ITEM 1. BUSINESS
Overview
We are an intellectual property asset management
company. Our principal operations include the acquisition, licensing and enforcement of intellectual property rights that are either owned
or controlled by us or one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries. We currently own, control or manage fifteen intellectual property portfolios,
which principally consist of patent rights. As part of our intellectual property asset management activities and in the ordinary course
of our business, it has been necessary for us or the intellectual property owner who we represent to initiate, and it is likely to continue
to be necessary to initiate, patent infringement lawsuits and engage in patent infringement litigation. We anticipate that our primary
source of revenue will come from the grant of licenses to use our intellectual property, including primarily licenses granted as part
of the settlement of patent infringement lawsuits.
Intellectual property monetization includes the
generation of revenue and proceeds from the licensing of patents, patented technologies and other intellectual property rights. Patent
litigation is often, and for us has been, a necessary element of intellectual property monetization where a patent owner, or a representative
of the patent owner, seeks to protect its patent rights against the unlicensed manufacture, sale, and use of the owner’s patent
rights or products which incorporate the owner’s patent rights. In general, we seek to monetize the bundle of rights granted by
the patents through structured licensing and when necessary enforcement of those rights through litigation, although to date all of our
patent license revenues have resulted from litigation. To date all of our revenue from the licensing of our patents has resulted from
litigation commenced by us.
We intend to develop our business by acquiring
intellectual property rights, either in the form of ownership of or an exclusive license to the underlying intellectual property. Our
goal is to enter into agreements with inventors of innovative technologies for which there may be a significant market for products which
use or incorporate the intellectual property. We seek to purchase all of, or interests in, intellectual property in exchange for cash,
securities of our company, the formation or a joint venture or separate subsidiary in which the owner has an equity interest, and/or interests
in the monetization of those assets. Our revenue from this aspect of our business can be generated through licensing and, when necessary,
which is typically the case, litigation. We engage in due diligence and a principled risk underwriting process to evaluate the merits
and potential value of any acquisition, partnership or joint venture. We seek to structure the terms of our acquisitions in a manner that
will achieve the highest risk-adjusted returns possible, in the context of our financial condition. In connection with the acquisition
of intellectual property portfolios, we have granted the party providing the financing an interest in any recovery we have with respect
to the intellectual property purchased with the financing, and we expect that we will have to continue to grant such interests until and
unless we have generated sufficient cash from licensing our intellectual property to enable us to acquire additional intellectual property
portfolios without outside financing. However, we cannot assure you that we will ever generate sufficient revenues to enable us to purchase
additional intellectual property without third-party financing.
We employ a due diligence process before completing
the acquisition of an intellectual property interest. We begin with an investment thesis supporting the potential transaction and then
proceed to test the thesis through an examination of the critical drivers of the value of the underlying intellectual property asset.
Such an examination focuses on areas such as title and inventorship issues, the quality of the drafting and prosecution of the intellectual
property assets, legal risks inherent in licensing programs generally, the applicability of the invention to the relevant marketplace
and other issues such as the effects of venue and other procedural issues. If we require financing to acquire intellectual property, we
will have to satisfy our financing source, which may by QFL, that we have the ability to monetize the intellectual property. However,
our financial position may affect our ability to conduct adequate due diligence with respect to intellectual property rights or to acquire
valuable intellectual property. This due diligence effort is conducted by our chief executive officer, who is our only full-time
employee.
It has been necessary to commence litigation in
order to obtain a recovery for past infringement of, or to license the use of, our intellectual property rights. Intellectual property
litigation is very expensive, with no certainty of any recovery. To the extent possible we seek to engage counsel on a contingent fee
or partial contingent fee basis, which significantly reduces our litigation cost, but which also reduces the value of the recovery to
us. We do not have the resources to enable us to fund the cost of litigation. To the extent that we cannot secure counsel on a contingent
basis and cannot fund litigation ourselves, which, considering our financial position, is likely to be the case, we may enter into an
agreement with a third party, which may be an independent third party, such as QFL, to finance the cost of litigation. In view of our
limited cash and our working capital deficiency, we are not able to institute any monetization program that may require litigation unless
we engage counsel on a fully contingent basis or we obtain funding from third party funding sources. In these cases, counsel may be afforded
a greater participation in the recovery and the third party that funds the litigation would be entitled to participate in any recovery.
Agreements with QFL and Intelligent Partners
Set forth below is a discussion of agreements which we entered into
in February 2021with QFL to provide us with a financing facility, funds to make a payment due to Intelligent Partners and for working
capital and an agreement with Intelligent Partners to restructure our loan agreement and related agreements. The agreement with Intelligent
Partners restated our agreements with United Wireless Holdings, Inc. (“United Wireless”) which had been assigned to Intelligent
Partners, an affiliate of United Wireless. The descriptions below and elsewhere in this Form 10-K relating to our agreements with QFL
and Intelligent Partners are summaries only and are qualified in their entirety by reference to those agreements which were filed as exhibits
to this Form 10-K.
Summary of Agreements with QFL
On February 22, 2021, we entered into a series
of agreements which we entered into in February 2021 with QFL, including a prepaid forward purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”),
a security agreement (the “Security Agreement”), a subsidiary security agreement (the “Subsidiary Security Agreement”),
a subsidiary guaranty (the “Subsidiary Guarantee”), a warrant issue agreement (the “Warrant Issue Agreement”),
a registration rights agreement (the “Registration Rights Agreement”) and a board observation rights agreement (the “Board
Observation Rights Agreement” together with the Security Agreement, the Subsidiary Guaranty, the Subsidiary Security Agreement,
Warrant Issuance Agreement, Registration Rights Agreement and the Purchase Agreement, the “Investment Documents”) pursuant
to which, at the closing held contemporaneously with the execution of the agreements:
|
(i) |
Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, QFL agreed to make available to us a financing facility of: (a) up to $25,000,000 for the acquisition of mutually agreed patent rights that we intend to monetize; (b) up to $2,000,000 for operating expenses; and (iii) $1,750,000 to fund the cash payment portion of the restructure of our obligations to Intelligent Partners. In return we transferred to QFL a right to receive a portion of net proceeds generated from the monetization of those patents. During 2021 we requested and received $1,000,000 for working capital. The terms of the Purchase Agreement are described under “Purchase Agreement.” |
|
(ii) |
We used $1,750,000 of proceeds from the QFL financing as the cash payment portion of the restructure of our obligations to Intelligent Partners as transferee of United Wireless pursuant to a restructure agreement (the “Restructure Agreement”) between us and Intelligent Partners executed contemporaneously with the closing of the Investment Documents with QFL. The payment was made directly from QFL to Intelligent Partners. The terms of the Restructure Agreement are described under “Restructure Agreement.” |
|
(iii) |
Pursuant to the Security Agreement, our obligations under the Purchase Agreement with QFL are secured by: (a) the proceeds (as defined in the Purchase Agreement); (b) the patents (as defined in the Purchase Agreement; (c) all general intangibles now or hereafter arising from or related to the foregoing (a) and (b); and (d) proceeds (including, without limitation, cash proceeds and insurance proceeds) and products of the foregoing (a)-(c). |
|
(iv) |
Pursuant to the Subsidiary Guaranty, eight of our subsidiaries – Quest Licensing Corporation (“QLC”), Quest NetTech Corporation (“NetTech”), Mariner IC Inc. (“Mariner”), Semcon IP Inc. (“Semcon”), IC Kinetics Inc. (“IC”), CXT Systems Inc. (“CXT”), M-Red Inc. (“MRED”), and Audio Messaging Inc.(“AMI”), collectively, the “Subsidiary Guarantors”) guaranteed our obligations to QFL under the Purchase Agreement. |
|
(v) |
Pursuant to the Subsidiary Security Agreement, the Subsidiary Guarantors grant QFL a security interest in the proceeds from the future monetization of their respective patent portfolios. |
|
(vi) |
Pursuant to the Warrant Issue Agreement, we granted QFL ten-year warrants to purchase a total of up to 96,246,246 shares of our common stock, with an exercise price of $0.0054 per share which may be exercised from February 19, 2021 through February 18, 2031 on a cash or cashless basis. Exercisability of the Warrant is limited if, upon exercise, the holder would beneficially own more than 4.99% (the “Maximum Percentage”) of our common stock, except that by written notice to us, the holder may change the Maximum Percentage to any other percentage not in excess of 9.99% provided any such change will not be effective until the 61st day following notice to us. The Warrant also contains certain minimum ownership percentage antidilution rights pursuant to which the aggregate number of shares of common stock purchasable upon the initial exercise of the Warrant shall not be less than 10% of the aggregate number of outstanding shares of capital stock of the Company (determined on a fully diluted basis). A portion of any gain from sale of the shares, net of taxes and costs of exercise, realized prior to the completion of all monetization activities shall be credited against the total return due to QFL pursuant to the Purchase Agreement. |
|
(vii) |
We agreed to take all commercially reasonable steps necessary to regain compliance with the OTCQB eligibility standards as soon as practicable, but in no event later than 12 months from the closing date. We regained such compliance on May 7, 2021, at which time the common stock recommenced trading on the OTCQB. |
|
(viii) |
We granted QFL certain registration rights with respect to the 96,246,246 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of the warrant. |
|
(ix) |
Commencing six months from the closing date, if the shares owned by QFL cannot be sold pursuant to a registration statement and cannot be sold pursuant to Rule 144 without the Company being in compliance with the current public information requirements of Rule 144, if the Company is not in compliance with the current public information requirements, the Company is required to pay damages to QFL. |
|
(x) |
Pursuant to the Board Observation Rights Agreement, until the later of the date on which QFL or its affiliates (i) have received the entirety of their Investment Return (as defined in Purchase Agreement), and (ii) no longer hold any Securities (the “Observation Period”), we granted QFL the right, exercisable at any time during the Observation Period, to appoint a representative to attend meetings (including, without limitation, telephonic or other electronic meetings) of the Board or any committee thereof, including executive sessions, in an observer capacity. |
Purchase Agreement
Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, QFL agreed
to make available to us a financing facility of: (i) up to $25,000,000 for the acquisition of mutually agreed patent rights that we intend
to monetize; (ii) up to $2,000,000 for operating expenses from which we may, at our discretion, draw up to $200,000 per calendar quarter;
and (iii) $1,750,000 to fund the cash payment portion of the restructure of our obligations to Intelligent Partners. In return we transferred
to QFL the right to receive a portion of net proceeds generated from the monetization of those patents. After QFL has a negotiated rate
of return, we and QFL shall share net proceeds equally until QFL shall have achieved its Investment Return (as defined therein). Thereafter,
we shall retain 100% of all net proceeds. Except in an Event of Default, as defined therein, all payments by the Company to QFL pursuant
to the Purchase Agreement are non-recourse and shall be paid only if and after net proceeds from monetization of the patent rights owned
or acquire by the Company are received, or to be received.
Events of Default include any breach of the Investment
Documents, including non-payment, material misrepresentation, security interest compromise, criminal indictment or felony conviction of
one or our officers or directors, our current chief executive no longer serving as our chief executive or as a director, the occurrence
of any Event of Default under the Restructure Agreement with Intelligent Partners, as defined therein, and our insolvency. In addition
to all rights and remedies available under law and the Investment Documents, upon and Event of Default, QFL may: (i) declare the Investment
Return immediately due and payable, (ii) except in the event of our insolvency, declare an amount equal to the aggregate amount of the
capital provided pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, plus a late charge, immediately due and payable, or (iii) cease making capital available
to us.
Under the agreement, QFL may terminate capital
advances other than in an Event of Default by giving written notice to us in which case QFL’s interest in Net Proceeds shall be
an amount equal to the greater of (i) the capital advanced to the Company plus interest at the prime rate, on the one hand, and (ii) Net
Proceeds received by the QFL prior to the date of such termination.
