customers) and technology
solutions. These decreases in deferred revenue were partially offset by gross increases in deferred
revenue of $72.0 million, primarily related to patent license agreements and new technology
solutions agreements signed in first nine months 2010.
Based on current license agreements, we expect the amortization of fixed fee royalty
payments to reduce the September 30, 2010 deferred revenue balance of $531.1 million by
$158.0 million over the next twelve months. Additional reductions to deferred revenue will be
dependent upon the level of per-unit royalties our customers report against prepaid balances and
work performed in conjunction with our technology solutions agreements.
16
At September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, we had approximately 1.5 million and
2.1 million options outstanding, respectively, that had exercise prices less than the fair market
value of our stock at each balance sheet date. These options would generate $20.3 million and
$30.4 million of cash proceeds to the Company if they are fully exercised.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Third Quarter 2010 Compared to Third Quarter 2009
Revenues
The following table compares third quarter 2010 revenues to revenues in the comparable
prior year period (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Increase/ (Decrease) |
|
Fixed fee amortized royalty revenue |
|
$ |
49.6 |
|
|
$ |
44.8 |
|
|
$ |
4.8 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
Per-unit royalty revenue |
|
|
35.8 |
|
|
|
27.7 |
|
|
|
8.1 |
|
|
|
29 |
% |
Past sales |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
40 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total patent licensing royalties |
|
|
86.1 |
|
|
|
73.0 |
|
|
|
13.1 |
|
|
|
18 |
% |
Technology solutions revenue |
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
132 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
91.9 |
|
|
$ |
75.5 |
|
|
$ |
16.4 |
|
|
|
22 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $16.4 million increase in total revenue in third quarter 2010 was primarily attributable
to a $13.1 million increase in patent licensing royalties. Of this increase in patent licensing
royalties, $8.1 million was attributable to an increase in per-unit royalty revenue primarily
resulting from (i) the second quarter 2010 renewal of a patent license agreement and (ii) an
aggregate increase in royalties from our remaining existing per-unit customers. The remaining
$5.0 million increase in patent licensing royalties was driven by increases in fixed fee amortized
royalty revenue and past sales revenue.
The increase in fixed fee amortized royalty revenue was driven by a full quarter of revenue
from our September 2009 patent license agreement with Pantech, compared to a partial quarter of
revenue in third quarter 2009, and our second quarter 2010 amendment to our patent license
agreement with an existing customer.
The increase in past sales revenue was attributable to the signing of a patent license
agreement with a new customer in third quarter 2010, as well as the resolution of a routine audit
of an existing customer.
The increase in technology solutions revenue was attributable to agreements signed during
first nine months 2010, which collectively contributed $3.7 million of revenue in third quarter
2010.
In third quarter 2010 and third quarter 2009, 55% and 64% of our total revenues for the
respective periods were attributable to companies that individually accounted for 10% or more of
these amounts. During third quarter 2010 and third quarter 2009, the following customers accounted
for 10% or more of our total revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months |
|
|
Ended September 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd. |
|
|
28 |
% |
|
|
34 |
% |
LG Electronics |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
19 |
% |
Sharp Corporation |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
Operating Expenses
The following table summarizes the change in operating expenses by category (in
millions):
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Increase/ (Decrease) |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
$ |
7.2 |
|
|
$ |
4.9 |
|
|
$ |
2.3 |
|
|
|
47 |
% |
Patent administration and licensing |
|
|
12.8 |
|
|
|
13.3 |
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
)% |
Development |
|
|
17.5 |
|
|
|
10.7 |
|
|
|
6.8 |
|
|
|
64 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
$ |
37.5 |
|
|
$ |
28.9 |
|
|
$ |
8.6 |
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses increased 30% to $37.5 million in third quarter 2010 from $28.9 million
in third quarter 2009. The $8.6 million increase was primarily due to net changes in the following
items (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase/ |
|
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
Long-term compensation |
|
$ |
3.9 |
|
Sublicense fees |
|
|
2.0 |
|
Consulting services |
|
|
1.7 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
0.7 |
|
Personnel-related costs |
|
|
0.7 |
|
Other |
|
|
0.6 |
|
Reserve for uncollectible accounts |
|
|
0.6 |
|
Patent maintenance and patent evaluation |
|
|
0.4 |
|
Intellectual property enforcement |
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total increase in operating expenses |
|
$ |
8.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in long-term compensation primarily resulted from a third quarter 2009 reduction
of $4.0 million to the accrual for the incentive period January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2010.