Grant of Security Interests
Pursuant to the Security Agreement and Subsidiary
Security Agreement, payment of the obligations of the Company under the Purchase Agreement with QFL are secured by (i) the Proceeds (as
defined in the Purchase Agreement); (ii) the Patents; (iii) all General Intangibles now or hereafter arising from or related to the foregoing;
(iv) Proceeds (including, without limitation, Cash Proceeds and insurance proceeds) and products of the foregoing and (v) the proceeds
realized by the relative patent portfolios of the Subsidiary Guarantors. The security interest in proceeds from the CXT and M-RED patents
granted to QFL is junior to the security interest held by the affiliates of Intellectual Ventures Management, LLC (collectively “Intellectual
Ventures”) granted to secure the obligations of CXT and MRED pursuant to their patent purchase agreements relating to the purchase
of intellectual property from Intellectual Ventures.
Registration Rights Agreement
Pursuant to the Registration Rights Agreement,
we filed a registration statement with the SEC covering 50,000,000 of the 96,246,246 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of
the Warrant. We are also required to file additional Registration Statements (as defined in the Registration Rights Agreement) on the
date 60 days after the date that we receive written notice from any Investor (as defined in the Registration Rights Agreement) that 60%
of the Registrable Securities held by all Investors registered under the immediately preceding registration statement have been sold.
The Registration Rights Agreement provides for us to pay damages in the event that we do not meet the required deadlines.
Intercreditor Agreement
In connection with the agreements with QFL and
the agreements with Intelligent Partners described below, we and our Subsidiaries entered into an intercreditor agreement with QFL and
Intelligent Partners which sets forth the priority of QFL in the collateral under the Investment Documents.
Summary of Agreements with Intelligent Partners
Securities Purchase Agreement and Related Agreements
with United Wireless
We, together with certain of our subsidiaries,
and United Wireless, entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement dated October 22, 2015 (the “SPA”) and related Transaction
Documents, as defined therein, pursuant to which the Company sold 50,000,000 shares (the “Shares”) of our common stock, par
value $0.00003 per share (the “Common Stock”) at $0.05 per share, or an aggregate of $250,000; we issued our 10% secured convertible
promissory notes due September 30, 2020 to United, and granted United an option (the “2015 Purchase Option”) to purchase up
to an additional 50,000,000 shares of Common Stock in three tranches at the prices as set forth therein. The 2015 Purchase Option expired
unexercised on September 30, 2020. The Shares are currently owned by Andrew C. Fitton (“Fitton”) and Michael Carper (“Carper”)
and United Wireless subsequently transferred its note and assigned all of its remaining rights under the agreements to Intelligent Partners,
which is an affiliate of United Wireless and is owned by Fitton and Carper. Our agreements with United Wireless, also included various
monetization proceeds agreements, which we refer to as MPAs, pursuant to which we granted to Intelligent Partners, as the assignee of
United Wireless, rights to the monetization proceeds from revenue generated from certain of our intellectual property, a security agreement
and a registration rights agreement.
At September 30, 2020, promissory notes in the
aggregate principal amount of $4,672,810 were outstanding. The notes became due by their terms on September 30, 2020, and we did not make
any payment on account of principal of and interest on the notes. As a result, Intelligent Partners had the right to declare a default
under the Notes, and, if Intelligent Partners had taken such action, it would have been necessary for us to seek protection under the
Bankruptcy Act. Subsequent to September 30, 2020, we engaged in negotiations with Intelligent Partners in parallel with our negotiations
with QFL, with a view to restructuring our obligations under the United Wireless agreements, including the Notes, so that we no longer
had any obligations under the Notes or the SPA. These negotiations resulted in the Restructure Agreement, described below, which provided
for the payment to Intelligent Partners of $1,750,000 from the proceeds from our agreements with QFL. We also made interest payments totaling
$117,780 between September 30, 2020 and February 22, 2021, the date we signed the Restructure Agreement with Intelligent Partners. One
of QFL’s requirements to provide us with a funding facility was the restructure of our obligations to Intelligent Partners so that
we no longer had any debt obligations to Intelligent Partners. Neither QFL nor any other financing source, would provide us with funding
while Intelligent Partners had a right to call a default under our notes to Intelligent Partners. As part of the restructure of our agreements
with Intelligent Partners, we amended the existing MPAs and granted Intelligent Partners certain rights in the monetization proceeds from
any new intellectual property we acquire, as describe below. Under these MPAs, Intelligent Partners participates in the monetization proceeds
we receive with respect to new patents after QFL has received its negotiated rate of return.
On or prior to the date of the Restructure Agreement,
Intelligent Partners transferred to Fitton and Carper $250,000 of the Notes (the “Transferred Note”), thereby reducing the
principal amount of the Notes held by Intelligent Partners to $4,422,810.
On February 22, 2021, we and Intelligent Partners
agreed to extinguish the Note and Transferred Note, and terminate or amend and restate the SPA and Transaction Documents, pursuant to
a series of agreements including: a Restructure Agreement (the “Restructure Agreement”), a Stock Purchase Agreement (the “Stock
Purchase Agreement”), an Option Grant (the “Option Grant”), an Amended and Restated Pledge Agreement (the “Pledge
Agreement”), an Amended and Restated Registration Rights Agreement (the “Registration Rights Agreement”), a Board Observation
Agreement (the “Board Observation Agreement”), a MPA-NA Security Interest Agreement (the “MPA-NA Security Interest Agreement”),
an Amended and Restated Patent Proceeds Security Agreement (the “Patent Proceeds Security Agreement”, an Amended and Restated
MPA-CP (the “MPA-CP”), an Amended and Restated MPA-CXT (the “MPA-CXT”), a MPA-MR (the “MPA-MR”), a
MPA-AMI (the “MPA-AMI,” and together with the MPA-CP, MPA-CXT and MPA-MR, each a Restructure MPA and together the Restructure
MPAs) and a MPA-NA (the “MPA-NA”).
|
(i) |
Pursuant to the Restructure Agreement, we paid Intelligent Partners $1,750,000 at closing, which we received from QFL and which QFL paid directly to Intelligent Partners, and recognized a further non-interest bearing total monetization proceeds obligation (the “TMPO”) of $2,805,000, which shall, from and after the Restructure Date, be reduced on a dollar for dollar basis by (a) payments to Intelligent Partners pursuant to the restructure agreement, the Restructure MPAs and the MPA-NA and (b) any election by the Intelligent Partners to pay the Exercise Price of the Restructure Option, in whole or part, by means of a reduction in the then outstanding TMPO. Further details regarding the TMPO are provided under “TMPO”; |
|
(ii) |
Pursuant to the Stock Purchase Agreement, we issued to Fitton and Carper, as holders of the Transferred Note, a total of 46,296,296 shares of common stock at a purchase price of $0.0054 per share, which purchase price was paid by the conversion and in full satisfaction of the Transferred Note (the “Conversion Shares”). |
|
(iii) |
Pursuant to the Option Grant, we granted Intelligent Partners an option to purchase a total of 50,000,000 shares of common stock, with an exercise price of $0.0054 per share which vests immediately and may be exercised through February 9, 2026. |
|
(iv) |
Pursuant to the restructured monetization proceeds agreement, Intelligent Partners has a right to receive 60% of the net monetization proceeds from the patents currently owned by the Subsidiary Guarantors. The agreement has no termination provisions, so Intelligent Partners will be entitled to its percentage interest as long as revenue is generated from the intellectual property covered by the agreement. |
|
(v) |
Pursuant to the Subsidiary Security Agreement, our obligations under our agreements with Intelligent Partners, including its obligations under the Restructure Agreement and the Restructure MPAs are secured by a security interest in the net proceeds realized from the future monetization of the patents currently owned by the eight subsidiaries named above. |
|
(vi) |
Pursuant to the MPA-NA-Security Interest Agreement, our obligations under the MPA-NA are secured by a security interest in net proceeds realized from the future monetization of new patents acquired until the TMPO is satisfied, provided Intelligent Partners’ secured interest shall be limited to its entitlement in Net Proceeds under the MPA-NA. After satisfaction of the TMPO the security interest in proceeds from new assets shall terminate. |
|
(vii) |
We granted Intelligent Partners, Andrew Fitton and Michael Carper certain registration rights with respect to (i) the 50,000,000 Shares currently owned by Fitton and Carper, which shares are included in the registration statement that we filed; (ii) the 46,296,296 Conversion Shares being issued to Fitton and Carper, and (iii) the 50,000,000 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of the Restructure Option; |
|
(viii) |
Commencing six months from the closing date, if the shares owned by Intelligent Partners cannot be sold pursuant to a registration statement and cannot be sold pursuant to Rule 144 without the Company being in compliance with the current public information requirements of Rule 144, if the Company is not in compliance with the current public information requirements, the Company is required to pay damages to Intelligent Partners. |
|
(ix) |
Pursuant to the Board Observation Rights Agreement, until the TMPO has been satisfied (the “Observation Period”), we granted Intelligent Partners the option and right, exercisable at any time during the Observation Period, to appoint a representative to attend meetings of the Board or any committee thereof, including executive sessions, in an observer capacity. |
Events of Default include (i) a Change of Control
of the Company (ii) any uncured default on payment due to Intelligent Partners in an amount totaling in excess of $275,000, which is not
the subject of a Dispute or other formal dispute resolution proceeding initiated in good faith pursuant to this Agreement or other Restructure
Documents (iii) the filing of a voluntary petition for relief under the United States Bankruptcy Code by Company or any of its material
subsidiaries, (iv) the filing of an involuntary petition for relief under the United States Bankruptcy Code against the Company, which
is not stayed or dismissed within sixty (60) days of such filing, except for an involuntary petition for relief filed solely by Intelligent
Partners, or any Affiliate or member of Intelligent Partners, or (v) acceleration of an obligation in excess of $1 million dollars to
another provider of financing following a final determination by arbitration or other judicial proceeding that such obligation is due
and owing.
Registration Rights Agreement
Pursuant to a registration rights agreement, we
granted Intelligent Partners, Andrew Fitton and Michael Carper certain registration rights with respect to (i) the 50,000,000 Shares currently
owned by Fitton and Carper; (ii) the 46,296,296 Conversion Shares issued to Fitton and Carper, and (iii) the 50,000,000 shares of common
stock issuable upon exercise of the Restructure Option. We filed the registration statement with the SEC covering the 50,000,000 Shares
owned by Fitton and Carper, and the registration statement was declared effective by the SEC.
Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on our Business
Although we do not manufacture or sell products,
the COVID-19 pandemic and the work shutdown imposed in the United States and other countries to limit the spread of the virus can have
a negative impact on our business. Our revenue is generated almost exclusively from license fees generated from litigation seeking damages
for infringement of our intellectual property rights. The work shutdown has affected the court system, and during much of 2020 and part
of 2021 courts operating on a reduced schedule, and some courts may still not be operating on a full in-person schedule and, even if operating
on a full schedule, have a backlog as a result of the pandemic. As a result, we believe patent infringement actions are treated as a lower
priority items in allocation of court resources with the effect that deadlines are likely to be postponed which delays may give defendants
an incentive to delay negotiations or offer a lower amount than they might otherwise accept. In addition, the effect of the COVID-19 and
the public response may adversely affect the financial condition and prospects of defendants and potential defendants, which would make
it less likely that they would be willing to settle our claim or which may result in a defendant or potential defendant reducing or discontinuing
its operations or taking advantage of the Bankruptcy Act.
The COVID-19 pandemic and the response to limit
the spread of the infection may affect the financial condition of financing sources and the willingness of potential financing sources
to provide funding for our litigation. In addition, these factors may affect a law firms’ ability and willingness to provide us
with legal services on a contingent or partial contingent.
Further, to the extent that holders of intellectual
property rights see these factors impacting our ability to generate revenue from their intellectual property, they may be reluctant to
sell intellectual property to us on terms which are acceptable to us, if at all.
Purchase of Intellectual Property from Intellectual
Ventures Entities
On October 22, 2015, pursuant to an agreement
with an effective date of July 8, 2015, as amended, between us and Intellectual Ventures Assets 16, LLC (“IV16”), we purchased
three groups of patents from IV16 for a purchase price of $3,000,000, which was paid in three annual installments of $1,000,000 from the
proceeds of our loans from United Wireless. The patent portfolios which we acquired from IV16 are the anchor structure portfolio, the
power management/bus control portfolio and the diode on chip portfolio, which are described under “Business – Our Intellectual
Property Portfolios.”
On January 26, 2018, Photonic Imaging Solutions
Inc. (“PIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into an agreement with Intellectual Ventures Assets 64 LLC (“IV 64”)
pursuant to which PIS advanced $10,000 to IV 64 at closing and IV 64 assigned to PIS all right, title, and interest in a portfolio of
eleven United States patents and sixteen foreign patents (the “CMOS Portfolio”). Under the agreement, PIS will distribute
70% of the first $1,500,000 of revenue, as defined in the agreement, 30% of the next $1,500,000 of revenue and 50% of revenue over $3,000,000
to IV 64; with the $10,000 advance being treated as an advance against the first distributions of net proceeds payable to IV 64. PIS’
obligations under the monetization proceeds agreement are secured by a security interest in the proceeds (from litigation or otherwise)
from the portfolio. The patent portfolio which we acquired from IV 64 is the CMOS portfolio which is described under “Business –
Our Intellectual Property Portfolios.”
On July 28, 2017, CXT, a wholly-owned subsidiary,
entered into an agreement with Intellectual Ventures Assets 34 LLC and Intellectual Ventures Assets 37 LLC (“IV 34/37”) pursuant
to which CTX paid IV 34/37 $25,000 and IV34/37 transferred to CXT all right, title and interest in a portfolio of thirteen United States
patents (the “CXT Portfolio”). Under the agreement, CXT will distribute 50% of net proceeds, as defined, to IV 34/37, as long
as we generate revenue from the CXT Portfolio. The $25,000 payment to IV 34/37 was made from a loan from United Wireless and was paid
by United Wireless directly to IV 34/37. The agreement with IV 34/37, as amended on January 26, 2018, provides that if, on December 31,
2018, December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2020, cumulative distributions to IV 34/37 total less than $100,000, $375,000 and $975,000, respectively,
CXT shall pay the difference between such cumulative amounts and the amount paid to IV 34/37 within ten days after the applicable date.
The $25,000 advance is treated as an advance against distributions of net proceeds payable to IV 34/37. The useful lives of the patents,
at the date of acquisition, was 5-6 years. Neither we nor any affiliate of CXT has guaranteed the minimum payments. On December 31, 2021
the parties amended the agreement to provide that CXT will distribute 65% of net proceeds, as defined, to IV 34/37, as long as we generate
revenue from the CXT Portfolio and that if, on December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2019, cumulative distributions to IV 34/37 total less
than $100,000 and $375,000, respectively, CXT shall pay the difference between such cumulative amounts and the amount paid to IV 34/37
within ten days after the applicable date. As of December 31, 2021 cumulative distributions to IV 34/37 totaled $375,000. CXT’s
obligations under the agreement with IV 34/37 are secured by a security interest in the proceeds (from litigation or otherwise) from the
CXT Portfolio. The patent portfolio which we acquired from IV 34/37 is the CXT portfolio which is described under “Business –
Our Intellectual Property Portfolios.”
On January 26, 2018, CXT entered into an agreement
with Intellectual Ventures Assets 62 LLC and Intellectual Ventures Assets 71 LLC “(IV 62/71”) pursuant to which CXT advanced
IV 62/71 $10,000 at closing and IV 62/71 assigned to CXT all right, title, and interest in a portfolio of sixteen United States patents
and three pending applications. Under the agreement, as amended on December 31, 2021, CXT will distribute 65% of net proceeds, as defined,
to IV 62/71, as long as we generate net proceeds from this portfolio. The initial $10,000 advance is treated as an advance toward our
future distributions of net proceeds payable to IV 62/71. CXT’s obligations under the agreement are secured by a security interest
in the proceeds (from litigation or otherwise) from the CXT Portfolio. In March 2021, we made a payment to IV 62/71 in the amount of $64,238.
We agreed to modify the monetization proceeds agreement between CXT and United Wireless to include the patents acquired from IV 62/71.
The monetization proceeds amendment was further amended by the MPA-CXT Agreement in connection with the restructure of our agreements
with Intelligent Partners.
On March 15, 2019, M-RED Inc., a wholly-owned
subsidiary, entered into an agreement with Intellectual Ventures Assets 113 LLC and Intellectual Ventures Assets 108 LLC (“IV 113/108”)
pursuant to which M-RED paid IV 113/108 $75,000 and IV 113/108 transferred to M-RED all right, title and interest in a portfolio of sixty
United States patents and eight foreign patents (the “M-RED Portfolio”). Under the agreement, M-RED will distribute 50% of
net proceeds, as defined, to IV 113/108, as long as we generate revenue from the M-RED Portfolio. The agreement with IV 113/108 provides
that if, on September 30, 2020, September 30, 2021 and September 30, 2022, cumulative distributions to IV 113/108 total less than $450,000,
$975,000 and $1,575,000, respectively, M-RED shall pay the difference between such cumulative amounts and the amount paid to IV 113/108
within ten days after the applicable date. The $75,000 advance is treated as an advance against the first distributions of net proceeds
payable to IV 113/108. On September 30, 2020 cumulative distributions to IV 113/108 totaled less than $450,000 and M-RED did not pay the
difference to IV 113/108 within ten days. On December 31, 2021 the parties amended the agreement to provide that M-RED will distribute
100% of undistributed net proceeds, as defined, resulting from agreements signed prior to December 31, 2021 and 65% of net proceeds thereafter
to IV 113/108, as long as we generate revenue from the M-RED Portfolio and that if, on December 31, 2021 cumulative distributions to IV
113/108 total less than $302,113.89, M-RED shall pay the difference between such cumulative amounts and the amount paid to IV 113/108
within ten days after the applicable date. As of December 31, 2021 cumulative distributions to IV 113/108 totaled $302,113.89. The useful
lives of the patents, at the date of acquisition, was approximately nine years. Neither we nor any affiliate of M-RED has guaranteed the
minimum payments. M-RED’s obligations under the agreement with IV 113/108 are secured by a security interest in the proceeds (from
litigation or otherwise) from the M-RED Portfolio. The patent portfolio which we acquired from IV 113/108 is the M-RED portfolio which
is described under “Business – Our Intellectual Property Portfolios.” Pursuant to the MPA-MR, Intelligent Partners is
entitled to receive 60% of the net proceeds as defined in the agreement.
A default under the agreements with the Intellectual
Ventures affiliates could result in a default under our agreements with QFL, and, even if QFL does not declare a default, QFL may be reluctant
to finance our intellectual property acquisition if we are in default under any of our patent acquisition agreements with Intellectual
Venture affiliates. Further, it may be necessary for any defaulting subsidiary to seek protection under the Bankruptcy Act if we are not
able to enter into modification agreements with the Intellectual Ventures affiliates.
Our Organization
We were incorporated in Delaware on July 17, 1987
under the name Phase Out of America. On September 21, 1997, we changed our name to Quest Products Corporation, and, on June 6, 2007, we
changed our name to Quest Patent Research Corporation. We have been engaged in the intellectual property monetization business since 2008.
Our executive principal office is located at 411 Theodore Fremd Ave., Suite 206S, Rye, New York 10580-1411, telephone (888) 743-7577.
Our website is www.qprc.com. Information contained on or derived from our website or any other website does not constitute a part of this
annual report.
Our Intellectual Property Portfolios
Mobile Data
The real-time mobile data portfolio relates to
the automatic update of information delivered to a mobile device without the need for a manual refreshing. The portfolio is comprised
of U.S. Patent No. 7,194,468 “Apparatus and Method for Supplying Information” and all related patents, patent applications,
and all continuations, continuations-in-part, divisions, extensions, renewals, reissues and re-examinations relating to all inventions
thereof (the “Mobile Data Portfolio”).
Through December 31, 2021, we did not receive
any proceeds from the Mobile Data Portfolio.
Flexible Packaging - Turtle PakTM
In March 2008, we entered into an agreement with
Emerging Technologies Trust whereby our majority-owned subsidiary, Quest Packaging Solutions Corporation, acquired the exclusive license
to make, use, sell, offer for sale or sublicense the intellectual property of Emerging Technologies Trust (the “Turtle Pak™
Portfolio”). The Turtle Pak portfolio relates to a cost effective, high-protection packaging system recommended for fragile items
weighing less than ten pounds. The intellectual property consists of two U.S. patents, U.S. Patent No. RE36,412 and U.S. Patent No.6,490,844,
and the Turtle PakTM trademark. Turtle Pak™ brand packaging is suited for such uses as electrical and electronic components,
medical, dental, and diagnostic equipment, instrumentation products, and control components. Turtle Pak™ brand packaging materials
are 100% curbside recyclable.
As the exclusive licensee and manager of the manufacture
and sale of licensed product, we coordinate the manufacture and sale of licensed products to end users; we contract for the manufacture
and assembly of the product components, and we coordinate order receipt, fulfillment and invoicing. We did not generate revenues from
the TurtlePakTM product for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020.
Universal Financial Data System
The invention describes a universal financial
data system which allows its holder to use the device to access one or more accounts stored in the memory of the device as a cash payment
substitute as well as to keep track of financial and transaction records and data, such as transaction receipts, in a highly portable
package, such as a cellular device (the “Financial Data Portfolio”). The inventive universal data system is capable of supporting
multiple accounts of various types, including but not limited to credit card accounts, checking/debit accounts, and loyalty accounts.
Our wholly-owned subsidiary, Wynn Technologies Inc., acquired US Patent No. 5,859,419, from the owner, Sol Wynn. In January 2001, we filed
a reissue application for the patent, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued patent RE38,137. This reissued patent,
which contains 35 separate claims, replaces the original patent, which had seven claims. In February 2011, we entered into a new agreement
with Sol Li (formerly Sol Wynn), pursuant to which we issued to Mr. Li a 35% interest in Wynn Technologies and warrants to purchase up
to 5,000,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $0.001 per share. These warrants expired unexercised. We also agreed that
Mr. Li would receive 40% of the net licensing revenues generated by Wynn Technologies with respect to this patent, which is the only patent
owned by Wynn Technologies. On December 17, 2018, Wynn Technologies, Inc. granted an exclusive license to the Financial Data Portfolio,
including the right to enforce, to our wholly owned subsidiary, Quest NetTech. Under the agreement, Quest NetTech receives 100% of the
net proceeds, as defined by the agreement. On April 11, 2019 Quest NetTech Corporation merged with Wynn Technologies, Inc. with Quest
NetTech Corporation being the surviving entity with Mr. Li having a 35% interest. On April 12, 2019, Quest NetTech brought a patent infringement
suit in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against Apple, Inc. The case was dismissed in May 2020.
We did not generate revenue from the Financial
Data Portfolio in 2021. Our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2020 includes revenue from the Financial Data Portfolio.
Rich Media
The rich media portfolio is directed to methods,
systems, and processes that permit typical Internet users to design rich-media production content (i.e., rich-media applications),
such as websites. The portfolio consists of U.S. Patent No. 7,000,180, “Methods, Systems, and Processes for the Design and Creation
of Rich Media Applications via the Internet” and all related patents, patent applications, corresponding foreign patents and foreign
patent applications and foreign counterparts, and all continuations, continuations-in-part, divisions, extensions, renewals, reissues
and re-examinations relating to all inventions thereof (the “Rich Media Portfolio”). In July 2008, we entered into a consulting
and licensing program management agreement with Balthaser Online, Inc., the patent owner, pursuant to which we performed services related
to the establishment and management of a licensing program to evaluate and analyze the relevant market and to obtain licenses for the
Rich Media Portfolio in exchange for management fees as well as an irrevocable entitlement to a distribution of 15% of all proceeds generated
by the Rich Media Portfolio for the remaining life of the portfolio regardless of whether those proceeds are derived from litigation,
settlement, licensing or otherwise. Our 15% distribution right is subject to reduction to 7.5% in the event that we refuse or are unable
to perform the services detailed in the agreement.
Through December 31, 2021, we did not generate
any revenue from the rich media patents.