This reduction related to lowering our expected payout from 100% to 50% in third quarter 2009. We
have subsequently raised the expected payout to 70% in connection with revenue-producing agreements
signed in first nine months 2010. Our technology solutions agreements signed in first nine months
2010 resulted in an increase in sublicense fees and consulting services. Additionally, consulting
services also increased in connection with research and development projects initiated within the
last twelve months. The increase in depreciation and amortization is related to the increase over
time in our capitalized patent costs. Personnel-related costs increased $0.7 million due to salary
increases. The increase in patent maintenance and patent evaluation costs were related to increased
activity in the management of our patent portfolio and due diligence associated with patent
acquisition opportunities. In third quarter 2010, we increased our reserve for uncollectible
accounts by $1.8 million. We recorded a charge of $0.6 million and a reduction of deferred revenue
of $1.2 million in connection with this reserve. These increases were partially offset by a
decrease in intellectual property enforcement primarily due to a decrease in activity associated
with our Nokia USITC case.
Selling, General and Administrative Expense: The increase in selling, general and administrative
expense was primarily attributable to the above-noted increase in long-term compensation and the
reserve for uncollectible accounts.
Patent Administration and Licensing Expense: The decrease in patent administration and licensing
expense primarily resulted from the above-noted decrease in intellectual property enforcement. This
decrease was partially offset by increases in long-term compensation, patent maintenance and patent
evaluation costs, and patent amortization.
Development Expense: The increase in development expense was primarily attributable to the
above-noted increases in long-term compensation, consulting services, and sublicense fees.
First Nine Months 2010 Compared to First Nine Months 2009
Revenues
The following table compares first nine months 2010 revenues to revenues in the prior
year comparable period (in millions):
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Nine Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Increase/ (Decrease) |
|
Fixed fee amortized royalty revenue |
|
$ |
146.3 |
|
|
$ |
133.7 |
|
|
$ |
12.6 |
|
|
|
9 |
% |
Per-unit royalty revenue |
|
|
97.4 |
|
|
|
78.5 |
|
|
|
18.9 |
|
|
|
24 |
% |
Past sales |
|
|
41.3 |
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
|
38.5 |
|
|
|
1375 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total patent licensing royalties |
|
|
285.0 |
|
|
|
215.0 |
|
|
|
70.0 |
|
|
|
33 |
% |
Technology solutions revenue |
|
|
14.3 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
8.3 |
|
|
|
138 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
299.3 |
|
|
$ |
221.0 |
|
|
$ |
78.3 |
|
|
|
35 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $78.3 million increase in total revenue in first nine months 2010 was primarily
attributable to a $70.0 million increase in patent licensing royalties. Of this increase in patent
licensing royalties, $38.5 million was attributable to past sales primarily resulting from (i) the
first quarter 2010 patent license agreement signed with CMHC, (ii) the first quarter 2010
resolution of a routine audit with an existing customer, and (iii) the renewal of a patent license
agreement in second quarter 2010. The remaining $31.5 million increase was driven by increases in
per-unit royalty revenue ($18.9 million) and fixed fee amortized royalty revenue ($12.6 million).
Per-unit royalty revenues increased $18.9 million due to the first quarter 2010 entry
into the patent license agreement with CMHC, the second quarter 2010 renewal of a patent license
agreement, a full nine months of revenue from license agreements signed in 2009, and an aggregate
increase in royalties from our remaining existing per-unit customers.