Anchor Structure Portfolio
This portfolio, which we acquired from IV16 in
October 2015 and transferred to our subsidiary, Mariner IC Inc., consists of two United States patents which relate to technology for
incorporating metal structures in the corners and edges of semiconductor dies to prevent cracking from stresses.
In March 2016, we entered into a funding agreement
whereby a third party agreed to provide funds to us to enable us to implement a structured licensing program, including litigation if
necessary, for the Anchor Structure Portfolio and engaged counsel on a partial contingency basis in connection with a proposed patent
infringement action relating to the Anchor Structure Portfolio. Under the funding agreement, the third party received an interest in the
proceeds from the settlements relating to this portfolio in 2019. The funding agreement was terminated in 2021.
We did not generate license fees from the Anchor
Structure Portfolio in 2021 or 2020 and we do not anticipate allocating further resources to monetization of the Anchor Structure Portfolio.
Power Management/Bus Control Portfolio
This portfolio, which is the second portfolio
which we acquired from IV16 and transferred to a newly-formed subsidiary, Semcon IP Inc., consists of four United States patents that
cover fundamental technology for adjusting the processor clock and voltage to save power based on the operating characteristics of the
processor and one United States patent that relates to coordinating direct bus communications between subsystems in an assigned channel.
In March 2016, we entered into a funding agreement
whereby a third party agreed to provide funds to us to enable us to implement a structured licensing program, including litigation if
necessary, for the Power Management/Bus Control Portfolio and engaged counsel on a partial contingency basis in connection with a proposed
patent infringement action relating to the Power Management/Bus Control. Under the funding agreement, the third party received an interest
in the proceeds from the program. The funding agreement was terminated in 2022.
Following the execution of the funding agreement
and partial contingency agreement with counsel, in April 2016, Semcon IP Inc. brought patent infringement suits in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Huawei Technologies, MediaTek Inc., STMicroelectronics Inc., Texas Instruments Incorporated
and ZTE Corporation. As of December 31, 2018, these actions had been settled and dismissed.
In May 2018, Semcon brought patent infringement
actions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against AsusTeK Computer Inc., TCT Mobile International
Limited et. al., LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton, SE, and Shenzhen OnePlus Science & Technology Co., Ltd.
The AsusTeK Computer Inc., TCT Mobile International
Limited et. al., LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton, SE, and Shenzhen OnePlus Science & Technology Co., Ltd., actions were settled in
2020 and our revenue for 2020 includes revenue from these settlements. We did not generate revenue from the Power Management/Bus Control
Portfolio in 2021 and we do not anticipate allocating further resources to its monetization.
Diode on Chip Portfolio
This portfolio, which is the third portfolio which
we acquired from IV16 and transferred to a newly-formed subsidiary, IC Kinetics Inc., consists of three United States patents and one
pending continuation application which cover technology relating to on-chip temperature measurement for semiconductors. As of December
31, 2021, we did not generate any revenue from this portfolio.
CXT Portfolio
This portfolio consists of thirty United States
patents which cover technology relating to systems and methods of operating an accessible information database which provides for inventory
evaluation, filtering according to preferences, alternative product recommendations, and access to a database of consumer feedback/evaluation.
In April 2018 CXT brought a patent infringement
suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Academy Ltd., In May 2018 CXT brought patent infringement
suits in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Conn’s, Inc., Fossil Group, Inc., JC Penney
Company, Inc., and Tailored Brands, Inc. In May 2019, CXT brought patent infringement actions in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Texas against Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc., Hallmark.com, LLC, Retail Concepts, Inc. and CC Filson Co. In August
2019, CXT brought patent infringement suits in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Neiman Marcus
Group Ltd., General Nutrition Corporation and Steve Madden, Ltd.
In March 2021 CXT brought patent infringement
suits in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Advanced Auto Parts, Inc., Costco Wholesale Corporation,
The Sherwin-Williams Company, V.F. Corporation and IKEA North America Services, LLC. In July 2021, HCL Technologies Limited (“HCL”),
as the world’ supplier of WebSphere Commerce products and citing CXT’s patent infringement suits against users of HCL’s
WebSphere Commerce products, brought an action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas seeking a declaratory
judgment that HCL’s WebSphere Commerce products do not infringe CXT’s patents and that CXT’s patents are invalid.
The actions against Conn’s, Inc., Academy
Ltd., Fossil Group, Inc., JC Penney Company, Inc., Tailored Brands, Inc., Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc., Hallmark, Retail Concepts, CC
Filson, General Nutrition, Steve Madden, Ltd. and Neiman Marcus Group Ltd. were resolved in 2020 and revenue for 2020 includes revenue
from any related settlements.
In 2021, the HCL matter was settled and dismissed
by mutual agreement pursuant to which HCL took a license to the CXT Portfolio and the actions against Advanced Auto Parts, Inc., Costco
Wholesale Corporation, The Sherwin-Williams Company, V.F. Corporation and IKEA North America Services, LLC were resolved. Revenue for
the year ended December 31, 2021 includes revenue from the resolution of these matters.
CMOS Portfolio
This portfolio consists of eleven United States
patents and sixteen foreign patents which cover technology relating to digital image sensor technology systems and methods which PIS acquired
on January 26, 2018.
We did not generate revenue from the CMOS Portfolio
in 2021 or 2020.
M-RED Portfolio
This portfolio consists of sixty United States
patents and eight foreign patents which cover technology relating to processor and power management which M-RED acquired on March 15,
2019.
On April 29, 2019, M-RED brought patent infringement
suits in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against MediaTek Inc. and Acer Inc. On July 16, 2019, M-Red Inc. brought
a patent infringement suit in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against Panasonic Corporation. As of December 31, 2020,
all actions were settled and dismissed and revenue for the year ended December 31, 2020 incudes revenue from settlements.
In March 2021, M-RED brought patent infringement suits in the U.S.
District for the Eastern District of Texas against Nintendo Co., Ltd., Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and Xiaomi Corporation et. al.
In April 2021, the case against Nintendo Co., Ltd. was dismissed without prejudice. In August 2021, M-Red Inc. brought a patent infringement
suit in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. In September 2021, M-RED Inc.
brought patent infringement suits in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against ASRock Inc., Biostar Microtech International
Corp., Giga-Byte Technology Co., Ltd. and Micro-Star International Co. Ltd. As of December 31, 2021 the action against Giga-Byte Technology
Co., Ltd. has been stayed pending settlement.
The actions against Mitsubishi Electric Corporation,
ASRock Inc., and Micro-Star International Co. Ltd. were resolved in 2021 and our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2021 includes
revenue from any related settlements.
Audio Messaging Portfolio
This portfolio consists of five issued United
States patents and one pending application which generally relate to systems and methods for associating an audio clip with an object
which our wholly-owned subsidiary, Audio Messaging Inc. (“AMI”), acquired in May of 2020. Pursuant to an unsecured non-recourse
funding agreement, a third-party agreed to provide acquisition funding in the amount of $95,000 for the acquisition. Under the funding
agreement, the third party funder is entitled to a priority return of funds advanced from net proceeds, as defined, recovered until the
funder has received $190,000. The Company has no other obligation to the third party and has no liability to the funder in the event that
the Company does not generate net proceeds.
On October 8, 2021, AMI brought patent infringement
suits in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against ZTE Corporation, Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp.,
Ltd. and Beijing Xiaomi Software Co., Ltd.
Peregrin Portfolio
Acquired in February 2021 by our wholly owned
subsidiary, Peregrin Licensing LLC (“PLL”), this portfolio consists of eight issued United States patents which generally
relate to systems and methods for processing inbound and outbound communications, such as, for example, determining the location of a
caller and routing the inbound communication to an entity in the caller’s location (the “Peregrin Portfolio”). PLL acquired
the portfolio pursuant to an agreement with Peter K. Trzyna (“PKT”) whereby PKT assigned us all right, title, and interest
in a portfolio of eight United States patents, we paid PKT $350,000 at closing and agreed that upon the realization of gross proceeds
from the Peregrin Portfolio we shall make subsequent installment payment or payments in the aggregate amount of $93,900. Thereafter, PKT
is entitled to a percentage of any gross proceeds realized.
In July 2021, PLL brought patent infringement
suits in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against Bank of America Corporation, Discover Financial Services, U.S. Bank
N.A. and Wells Fargo & Co. All actions were resolved in 2021 and our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2021 includes revenue
from any related settlements.
Taasera Portfolio
Acquired by our wholly-owned subsidiary, Taasera
Licensing LLC (“TLL”), this portfolio consists of 29 United States patents and 2 foreign patents which generally relate to
the field of network security (the “Taasera Portfolio”). In June 2021 seven patents were acquired via assignment from Taasera,
Inc. for the purchase price of $250,000. In August 2021 acquired a portfolio of network security patents from Daedalus Blue LLC (“DBL”)
consisting of 22 United States patents and 2 foreign patents. Original assignees of the patents acquired from DBL include International
Business Machines Corporation, Internet Security Systems, Inc. and Fiberlink Communications Corporation (“Fiberlink”). ISS
and Fiberlink were acquired by IBM in 2006 and 2013, respectively. In September 2019, IBM divested over 500 United States patent assets,
as well as a number of foreign counterparts in Asia, Europe, and elsewhere, to Daedalus Group, and affiliate of DBL. Pursuant to the acquisition
agreement, DBL is entitled to a portion of the net proceeds from monetization of the TLL portfolio.
In November 2021, TLL brought patent infringement
suits in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against Trend Micro Incorporated. In February 2022, TLL brought patent infringement
suits in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against Checkpoint Software Technologies Ltd. and Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
Soundstreak Portfolio
Acquired through our acquisition of all of the
issued and outstanding equity interests of Soundstreak Texas LLC (“STX”) in August 2021 for a purchase price consisting of
50% of the net proceeds resulting from monetization of the patent portfolio, this patent portfolio consists of three United States patents
and one pending patent application which generally relate to streaming data (including audio or video) while also storing higher quality
versions of the same data locally. The patented technology has applications in the professional recording industry, digital audio/video
industries, the drone/remote capture industry, the teleconferencing industry, and more.
In August 2021, STX brought a patent infringement suit in the U.S.
District for the Eastern District of Texas against Yamaha Corporation and Steinberg Media Technologies GMBH. In September 2021, STX brought
patent infringement suits in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against Sony Group Corporation, Panasonic Corporation,
Olympus Corporation and Nikon Corporation.
The actions against Sony Group Corporation, Panasonic
Corporation, Olympus Corporation and Nikon Corporation were resolved in 2021 and our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2021 includes
revenue from any related settlements.
In March 2022, STX brought a patent infringement suit in the U.S. District
for the Eastern District of Texas against Parrot SA, Delair SAS, Drone Volt, SA, EHang Holdings Limited and Flyability SA.
Multimodal Media Portfolio
Acquired by the our wholly owned subsidiary, Multimodal
Media LLC (“MML”) in October 2021, the Multimodal Media portfolio consists of ten United States patents and one pending application
which generally relate to systems and methods of recording and sending interactive messages and voice messages using mobile devices, as
well as completing a communication after an incomplete call (the “Multimodal Media Portfolio”). MML advanced $550,000 at closing
pursuant to an agreement with Aawaaz Inc. (“AI”). Under the agreement, MML retains an amount equal to the purchase price plus
any fees incurred out of net proceeds, as defined in the agreement, after which AI is entitled to a percentage of further net proceeds
realized, if any.
The Multimodal Media Portfolio was originally
developed by Kirusa, Inc., a communications software development company founded in 2001 by Inderpal Mumick together with other technocrats
with a dream of connecting people through the power of voice. Heralded by the invention of Voice SMS, Kirusa, Inc. was born with a vision
to revolutionize the experiences users derived from their mobile phones.
In November 2021, MML brought patent infringement
suits in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against ZTE Corporation and Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp.,
Ltd.
LS Cloud Storage Portfolio
We acquired this portfolio through our acquisition
of all of the issued and outstanding equity interests of LS Cloud Storage Technologies LLC (“LSC”) in November 2021, the LS
Cloud Portfolio consists of four United States patents which generally relate to data sharing using distributed cache.
In March 2022, LSC brought patent infringement
suits in the U.S. District for the Eastern District of Texas against Microsoft Corporation, Google LLC, Cisco Systems, Inc. and Amazon.com,
Inc. et.al.
Competition
We encounter and expect to continue to encounter
competition in the areas of intellectual property acquisitions for the sake of licensure from both private and publicly traded companies
that engage in intellectual property monetization activities. Such competitors and potential competitors include companies seeking to
acquire the same intellectual property assets and intellectual property rights that we may seek to acquire. Entities such as Acacia Research
Corporation, Document Security Systems, Inc., Intellectual Ventures, Quarterhill Inc., Conversant Intellectual Property Management Inc.,
VirnetX Holding Corporation, Network-1 Security Solutions, Interdigital, Inc., IPValue Management Inc., Pendrell Corporation, Inventergy
Global, Inc., Netlist Inc., Parkervision Inc., Walker Innovation, Inc., Daedalus Group LLC and others derive all or a substantial portion
of their revenue from intellectual property monetization activities, and we expect more entities to enter the market. Most of our competitors
have longer operating histories and significantly greater financial resources and personnel than we have.
We also compete with venture capital firms, strategic
corporate buyers and various industry leaders for intellectual property and technology acquisitions and licensing opportunities. Many
of these competitors have more financial and human resources than our company. In seeking to obtain intellectual property assets or intellectual
property rights, we seek to both demonstrate our understanding of the intellectual property that we are seeking to acquire or license
and our ability to monetize their intellectual property rights. Our weak cash position and history of losses, together with our low stock
price, may impair our ability to negotiate successfully with the intellectual property owners.
Other companies may develop competing technologies
that offer better or less expensive alternatives to intellectual property rights that we may acquire and/or license. Many potential competitors
may have significantly greater resources than we do. The development of technological advances or entirely different approaches could
render certain of the technologies owned or controlled by our operating subsidiaries obsolete and/or uneconomical.
Intellectual Property Rights
We have fifteen intellectual property portfolios:
financial data, mobile data, Turtle Pak, anchor structure, power management/bus control, diode on chip, rich media, CXT, CMOS, M-RED,
Audio Messaging, Peregrin, Taasera, Soundstreak, Multmodal Media and LS Cloud. The following table sets forth information concerning our
patents and other intellectual property. Each patent or other intellectual property right listed in the table below that has been granted
is publicly accessible on the Internet website of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office at www.uspto.gov. In the table below, the
anchor structure portfolio is referred to as Mariner, the power management/bus control portfolio is referred to as Semcom, the diode on
chip portfolio is referred to as IC, the Audio Messaging portfolio is referred to as AMI, the Peregrin portfolio is referred to as PLL,
the Taasera portfolio is referred to as TLL, the Soundstreak portfolio is referred to as STX, the Multimodal Media portfolio is referred
to as MML and the LS Cloud portfolio is referred to as LSC.
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration |
Financial Data |
|
US Patent |
|
RE38,137 |
|
Programmable multiple company credit card system |
|
1/11/2001 |
|
6/10/2003 |
|
9/28/2015 |
Mobile Data |
|
US Patent |
|
7,194,468 |
|
Apparatus and method for supplying information |
|
4/13/2000 |
|
3/20/2007 |
|
4/13/2020 |
Mobile Data |
|
US Patent |
|
9,288,605 |
|
Apparatus and method for supplying information |
|
11/12/2009 |
|
3/15/2016 |
|
4/13/2020 |
Mobile Data |
|
US Patent |
|
9,913,068 |
|
Apparatus and method for supplying information |
|
3/15/2013 |
|
3/6/2018 |
|
7/20/2021 |
Mobile Data |
|
US Application |
|
15/877,820 |
|
Apparatus and method for supplying information |
|
1/23/2018 |
|
5/31/2018 |
|
N/A |
Turtle Pak |
|
US Patent |
|
6,490,844 |
|
Film wrap packaging apparatus and method |
|
6/21/2001 |
|
12/10/2002 |
|
7/10/2021 |
Turtle Pak |
|
US Trademark |
|
74709827 |
|
Turtle pak - design plus words, letters, and/or numbers |
|
8/1/1995 |
|
6/4/1996 |
|
N/A |
Mariner |
|
US Patent |
|
5,650,666 |
|
Method and apparatus for preventing cracks in semiconductor die |
|
11/22/1995 |
|
7/22/1997 |
|
11/22/2015 |
Mariner |
|
US Patent |
|
5,846,874 |
|
Method and apparatus for preventing cracks in semiconductor die |
|
2/28/1997 |
|
12/8/1998 |
|
11/22/2015 |
Semcon |
|
US Patent |
|
7,100,061 |
|
Adaptive power control |
|
1/18/2000 |
|
8/29/2006 |
|
1/18/2020 |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration |
Semcon |
|
US Patent |
|
7,596,708 |
|
Adaptive power control |
|
4/25/2006 |
|
9/29/2009 |
|
1/18/2020 |
Semcon |
|
US Patent |
|
8,566,627 |
|
Adaptive power control |
|
7/14/2009 |
|
10/22/2013 |
|
1/18/2020 |
Semcon |
|
US Patent |
|
8,806,247 |
|
Adaptive power control |
|
12/21/2012 |
|
8/12/2014 |
|
1/18/2020 |
Semcon |
|
PCT Application |
|
PCT/US2001/001684 |
|
Adaptive power control |
|
1/16/2001 |
|
7/26/2001 |
|
N/A |
Semcon |
|
Reexam Certificate |
|
7,100,061C1 |
|
Adaptive power control |
|
6/13/2007 |
|
8/4/2009 |
|
N/A |
Semcon |
|
US Patent |
|
5,978,876 |
|
System and method for controlling communications between subsystems |
|
4/14/1997 |
|
11/2/1999 |
|
4/14/2017 |
IC |
|
US Patent |
|
7,118,273 |
|
System for on-chip temperature measurement in integrated circuits |
|
4/10/2003 |
|
10/10/2006 |
|
4/10/2023 |
IC |
|
US Patent |
|
7,108,420 |
|
System for on-chip temperature measurement in integrated circuits |
|
10/7/2004 |
|
9/19/2006 |
|
4/10/2023 |
IC |
|
US Patent |
|
9,222,843 |
|
System for on-chip temperature measurement in integrated circuits |
|
9/23/2011 |
|
12/29/2015 |
|
4/10/2023 |
IC |
|
US Application |
|
16/537,200 |
|
System for on-chip temperature measurement in integrated circuits |
|
8/9/2019 |
|
11/28/2019 |
|
N/A |
Rich Media |
|
Patent Proceeds Interest |
|
7,000,180 |
|
Methods, systems, and processes for the design and creation of rich media applications via the internet |
|
02/09/2001 |
|
02/14/2006 |
|
10/16/2023 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,103,568 |
|
Online product exchange system |
|
2/23/2004 |
|
9/5/2006 |
|
8/8/2015 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,933,806 |
|
Online product exchange system with price-sorted matching products |
|
9/11/2006 |
|
4/26/2011 |
|
8/8/2015 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
8,024,226 |
|
Product exchange system |
|
11/6/2006 |
|
4/26/2011 |
|
8/8/2015 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
5,983,220 |
|
Suppporting intuitive decision in complex multi-attributive domains using fuzzy, hierarchial expert models |
|
11/14/1996 |
|
11/9/1999 |
|
11/14/2016 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
6,463,431 |
|
Database evaluation system suppporting intuitive decision in complex multi-attributive domains using fuzzy, hierarchial expert models |
|
6/25/1999 |
|
10/8/2002 |
|
11/14/2016 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
5,940,807 |
|
Automated and independently accessible inventory information exchange system |
|
5/28/1997 |
|
8/17/1999 |
|
5/23/17 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
6,081,789 |
|
Automated and independently accessible inventory information exchange system |
|
1/8/1999 |
|
6/27/2000 |
|
5/23/17 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
6,601,043 |
|
Automated and independently accessible inventory information exchange system |
|
6/26/2000 |
|
7/29/2003 |
|
5/23/17 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
6,011,537 |
|
System for delivering and simultaneously displaying primary and secondary information, and for displaying only the secondary information during interstitial space |
|
1/27/1998 |
|
1/4/2000 |
|
1/27/2018 |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,133,835 |
|
Online exchange market system with a buyer auction and a seller auction |
|
10/30/1995 |
|
11/7/2006 |
|
5/27/2018 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
6,412,012 |
|
System, method, and article of manufacture for making a compatibility aware recommendation to a user |
|
12/23/1998 |
|
6/25/2002 |
|
12/23/2018 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
6,493,703 |
|
System and method for implementing intelligent online community message board |
|
5/11/1999 |
|
12/10/2002 |
|
5/11/2019 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
6,571,234 |
|
System and method for managing online message board |
|
5/11/1999 |
|
5/27/2003 |
|
5/11/2019 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
6,721,748 |
|
Online content provider system and method |
|
5/13/2002 |
|
4/13/2004 |
|
5/11/2019 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
6,778,982 |
|
Online content provider system and method |
|
2/20/2003 |
|
8/17/2004 |
|
5/11/2019 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
6,804,675 |
|
Online content provider system and method |
|
3/17/2003 |
|
10/12/2004 |
|
5/11/2019 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,159,011 |
|
System and method for managing an online messaging board |
|
8/16/2004 |
|
1/2/2007 |
|
5/11/2019 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,162,471 |
|
Content query system and method |
|
8/16/2004 |
|
1/9/2007 |
|
5/11/2019 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
RE43,835 |
|
Online content tabulating system and method |
|
2/22/2007 |
|
11/27/2012 |
|
5/11/2019 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
RE45,661 |
|
Online content tabulating system and method |
|
11/20/2012 |
|
9/1/2015 |
|
5/11/2019 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,065,494 |
|
Electronic customer service and rating system and method |
|
6/25/1999 |
|
6/20/2006 |
|
6/25/2019 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,340,411 |
|
System and method for generating, capturing, and managing customer lead information over a computer network |
|
10/20/2003 |
|
3/4/2008 |
|
8/2/2021 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
8,260,806 |
|
Storage, management and distribution of consumer information |
|
6/29/2007 |
|
9/4/2012 |
|
10/17/2021 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,487,130 |
|
Consumer-controlled limited and constrained access to a centrally stored information account |
|
1/6/2006 |
|
2/3/2009 |
|
11/7/2021 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,016,877 |
|
Consumer-controlled limited and constrained access to a centrally stored information account |
|
11/7/2001 |
|
3/21/2006 |
|
2/22/2023 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,257,581 |
|
Storage, management and distribution of consumer information |
|
8/6/2001 |
|
8/14/2007 |
|
6/2/2023 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,467,141 |
|
Branding and revenue sharing models for facilitating storage, management and distribution of consumer information |
|
8/20/2001 |
|
12/16/2008 |
|
8/11/2023 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
7,016,875 |
|
Single sign-on for access to a central data repository |
|
10/9/2001 |
|
3/21/2006 |
|
8/19/2023 |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
8,566,248 |
|
Initiation of an information transaction over a network via a wireless device |
|
11/20/2001 |
|
10/22/2013 |
|
6/17/2026 |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration |
CXT |
|
US Patent |
|
9,928,508 |
|
Single sign-on for access to a central data repository |
|
1/6/2006 |
|
3/27/18 |
|
5/22/2027 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
6,624,404 |
|
CMOS image sensor having enhanced photosensitivity and method for fabricating the same |
|
11/26/2001 |
|
9/23/2003 |
|
12/30/2019 |
CMOS |
|
Korean Patent |
|
KR10-0303774 |
|
Method for fabricating cmos image sensor |
|
12/30/1998 |
|
7/13/2001 |
|
12/30/2018 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
6,348,361 |
|
CMOS image sensor having enhanced photosensitivity and method for fabricating the same |
|
12/30/1999 |
|
2/19/2002 |
|
12/30/2019 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
6,184,055 |
|
CMOS image sensor with equivalent potential diode and method for fabricating the same |
|
2/26/1999 |
|
2/6/2001 |
|
2/26/2019 |
CMOS |
|
Chinese Patent |
|
CNZL99105588.8 |
|
Complementary mos image sensor and making method thereof |
|
2/28/1999 |
|
10/13/2004 |
|
2/27/2019 |
CMOS |
|
Chinese Patent |
|
CNZL200310104488.4 |
|
Image sensing device and its manufacturing method |
|
2/28/1999 |
|
3/26/2008 |
|
2/27/2019 |