The increase in fixed fee amortized royalty revenue was driven by a full nine months of
revenue from the patent license agreement with Samsung signed during first quarter 2009 and the
September 2009 patent license agreement with Pantech. These increases were partially offset by the
expiration of a fixed fee license agreement in second half 2009, which, as noted above, was renewed
in second quarter 2010 as a per-unit agreement.
The increase in technology solutions revenue was attributable to technology solutions
agreements signed during first nine months 2010, which collectively contributed revenue of
$6.8 million, as well as increased royalties earned on our SlimChip modem core platform relating to
our customers product sales.
During first nine months 2010 and first nine months 2009, 51% and 63% of our total
revenues for the respective periods were attributable to companies that individually accounted for
10% or more of these amounts. During first nine months 2010 and first nine months 2009, the
following customers accounted for 10% or more of our total revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Nine Months |
|
|
Ended September 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd. |
|
|
26 |
% |
|
|
33 |
% |
LG Electronics |
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
20 |
% |
Casio Hitachi Mobile Communications Co., Ltd. |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
<10 |
% |
Sharp Corporation |
|
|
<10 |
% |
|
|
10 |
% |
Operating Expenses
The following table summarizes the change in operating expenses by category (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Nine Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Increase/ (Decrease) |
|
Selling, general and administrative |
|
$ |
21.8 |
|
|
$ |
19.2 |
|
|
$ |
2.6 |
|
|
|
14 |
% |
Patent administration and licensing |
|
|
45.3 |
|
|
|
41.0 |
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
Development |
|
|
50.0 |
|
|
|
50.8 |
|
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
Repositioning |
|
|
|
|
|
|
37.0 |
|
|
|
(37.0 |
) |
|
|
(100 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
$ |
117.1 |
|
|
$ |
148.0 |
|
|
$ |
(30.9 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses decreased 21% to $117.1 million in first nine months 2010 from
$148.0 million in first nine months 2009. Not including a $37.0 million repositioning charge in
first nine months 2009, operating expenses would have increased 6%. The $30.9 million decrease was
primarily due to the following net changes in expenses (in millions):
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase/ |
|
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
Long-term compensation |
|
$ |
5.1 |
|
Sublicense fees |
|
|
2.9 |
|
Patent amortization |
|
|
2.2 |
|
Patent maintenance and patent evaluation |
|
|
1.9 |
|
Reserve for uncollectible accounts |
|
|
1.1 |
|
Other |
|
|
0.2 |
|
Personnel-related costs |
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
Consulting services |
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
Intellectual property enforcement |
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
Engineering software and equipment maintenance |
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Total increase in operating expenses not including repositioning charges |
|
|
6.1 |
|
Repositioning charge |
|
|
(37.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total decrease in operating expenses |
|
$ |
(30.9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
In connection with our first quarter 2009 decision to cease further development of our
SlimChip modem technology, we wrote off approximately 73% of the net carrying value of our fixed
assets and development licenses and decreased our headcount by approximately 25%. As a result of
these actions, consulting services, personnel-related costs, depreciation and amortization, and
engineering software and equipment maintenance decreased approximately $6.1 million. The increase
in long-term compensation primarily resulted from a third quarter 2009 reduction of $4.0 million to
the accrual for the incentive period January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2010. This reduction
related to lowering our expected payout from 100% to 50% in third quarter 2009. During first nine
months 2010, we incurred a $1.8 million charge to increase the accrual rate to 70% in connection
with revenue-producing agreements signed in first nine months 2010. The increase in sublicense
fees related to our technology solutions agreements signed in first nine months 2010. Patent
amortization increased due to the increase over time in our capitalized patent costs. The increase
in patent maintenance and patent evaluation costs were related to increased activity in management
of our patent portfolio and due diligence associated with patent acquisition opportunities. In
first nine months 2010, we recorded a net increase of $1.3 million to our reserve for uncollectible
accounts. We recorded a net charge of $0.1 million and a reduction of deferred revenue of $1.2
million in connection with this increase. In first nine months 2009, we recorded a benefit of $1.0
million in connection with a reduction of our reserve for uncollectible accounts. The
decrease in intellectual property enforcement was primarily due to a decrease in activity
associated with our Nokia USITC case.