CMOS |
|
German Patent |
|
DE19908457.2 |
|
Photodiode used in cmos image sensing device |
|
2/26/1999 |
|
11/28/2013 |
|
2/26/2019 |
CMOS |
|
French Patent |
|
FR2775541 |
|
Photodiode for use in a cmos image sensor and method for fabricating the same |
|
3/1/1999 |
|
8/2/2002 |
|
3/1/2019 |
CMOS |
|
French Patent |
|
FR2779870 |
|
Photodiodes for image sensors |
|
3/1/1999 |
|
5/13/2005 |
|
3/1/2019 |
CMOS |
|
United Kingdom Patent |
|
GB2334817 |
|
Photodiode for use in a cmos image sensor and method for fabricating the same |
|
3/1/1999 |
|
7/1/2003 |
|
3/1/2019 |
CMOS |
|
United Kingdom Patent |
|
GB2383900 |
|
CMOS image sensor and method for fabricating the same |
|
3/1/1999 |
|
8/20/2003 |
|
3/1/2019 |
CMOS |
|
Japanese Patent |
|
JP4390896 |
|
CMOS image sensor and manufacture thereof |
|
3/1/1999 |
|
10/16/2009 |
|
3/1/2019 |
CMOS |
|
Korean Patent |
|
KR10-0278285 |
|
CMOS image sensor and manufacturing method thereof |
|
2/24/1999 |
|
10/18/2000 |
|
2/24/2019 |
CMOS |
|
Taiwanese Patent |
|
TWI141677 |
|
CMOS image sensor with equivalent potential diode |
|
3/22/1999 |
|
10/1/2001 |
|
3/21/2019 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
6,180,969 |
|
CMOS image sensor with equivalent potential diode |
|
2/26/1999 |
|
1/30/2001 |
|
2/26/2019 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
6,563,187 |
|
CMOS image sensor integrated together with memory device |
|
6/29/1999 |
|
5/13/2003 |
|
6/29/2019 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
6,949,388 |
|
CMOS image sensor integrated together with memory device |
|
5/12/2003 |
|
9/27/2005 |
|
11/9/2019 |
CMOS |
|
Korean Patent |
|
KR10-0464955 |
|
CMOS image sensor integrated with memory device |
|
6/29/1998 |
|
12/24/2004 |
|
6/29/2018 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
6,627,929 |
|
Solid state ccd image sensor having a light shielding layer |
|
6/13/2001 |
|
9/30/2003 |
|
10/13/2018 |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration |
CMOS |
|
Korean Patent |
|
KR10-0263473 |
|
Solid state image device and fabrication method thereof |
|
2/16/1998 |
|
5/17/2000 |
|
2/16/2018 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
6,300,157 |
|
Solid state image sensor and method for fabricating the same |
|
10/13/1998 |
|
10/9/2001 |
|
10/13/2018 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
7,113,203 |
|
Method and system for single-chip camera |
|
5/7/2002 |
|
9/26/2006 |
|
5/13/2022 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
6,706,550 |
|
Photodiode having a plurality of PN junctions and image sensor having the same |
|
10/16/2002 |
|
3/16/2004 |
|
2/26/2019 |
CMOS |
|
Japanese Patent |
|
JP4139931 |
|
Pinned photodiode of image sensor, and its manufacture |
|
6/28/1999 |
|
6/20/2008 |
|
6/28/2019 |
CMOS |
|
Korean Patent |
|
KR10-0275123 |
|
Pinned photodiode of image sensor and manufacturing method thereof |
|
6/29/1998 |
|
9/19/2000 |
|
6/29/2018 |
CMOS |
|
Taiwanese Patent |
|
TWI133257 |
|
Photodiode having a plurality of PN junctions and image sensor having the same |
|
6/30/1999 |
|
5/28/2001 |
|
6/29/2019 |
CMOS |
|
US Patent |
|
6,489,643 |
|
Photodiode having a plurality of PN junctions and image sensor having the same |
|
6/28/1999 |
|
12/3/2002 |
|
6/28/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,853,259 |
|
Ring oscillator dynamic adjustments for auto calibration |
|
8/15/2001 |
|
2/8/2005 |
|
8/15/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
7,068,557 |
|
Ring oscillator dynamic adjustments for auto calibration |
|
1/25/2005 |
|
6/27/2006 |
|
8/15/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
7,209,401 |
|
Ring oscillator dynamic adjustments for auto calibration |
|
5/2/2006 |
|
4/24/2007 |
|
8/15/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,221,682 |
|
Method and apparatus for evaluating a known good die using both wire bond and flip-chip interconnects |
|
5/28/1999 |
|
4/24/2001 |
|
5/28/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
RE43,607 |
|
Method and apparatus for evaluating a known good die using both wire bond and flip-chip interconnects |
|
5/31/2007 |
|
8/28/2012 |
|
12/31/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,177,843 |
|
Oscillator circuit controlled by programmable logic |
|
5/26/1999 |
|
1/23/2001 |
|
5/26/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,628,171 |
|
Method, architecture and circuit for controlling and/or operating an oscillator |
|
1/23/2001 |
|
9/30/2003 |
|
5/26/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,831,690 |
|
Electrical sensing apparatus and method utilizing an array of transducer elements |
|
12/7/1999 |
|
12/14/2004 |
|
12/7/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
7,511,754 |
|
Electrical sensing apparatus and method utilizing an array of transducer elements |
|
10/26/2004 |
|
3/31/2009 |
|
2/7/2022 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,498,399 |
|
Low dielectric-constant dielectric for etchstop in dual damascene backend of integrated circuits |
|
9/8/1999 |
|
12/24/2002 |
|
9/8/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,744,311 |
|
Switching amplifier with voltage-multiplying output stage |
|
4/23/2002 |
|
6/1/2004 |
|
4/23/2022 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,646,465 |
|
Programmable Logic Device Including Bi-Directional Shift Register |
|
2/7/2002 |
|
11/11/2003 |
|
2/7/2022 |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,721,310 |
|
Multiport non-blocking high capacity atm and packet switch |
|
11/2/2001 |
|
4/13/2004 |
|
11/2/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,456,183 |
|
Inductor for Integrated Circuit |
|
2/24/2000 |
|
9/24/2002 |
|
2/24/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,838,970 |
|
Inductor for Integrated Circuit |
|
7/26/2002 |
|
1/4/2005 |
|
9/30/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,459,135 |
|
Monolithic Integrated Circuit Incorporating An Inductive Component And Process For Fabricating Such An Integrated Circuit |
|
3/15/2000 |
|
10/1/2002 |
|
3/15/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,388,322 |
|
Article comprising a mechanically compliant bump |
|
1/17/2001 |
|
5/14/2002 |
|
1/17/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,458,411 |
|
Method of making a mechanically compliant bump |
|
10/5/2001 |
|
10/1/2002 |
|
1/17/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,506,648 |
|
Method of fabricating a high power RF field effect transistor with reduced hot electron injection and resulting structure |
|
9/2/1998 |
|
1/14/2003 |
|
6/27/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,735,422 |
|
Calibrated DC compensation system for a wireless communication device configured in a zero intermediate frequency architecture |
|
10/2/2000 |
|
5/11/2004 |
|
10/2/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,674,998 |
|
System and method for detecting and correcting phase error between differential signals |
|
12/21/2000 |
|
1/6/2004 |
|
10/2/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,891,440 |
|
Quadrature oscillator with phase error correction |
|
12/21/2000 |
|
1/6/2004 |
|
8/8/2022 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,763,228 |
|
Precision automatic gain control circuit |
|
12/21/2001 |
|
7/13/2004 |
|
10/3/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,748,200 |
|
Automatic gain control system and method for a ZIF architecture |
|
4/4/2003 |
|
6/8/2004 |
|
10/2/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
RE42,799 |
|
Packet acquisition and channel tracking for a wireless communication device configured in a zero intermediate frequency architecture |
|
6/27/2008 |
|
10/4/2011 |
|
1/22/2023 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,560,448 |
|
DC compensation system for a wireless communication device configured in a zero intermediate frequency architecture |
|
10/2/2000 |
|
5/6/2003 |
|
8/29/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,448,910 |
|
Method and apparatus for convolution encoding and viterbi decoding of data that utilize a configurable processor to configure a plurality of re-configurable processing elements |
|
3/26/2001 |
|
9/10/2002 |
|
3/26/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
7,127,588 |
|
Apparatus and method for an improved performance VLIW processor |
|
12/5/2000 |
|
10/24/2006 |
|
3/17/2022 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,757,752 |
|
Micro Controller Development System |
|
1/14/2002 |
|
6/29/2004 |
|
1/14/2022 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,509,646 |
|
Apparatus For Reducing An Electrical Noise Inside A Ball Grid Array Package |
|
5/22/2000 |
|
1/21/2003 |
|
5/22/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,365,970 |
|
Bond Pad Structure And Its Method Of Fabricating |
|
12/10/1999 |
|
4/2/2002 |
|
12/10/2019 |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,912,601 |
|
Method of programming PLDs using a wireless link |
|
6/28/2000 |
|
6/28/2005 |
|
5/11/2022 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,496,054 |
|
Control signal generator for an overvoltage-tolerant interface circuit on a low voltage process |
|
5/9/2001 |
|
12/17/2002 |
|
5/9/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,194,279 |
|
Fabrication method for gate spacer |
|
6/28/1999 |
|
2/27/2001 |
|
6/28/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,281,554 |
|
Electrostatic discharge protection circuit |
|
3/20/2000 |
|
8/28/2001 |
|
3/20/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,657,263 |
|
MOS transistors having dual gates and self-aligned interconnect contact windows |
|
6/28/2001 |
|
12/2/2003 |
|
3/24/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,461,908 |
|
Method of manufacturing a semiconductor device |
|
4/10/2001 |
|
10/8/2002 |
|
4/10/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,737,995 |
|
Clock and data recovery with a feedback loop to adjust the slice level of an input sampling circuit |
|
4/10/2002 |
|
5/18/2004 |
|
4/18/2022 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,747,522 |
|
Digitally controlled crystal oscillator with integrated coarse and fine control |
|
5/3/2002 |
|
6/8/2004 |
|
5/17/2022 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,275,116 |
|
Method, circuit and/or architecture to improve the frequency range of a voltage controlled oscillator |
|
6/8/1999 |
|
8/14/2001 |
|
6/8/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,608,763 |
|
Stacking system and method |
|
9/15/2000 |
|
8/19/2003 |
|
5/24/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,404,043 |
|
Panel stacking of BGA devices to form three-dimensional modules |
|
6/21/2000 |
|
6/11/2002 |
|
6/21/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,472,735 |
|
Three-dimensional memory stacking using anisotropic epoxy interconnections |
|
4/5/2001 |
|
10/29/2002 |
|
6/27/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,544,815 |
|
Panel stacking of BGA devices to form three-dimensional modules |
|
8/6/2001 |
|
4/8/2003 |
|
6/21/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,566,746 |
|
Panel stacking of BGA devices to form three-dimensional modules |
|
12/14/2001 |
|
5/20/2003 |
|
6/21/2020 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,878,571 |
|
Panel stacking of BGA devices to form three-dimensional modules |
|
12/11/2002 |
|
4/12/2005 |
|
4/30/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,627,984 |
|
Chip stack with differing chip package types |
|
7/24/2001 |
|
9/30/2003 |
|
7/24/2021 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,908,792 |
|
Chip stack with differing chip package types |
|
10/3/2002 |
|
6/21/2005 |
|
2/21/2022 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,205,524 |
|
Multimedia arbiter and method using fixed round-robin slots for real-time agents and a timed priority slot for non-real-time agents |
|
9/16/1998 |
|
3/20/2001 |
|
9/16/2018 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,157,978 |
|
Multimedia round-robin arbitration with phantom slots for super-priority real-time agent |
|
1/6/1999 |
|
12/5/2000 |
|
9/16/2018 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,117,750 |
|
Process for obtaining a layer of single-crystal germanium or silicon on a substrate of single-crystal silicon or germanium, respectively |
|
12/21/1998 |
|
9/12/2000 |
|
12/21/2018 |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,429,098 |
|
Process for obtaining a layer of single-crystal germanium or silicon on a substrate of single-crystal silicon or germanium, respectively, and multilayer products obtained |
|
9/11/2000 |
|
8/6/2002 |
|
12/21/2018 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,134,176 |
|
Disabling a defective element in an integrated circuit device having redundant elements |
|
11/24/1998 |
|
10/17/2000 |
|
11/24/2018 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,366,998 |
|
Reconfigurable functional units for implementing a hybrid vliw-simd programming model |
|
10/14/1998 |
|
4/2/2002 |
|
10/14/2018 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,401,217 |
|
Method For Error Recognition In A Processor System |
|
7/22/1998 |
|
6/4/2002 |
|
7/22/2018 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,169,028 |
|
Method for fabricating metal interconnected structure |
|
1/26/1999 |
|
1/2/2001 |
|
1/26/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,190,981 |
|
Method for fabricating metal oxide semiconductor |
|
2/3/1999 |
|
2/20/2001 |
|
2/3/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,130,823 |
|
Stackable ball grid array module and method |
|
2/1/1999 |
|
10/10/2000 |
|
2/1/2019 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,208,004 |
|
Semiconductor device with high-temperature-stable gate electrode for sub-micron applications and fabrication thereof |
|
8/19/1998 |
|
3/27/2001 |
|
8/19/2018 |
M-RED |
|
US Patent |
|
6,479,362 |
|
Semiconductor device with high-temperature-stable gate electrode for sub-micron applications and fabrication thereof |
|
2/14/2001 |
|
11/12/2002 |
|
8/19/2018 |
M-RED |
|
Korean Patent |
|
KR10-0796825 |
|
Method of manufacturing a semiconductor device |
|
4/3/2001 |
|
6/24/2009 |
|
4/3/2021 |
M-RED |
|
British Patent |
|
GB0930382 |
|
Process for obtaining a layer of single crystal germanium or silicon on single crystal silicon or germanium substrate respectively, and multilayer products thus obtained |
|
12/9/1998 |
|
8/21/2002 |
|
12/9/2018 |
M-RED |
|
Italian Patent |
|
IT0930382 |
|
Process for obtaining a layer of single crystal germanium or silicon on single crystal silicon or germanium substrate respectively, and multilayer products thus obtained |
|
12/9/1998 |
|
8/21/2002 |
|
12/9/2018 |
M-RED |
|
Korean Patent |
|
KR10-0633947 |
|
Method of fabricating a high power rf field effect transistor with reduced hot electron injection and resulting structure |
|
8/17/1999 |
|
10/4/2006 |
|
8/17/2019 |
M-RED |
|
French Patent |
|
FR2791470 |
|
Monolithic Integrated Circuit Comprising An Inductor And A Method Of Fabricating The Same |
|
3/23/1999 |
|
6/1/2001 |
|
3/23/2019 |
M-RED |
|
French Patent |
|
FR2790328 |
|
Inductive Component, Integrated Transformer, In Particular For A Radio Frequency Circuit, And Associated Integrated Circuit With Such Inductive Component Or Integrated Transformer |
|
2/26/1999 |
|
4/20/2001 |
|
2/26/2019 |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration* |
M-RED |
|
Japanese Patent |
|
JP4846167 |
|
Method of manufacturing a semiconductor device |
|
4/3/2001 |
|
10/21/2011 |
|
4/3/2021 |
M-RED |
|
Japanese Patent |
|
JP5051939 |
|
Electric sensor device, method for generating electric signal from array of converter element |
|
12/5/2000 |
|
8/3/2012 |
|
12/5/2020 |
AMI |
|
US Patent |
|
8,280,014 |
|
System and method for associating audio clips with objects |
|
11/29/2006 |
|
10/02/2012 |
|
11/08/2030 |
AMI |
|
US Patent |
|
9,088,667 |
|
System and method for associating audio clips with objects |
|
09/06/2012 |
|
07/21/2015 |
|
06/30/2027 |
AMI |
|
US Patent |
|
10,033,876 |
|
System and method for associating audio clips with objects |
|
06/02/2015 |
|
07/24/2018 |
|
11/29/2026 |
AMI |
|
US Patent |
|
10,348,909 |
|
System and method for associating audio clips with objects |
|
06/18/2018 |
|
07/09/2019 |
|
11/29/2026 |
AMI |
|
US Patent |
|
10,938,995 |
|
System and method for associating audio clips with objects |
|
05/23/2019 |
|
03/02/2021 |
|
11/29/2026 |
AMI |
|
US Patent Application |
|
17/162,354 |
|
System and method for associating audio clips with objects |
|
01/29/2021 |
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
PLL |
|
US Patent |
|
7,761,371 |
|
Analyzing a credit counseling agency |
|
07/19/2007 |
|
07/20/2010 |
|
10/19/2020 |
PLL |
|
US Patent |
|
7,827,097 |
|
System for transferring an inbound communication to one of a plurality of credit-counseling agencies |
|
10/19/2000 |
|
11/02/2010 |
|
10/23/2024 |
PLL |
|
US Patent |
|
7,860,785 |
|
Communication system to automatically refer an inbound communication |
|
07/19/2007 |
|
12/28/2010 |
|
10/19/2020 |
PLL |
|
US Patent |
|
8,209,257 |
|
System for transferring an inbound communication to one of a plurality of credit-counseling agencies |
|
11/01/2010 |
|
06/26/2012 |
|
11/27/2020 |
PLL |
|
US Patent |
|
8,725,630 |
|
Method of processing a phone call |
|
06/25/2012 |
|
05/13/2014 |
|
10/19/2020 |
PLL |
|
US Patent |
|
9,948,771 |
|
Using an interactive voice response apparatus |
|
05/12/2014 |
|
04/17/2018 |
|
12/23/2022 |
PLL |
|
US Patent |
|
10,230,840 |
|
Method of using an apparatus processing phone call routing |
|
05/12/2014 |
|
03/12/2019 |
|
01/05/2022 |
PLL |
|
US Patent |
|
10,735,582 |
|
Apparatus processing phone calls |
|
03/11/2019 |
|
08/04/2020 |
|
10/19/2020 |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration* |
TLL |
|
US Patent |
|
8,327,441 |
|
System and method for application attestation |
|
2/17/2012 |
|
12/4/2012 |
|
2/17/2032 |
TLL |
|
US Patent |
|
8,776,180 |
|
Systems and methods for using reputation scores in network services and transactions to calculate security risks to computer systems and platforms |
|
7/27/2012 |
|
7/8/2014 |
|
7/27/2032 |
TLL |
|
US Patent |
|
8,850,517 |
|
Runtime risk detection based on user, application, and system action sequence correlation |
|
1/15/2013 |
|
9/30/2014 |
|
1/15/2033 |
TLL |
|
US Patent |
|
8,850,588 |
|
Systems and methods for providing
Mobile security based on dynamic
Attestation |
|
7/27/2012 |
|
9/30/2014 |
|
7/27/2032 |
TLL |
|
US Patent |
|
8,990,948 |
|
Systems and methods for orchestrating runtime operational integrity |
|
7/27/2012 |
|
3/24/2015 |
|
7/27/2032 |
TLL |
|
US Patent |
|
9,027,125 |
|
Systems and methods for network flow remediation based on risk correlation |
|
7/27/2012 |
|
5/5/2015 |
|
7/27/2032 |
TLL |
|
US Patent |
|
9,092,616 |
|
Systems and methods for threat identification and remediation |
|
7/27/2012 |
|
7/28/2015 |
|
7/27/2032 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 7565549 | |
System and method for the managed security control of processes on a computer system |
| 7/3/2007 |
| 7/21/2009 |
| 7/3/2027 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 7673137 | |
System and method for the managed security control of processes on a computer system |
| 1/3/2003 |
| 3/2/2010 |
| 1/3/2023 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8150958 | |
Methods, systems and computer program products for disseminating status information to users of computer resources |
| 5/5/2004 |
| 4/3/2012 |
| 5/5/2024 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8955038 | |
Methods and systems for controlling access to computing resources based on known security vulnerabilities |
| 8/16/12 |
| 2/10/2015 |
| 8/16/2032 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 9608997 | |
Methods and systems for controlling access to computing resources based on known security vulnerabilities |
| 2/10/2015 |
| 3/28/2017 |
| 2/10/2035 |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration* |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 9923918 | |
Methods and systems for controlling access to computing resources based on known security vulnerabilities |
| 3/27/2017 |
| 3/20/2018 |
| 3/27/2037 |
TLL | |
Korean Patent |
| 20090075861 | |
On demand virus scan |
| 12/4/2007 |
| n/a |
| n/a |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8572738 | |
On demand virus scan |
| 12/7/2006 |
| 10/29/2013 |
| 12/7/2026 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 6842796 | |
Information extraction from documents with regular expression matching |
| 7/3/2001 |
| 1/11/2005 |
| 7/3/2021 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 6928549 | |
Dynamic intrusion detection for computer systems |
| 7/9/2001 |
| 8/9/2005 |
| 7/9/2021 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8180941 | |
Mechanisms for priority control in resource allocation |
| 12/4/2009 |
| 5/15/2012 |
| 12/4/2029 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8055996 | |
Lightweight form pattern validation |
| 11/13/2003 |
| 11/8/2011 |
| 11/13/2023 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8086835 | |
Rootkit detection |
| 6/4/2007 |
| 12/27/2011 |
| 6/4/2027 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8127356 | |
System, method and program product for detecting unknown computer attacks |
| 8/27/2003 |
| 2/28/2012 |
| 8/27/2023 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8135958 | |
Method, system, and apparatus for dynamically validating a data encryption operation |
| 11/22/2005 |
| 3/13/2012 |
| 11/22/2025 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8140853 | |
Mutually excluded security managers |
| 7/1/2008 |
| 3/20/2012 |
| 7/1/2028 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8171533 | |
Managing web single sign-on applications |
| 9/29/2008 |
| 5/1/2012 |
| 9/1/2028 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8819419 | |
Method and system for dynamic encryption of a URL |
| 4/3/2003 |
| 8/26/2014 |
| 4/3/2023 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 9118634 | |
Dynamic encryption of a universal resource locator |
| 7/2/2014 |
| 8/25/2015 |
| 7/2/2034 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 9628453 | |
Dynamic encryption of a universal resource locator |
| 6/10/2015 |
| 4/18/2017 |
| 6/10/2035 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 9860251 | |
Dynamic encryption of a universal resource locator |
| 1/30/2017 |
| 1/2/2018 |
| 1/30/2037 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 8769126 | |
Expanded membership access control in a collaborative environment |
| 6/24/2004 |
| 7/1/2014 |
| 7/1/2018 |
TLL | |
European Patent |
| EP2727042 | |
Rules based actions for mobile device management |
| 7/2/2012 |
| 4/6/2016 |
| 7/2/2032 |
TLL | |
US Patent |
| 9071518 | |
Rules based actions for mobile device management |
| 7/2/2012 |
| 6/30/2015 |
| 7/2/2032 |
STX | |
US Patent |
| 7,592,532 | |
Method and Apparatus for Remote Voice-over or Music Production and Management |
| 9/27/2005 |
| 9/22/2009 |
| 4/25/2026 |
STX | |
US Patent |
| 9,635,312 | |
Method and Apparatus for Remote Voice-over or Music Production and Management |
| 12/11/2015 |
| 4/25/2017 |
| 9/27/2025 |
STX | |
US Patent |
| 10,726,822 | |
Method and Apparatus for Remote Digital Content Monitoring and Management |
| 4/24/2017 |
| 7/28/2020 |
| 9/27/2025 |
STX | |
US Application |
| 16/940,157 | |
Method and Apparatus for Remote Digital Content Monitoring and Management |
| 7/27/2020 |
| n/a |
| |
Segment |
|
Type |
|
Number |
|
Title |
|
File Date |
|
Issue / Publication
Date |
|
Expiration* |
MML | |
US Patent |
| 7,725,116 | |
Techniques for combining voice with wireless text short message services |
| 11/25/2006 |
| 5/25/2010 |
| 9/17/2026 |
MML | |
US Patent |
| 7,929,949 | |
Interactive multimodal messaging |
| 2/3/2009 |
| 4/19/2011 |
| 2/3/2029 |
MML | |
US Patent |
| 8,107,978 | |
Addressing voice SMS messages |
| 3/27/2008 |
| 1/31/2012 |
| 3/27/2028 |
MML | |
US Patent |
| 8,688,150 | |
Methods for identifying messages and communicating with users of a multimodal message service |
| 8/12/2005 |
| 4/1/2014 |
| 2/16/2029 |
MML | |
US Patent |
| 9,185,227 | |
Sender driven call completion system |
| 12/12/2013 |
| 11/10/2015 |
| 12/12/2033 |
MML | |
US Patent |
| 9,520,851 | |
Predictive automatic gain control in a media processing system |
| 3/12/2015 |
| 12/13/2016 |
| 6/9/2035 |
MML | |
US Patent |
| 9,532,191 | |
Multi-modal transmission of early media notifications |
| 5/17/2013 |
| 12/27/2016 |
| 5/17/2033 |
MML | |
US Patent |
| 9,686,324 | |
System and method for establishing communication links between mobile devices |
| 2/27/2014 |
| 6/20/2017 |
| 5/1/2034 |
MML | |
US Patent |
| 10,552,030 | |
Multi-Gesture Media Recording System |
| 10/11/2013 |
| 2/4/2020 |
| 7/5/2035 |
MML | |
US Patent |
| 10,884,609 | |
Multi-Gesture Media Recording System |
| 1/7/2020 |
| 1/5/2021 |
| 10/11/2033 |
MML | |
US Application |
| 17/117,114 | |
Multi-Gesture Media Recording System |
| 12/10/2020 |
| 4/1/2021 |
| n/a |
LSC | |
US Patent |
| 6,549,988 | |
Data storage system comprising a network of PCs and method using same |
| 1/22/1999 |
| 4/15/2013 |
| 1/22/2019 |
LSC | |
US Patent |
| 8,225,002 | |
Data storage and data sharing in a network of heterogeneous computers |
| 3/5/2003 |
| 7/17/2012 |
| 1/22/2019 |
LSC | |
US Patent |
| 9,811,463 | |
Apparatus Including an I/O Interface and a Network Interface and Related Method of Use |
| 2/23/2017 |
| 11/7/2017 |
| 1/22/2019 |
LSC | |
US Patent |
| 10,154,092 | |
Data Sharing Using Distributed Cache in a Network of Heterogeneous Computers |
| 1/15/2016 |
| 12/11/2018 |
| 1/15/2016 |
* |
Subject to any terminal disclaimer or patent term extension |
Research and Development
We did not incur research and development expenses
during 2021 or 2020.