Selling, General and Administrative Expense: The increase in selling, general and administrative
expense was primarily attributable to the above-noted increase in long-term compensation and the
reserve for uncollectible accounts.
Patent Administration and Licensing Expense: The increase in patent administration and licensing
expense was primarily attributable to the above-noted increases in long-term compensation,
patent amortization, and patent maintenance and patent evaluation. These increases were partially
offset by the above-noted reduction in intellectual property enforcement.
Development Expense: The decrease in development expense was primarily attributable to the
reduction of consulting services, depreciation and amortization, personnel-related costs, and
engineering software and equipment maintenance resulting from the repositioning announced on March
30, 2009. These decreases were offset, in part, by the above-noted increase in long-term compensation
and sublicense fees.
Repositioning Expense: On March 30, 2009, we announced a repositioning plan under which we (i)
expanded our technology development and licensing business and (ii) ceased further product
development of our SlimChip HSPA technology. In connection with the repositioning plan, we incurred
certain costs associated with exit or disposal activities. The repositioning resulted in a
reduction in force of approximately 100 employees across our three locations. We incurred a
repositioning charge of $37.1 million in first quarter 2009 and additional costs of $1.5 million
during the balance of 2009. We did not incur any additional charges under this plan in first nine
months 2010, nor do we expect to incur any related charges in the future.
Expected Trends
We will provide our expectations for our fourth quarter 2010 revenue after we receive and
review the applicable patent licensing and product sales royalty reports.
20
STATEMENT PURSUANT TO THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995 FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements within the meaning
of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Such statements include certain
information under the heading Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations and other information regarding our current beliefs, plans and
expectations, including without limitation the matters set forth below. Words such as anticipate,
estimate, expect, project, intend, plan, forecast, variations of any such words or
similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking
statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q include, without limitation, statements regarding:
|
|
|
The potential effects of new accounting standards on our financial statements or results of operations; |
|
|
|
|
Our amortization of fixed fee royalty payments and recognition of deferred technology solutions
revenue over the next twelve months to reduce our September 30, 2010 deferred revenue balance; |
|
|
|
|
Our future tax expense and changes to our reserves for uncertain tax positions; |
|
|
|
|
The timing, outcome and impact of our various litigation and administrative matters; |
|
|
|
|
Our need for debt and equity financings in the next twelve months; and |
|
|
|
|
Our belief that our available sources of funds will be sufficient to
finance our operations, capital requirements, our existing stock
repurchase program and any stock repurchase program or dividend that we may
initiate in the next twelve months. |
Forward-looking statements concerning our business, results of operations and financial
condition are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, and
actual events that occur, to differ materially from results contemplated by the forward-looking
statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the risks and
uncertainties outlined in greater detail in Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors of our 2009 Form 10-K. We
undertake no obligation to revise or update publicly any forward-looking statement for any reason,
except as otherwise required by law.
Item 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.
There have been no material changes in quantitative and qualitative market risk from the
disclosures included in our 2009 Form 10-K.
Item 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.
The Companys principal executive officer and principal financial officer, with the
assistance of other members of management, have evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that
evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective in their design to ensure that the information
required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods
specified in the SECs rules and forms and to ensure that the information required to be disclosed
by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and
principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure. There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the quarter ended September 30, 2010 that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
21
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
The information required by this Item is incorporated by reference to Note 6, Litigation and
Legal Proceedings, to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part I, Item 1
of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS.
In addition to factors set forth in the Statement Pursuant to the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995 Forward-Looking Statements in Part I, Item 2 of this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q, you should carefully consider the factors discussed in Part I, Item 1A. Risk
Factors of our 2009 Form 10-K, which could materially affect our business, financial condition or
future results. The risks described in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and in our 2009 Form 10-K
are not the only risks facing the Company. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known
to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial also may materially and adversely affect our
business, financial condition and/or operating results.
Item 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS.
There were no sales of unregistered shares of our common stock or repurchases of our common
stock during third quarter 2010 or from October 1, 2010 through October
29, 2010.
Item 5. OTHER INFORMATION
On October 26, 2010, the compensation committee of InterDigitals board of directors
approved certain changes to the companys compensation programs, including the compensation plans
and arrangements of InterDigitals chief executive officer, chief financial officer and other named
executive officers as identified in the companys 2010 definitive proxy statement filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on April 30, 2010 (the 2010 proxy statement). The changes
relate to the companys (i) long-term compensation program (LTCP), (ii) annual bonus plan, or
short-term incentive plan (STIP), (iii) supplemental payment program and (iv) profit-sharing
program, each of which has been previously described by InterDigital in the Compensation Discussion
and Analysis section of the 2010 proxy statement.
Long-Term Compensation Program
The compensation committee approved certain amendments to the LTCP to provide the committee
with flexibility to respond more rapidly to changing market dynamics, accounting rules and other
organizational factors. Prior to being amended, the LTCP, which consists of overlapping cycles
that are generally three years in length, was designed to alternate between equity and cash cycles,
with equity cycles including both time-based and performance-based components and cash cycles
consisting of a performance-based cash incentive. Under the equity cycles, executives, including
the named executive officers, received 50% of their equity awards in the form of performance-based
restricted stock units (RSUs) and 50% in the form of time-based RSUs that vested in full at the
end of the three-year cycle period.
Under the terms of the amended LTCP, effective for the cycle that began on January 1, 2010 and
cycles thereafter, all executives, including the named executive officers, will receive 25% of
their LTCP participation in the form of time-based RSUs that vest in full at the end of the
three-year cycle period and the remaining 75% in the form of performance-based awards granted under
the long-term incentive plan (LTIP) component of the LTCP. The LTIP performance-based awards may
be paid out in the form of cash or equity or any combination thereof. The form of the LTIP award
will be determined by the compensation committee in its sole discretion at the beginning or the end
of the three-year cycle.
The level of participation in the LCTP for each named executive officer, which is established
as a target percentage of their annual base salary, remains unchanged. Payouts of
performance-based awards will continue to be determined by the compensation committee in its sole
discretion based on the companys achievement of one of more performance goals during the cycle
period, as established and approved by the compensation committee. Payouts pursuant to the LTIP
may exceed or be less than target, depending on the level of the companys achievement of the
performance goal(s). No payout may be made if the company fails to achieve the minimum level of
performance for the applicable cycle, and the payout for any particular cycle is capped at 200% of
target.
This description is qualified in its entirety by reference to the amended LTCP, a copy of
which is filed as Exhibit 10.1 to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and is incorporated herein by
reference.
Short-Term Incentive Plan, Supplemental Payment Program and Profit-Sharing Program
The compensation committee also made certain changes and decisions with respect to the STIP
and the companys supplemental payment and profit-sharing programs in order to further enhance the
companys performance-based compensation programs and to simplify the companys overall
compensation structure by reducing the number of compensation elements used.
The STIP, a key element of performance-based compensation, was amended to increase the
targeted award amount for each participant, which is expressed as a percentage of annual base
salary, by five percentage points. Accordingly, effective with the 2011 plan year, the targets
under the STIP for each of the named executive officers are as follows: 80% for William Merritt,
55% for Scott McQuilkin and Lawrence Shay and 45% for Mark Lemmo and James Nolan. The amended STIP
is filed as Exhibit 10.2 to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and is incorporated herein by
reference.
The companys supplemental payment program, pursuant to which each executive, including the
named executive officers, received annual grants of 1,000 shares of the companys common stock,
subject to a one-year restriction on transferability, was terminated by the compensation committee.
Finally, the compensation committee determined that it would not elect to make a
profit-sharing contribution to each employee in 2011, or for the foreseeable future, pursuant to a
discretionary provision in the companys 401(k) savings plan. In prior years, the compensation
committee had approved a profit-sharing contribution to each employee, including each named
executive officer, ranging from 1.0% to 1.5% of the employees annual salary. This
decision is not intended to be reflective of the companys recent financial performance but rather
is consistent with the compensation committees intent to simplify the companys overall
compensation structure.
22
Item 6. EXHIBITS.
The following is a list of exhibits filed with this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q:
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Exhibit Description |
*Exhibit 3.1
|
|
Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of InterDigital, Inc. (Exhibit 3.1
to InterDigitals Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 7, 2010). |
|
|
|
*Exhibit 3.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of InterDigital, Inc. (Exhibit 3.2 to InterDigitals
Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 7, 2010). |
|
|
|
Exhibit 10.1
|
|
InterDigital Long-Term Compensation Program, as amended October 2010.+ |
|
|
|
Exhibit 10.2
|
|
InterDigital Short-Term Incentive Plan, as amended October 2010.+ |
|
|
|
Exhibit 31.1
|
|
Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
|
|
|
Exhibit 31.2
|
|
Certification of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
|
|
|
Exhibit 32.1
|
|
Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. |
|
|
|
Exhibit 32.2
|
|
Certification of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. |
|
|
|
Exhibit 101
|
|
The following financial information from InterDigital, Inc.s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on October 29, 2010, formatted in eXtensible Business
Reporting Language: |
|
|
|
|
|
(i) Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at September 30, 2010 and December 31,
2009, (ii) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, (iii) Condensed Consolidated Statements
of Cash Flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 and (iv) Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (tagged as blocks of text). |
|
|
|
* |
|
Incorporated by reference to the previous filing indicated. |
|
+
|
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement. |
|
|
|
This exhibit will not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78r), or otherwise subject to the liability of that
section. Such exhibit will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under
the Securities Act or Securities Exchange Act, except to the extent that InterDigital, Inc.
specifically incorporates it by reference. |
23
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
INTERDIGITAL, INC.
|
|
Date: October 29, 2010 |
/s/ WILLIAM J. MERRITT
|
|
|
William J. Merritt |
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: October 29, 2010 |
/s/ SCOTT A. MCQUILKIN
|
|
|
Scott A. McQuilkin |
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: October 29, 2010 |
/s/ RICHARD J. BREZSKI
|
|
|
Richard J. Brezski |
|
|
Chief Accounting Officer |
|
24
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
*Exhibit 3.1
|
|
Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of InterDigital, Inc. (Exhibit 3.1
to InterDigitals Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 7, 2010). |
|
|
|
*Exhibit 3.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of InterDigital, Inc. (Exhibit 3.2 to InterDigitals
Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 7, 2010). |
|
|
|
Exhibit 10.1
|
|
InterDigital Long-Term Compensation Program, as amended October 2010.+ |
|
|
|
Exhibit 10.2
|
|
InterDigital Short-Term Incentive Plan, as amended October 2010.+ |
|
|
|
Exhibit 31.1
|
|
Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
|
|
|
Exhibit 31.2
|
|
Certification of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
|
|
|
Exhibit 32.1
|
|
Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. |
|
|
|
Exhibit 32.2
|
|
Certification of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. |
|
|
|
Exhibit 101
|
|
The following financial information from InterDigital, Inc.s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on October 29, 2010, formatted in eXtensible Business
Reporting Language: |
|
|
|
|
|
(i) Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at September 30, 2010 and December 31,
2009, (ii) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, (iii) Condensed Consolidated Statements
of Cash Flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 and (iv)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (tagged as blocks of text).
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Incorporated by reference to the previous filing indicated. |
|
+
|
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement. |
|
|
|
This exhibit will not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78r), or otherwise subject to the liability of that
section. Such exhibit will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under
the Securities Act or Securities Exchange Act, except to the extent that InterDigital, Inc.
specifically incorporates it by reference. |
25