Consulting Contracts
On February 22, 2021, we entered into advisory
service agreement with three consultants pursuant to which they will provide services to us in connection with the development of our
business. The agreements have a term of ten years and may be terminated by us for cause or upon the death or disability of the consultants.
Pursuant to the agreements with two of the consultants,
the compensation payable to each of them consists of a restricted stock grant of 10,000,000 shares of Common Stock which vested in full
immediately upon issuance and a ten-year option to purchase a total of 30,000,000 shares of Common Stock, which become exercisable cumulatively
as follows:
| ● | 10,000,000
shares at an exercise price of $0.01 per share becoming exercisable upon the commencement of trading of our common stock on the OTCQB
which occurred on May 7, 2021. |
| ● | 10,000,000
shares at an exercise price of $0.03 per share, becoming exercisable on the first day on which we file with the SEC a Form 10-K or Form
10-Q which stockholders’ equity of at least $5,000,000, and |
| ● | 10,000,000
shares at an exercise price of $0.05 per share becoming exercisable on the date on which the Common Stock is listed for trading on the
Nasdaq Stock Market or the New York Stock Exchange. |
Pursuant to the agreement with the third consultant, the compensation
payable to him consists of a restricted stock grant of 10,000,000 shares of Common Stock which immediately vests in full and a ten-year
option to purchase 30,000,000 shares of Common Stock, which becomes exercisable cumulatively as follows:
| ● | 10,000,000
shares at an exercise price of $0.01 per share which became exercisable on February 22, 2022, which was the first anniversary of the
date of the agreement; |
| ● | 10,000,000
shares at an exercise price of $0.03 per share upon the second anniversary of the date of the agreement; and |
| ● | 10,000,000
shares at an exercise price of $0.05 per share upon the third anniversary of the date of the agreement. |
Employees
As of March 31, 2022, we have no employees other
than our two officers, only one of whom, Mr. Jon Scahill, our chief executive officer and president, is full time. Our employees
are not represented by a labor union, and we consider our employee relations to be good.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
An investment in our common stock involves
a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below together with all of the other information included in
this annual report before making an investment decision with regard to our securities. The statements contained in this annual report
include forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from
those set forth in or implied by forward-looking statements. The risks set forth below are not the only risks facing us. Additional risks
and uncertainties may exist that could also adversely affect our business, prospects or operations. If any of the following risks actually
occurs, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be harmed. In that case, the trading price of our common stock
could decline, and you may lose all or a significant part of your investment.
Risks Relating to our Financial Conditions
and Operations
We have a history of losses and are continuing
to incur losses. During the period from 2008, when we changed our business to become an intellectual property management company,
through December 31, 2021, we generated a cumulative loss of approximately $25.4 million on cumulative revenues of less than $23.3 million,
and our losses are continuing. We did not generate any revenue during the fourth quarter of 2020 or during the first three quarters of
2021. Our total assets were approximately $817,000 at December 31, 2021, of which approximately $539,000 represented the book value of
patents we acquired from AI in October of 2021. At December 31, 2021, we had a working capital deficiency of approximately $8.1 million.
We did not generate any revenue during the
fourth quarter of 2020 or the first three quarters of 2021. During the fourth quarter of 2020 and the first three quarters of 2021,
we did not generate any revenue. Because we were in default under our loans to Intelligent Partners (as successor to United Wireless),
with Intelligent Partners having the ability to declare a default on our notes in the principal amount of $4,672,810, with the possibility
of our seeking protection under the Bankruptcy Act, we ceased our monetization activities, since no counsel would represent us on a contingent
basis in view of the default and possible bankruptcy, and devoted our efforts in negotiating the agreements with QFL and Intelligent Partners.
We resumed our monetization activities following in February 2021 after we entered into our agreements with QFL and Intelligent Partners.
However, the intellectual property monetization cycle is lengthy and may be unsuccessful. Monetization activities initiated may take several
quarters to generate revenues if ever.
Our independent auditors have included a going
concern qualification in their report on our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2021. Because of our history of
losses, deficiency in stockholders’ equity, working capital deficiency and the uncertainty of generating revenues in the future,
our independent auditors have included a going concern qualification in their report on our financial statements for the year ended December
31, 2021.
We require significant funding in order to
develop our business. Our business requires substantial funding to evaluate and acquire intellectual property rights and to develop
and implement programs to monetize our intellectual property rights, including the prosecution of any litigation necessary to enable us
to monetize our intellectual property rights. Our failure to develop and implement these programs could both jeopardize our relationships
under our existing agreements and could inhibit our ability to generate new business, either through the acquisition of intellectual property
rights or through exclusive management agreements. We cannot be profitable unless we are able to obtain the funding necessary to develop
our business, including litigation to monetize our intellectual property. Although we have an agreement with QFL which provides a funding
line to acquire and monetize intellectual property rights, QFL must approve any intellectual property we acquire and, if QFL does not
fund an intellectual property acquisition, we may not be able to acquire and monetize the intellectual property. We cannot assure you
that we will be able to obtain necessary funding or to develop our business.
The terms of our agreements with QFL and
Intelligent Partners may make it difficult for us to generate cash flow from our operations. Although we have an agreement with QFL
pursuant to which QFL agreed to make available to us a financing facility of (i) up to $25,000,000 for the acquisition of mutually agreed
patent rights that the Company intends to monetize, of which we have received $2,210,000 as of March 15, 2022; (ii) up to $2,000,000 for
operating expenses from which the Company may, at its discretion, draw up to $200,000 per calendar quarter, of which we have drawn down
$1,200,000 as of March 15, 2022, and (iii) $1,750,000 which was used to fund the cash payment portion of the restructure of our obligations
to Intelligent Partners. Pursuant to the QFL agreement, QFL receive all proceeds payable to us from the monetization of those patents
which have been financed by QFL until QFL has received its negotiated rate of return, then we and QFL share equally in the proceeds from
monetization until QFL has received its investment return and thereafter we receive all of the net proceeds. Pursuant to our restructure
agreement with Intelligent Partners, we have an obligation to pay TMPO totaling $2,805,000. Under our amended monetization proceeds agreements
with Intelligent Partners, we pay Intelligent Partners 60% of the net monetization proceeds from associated intellectual property portfolios.
Further, until we have paid Intelligent Partners a total of $2,805,000 under all of the monetization proceeds agreements, for net proceeds
between $0 and $1,000,000 we are to pay Intelligent Partners 10% of the net proceeds realized from new assets acquired by us, provided,
that, if, in any calendar quarter, our net proceeds realized exceed $1,000,000, Intelligent Partner’s entitlement for that quarter
shall increase to 30% on the portion of net proceeds in excess of $1,000,000 but less than $3,000,000, and if in the same calendar quarter,
net proceeds exceed $3,000,000, Intelligent Partners’ entitlement for that quarter shall increase to 50% on the portion of net proceeds
in excess of $3,000,000. These payments come from our share of the proceeds after QFL has recovered its negotiated rate of return. In
these agreements, the monetization proceeds is determined after payment of contingent legal fees and certain other expenses, including
payments due by us to as part of the purchase price for intellectual property rights. We cannot assure you that, as a result of these
provisions, that we will generate any meaningful cash flow from the intellectual property we acquire. If we do not generate sufficient
cash flow from our monetization activities, we may not be able to fund our operations or continue in business.
Our business may be impaired by the effects
of the COVID-19 pandemic and the effects of the response to the pandemic. Although we do not manufacture or sell products, the COVID-19
pandemic and the work shutdown imposed in the United States and other countries to limit the spread of the virus can have a negative impact
on our business. Our revenue is generated almost exclusively from license fees generated from litigation seeking damages for infringement
of our intellectual property rights. The work shutdown affected the court system courts operating on a reduced schedule. As a result,
even though many court are operating on a near normal schedule, patent infringement actions are likely to be lower priority items in allocation
of court resources, with the effect that deadlines are likely to be postponed which delays may give defendants an incentive to delay negotiations
or offer a lower amount than they might otherwise accept. In addition, the effect of the COVID-19 and new variants and subvriants the
public response may adversely affect the financial condition and prospects of defendants and potential defendants, which would make it
less likely that they would be willing to settle our claim.
The COVID-19 pandemic and the response to limit
the spread of the infection may affect the financial condition of financing sources and the willingness of potential financing sources
to provide funding for our litigation. In addition, these factors may affect a law firms’ ability and willingness to provide us
with legal services on a contingent or partial contingent and may result in the impairment or discontinuation of business of or the filing
of a petition under the Bankruptcy Act by or against any defendant or potential defendant.
Further, to the extent that holders of intellectual
property rights see these factors impacting our ability to generate revenue from their intellectual property, they may be reluctant to
sell intellectual property to us on terms which are acceptable to us.
We are dependent upon our chief executive officer.
We are dependent upon Jon Scahill, our chief executive officer and president and sole full-time employee, for all aspects of our business
including locating, evaluating and negotiating and performing due diligence with respect to intellectual property rights from the owners,
managing our intellectual property portfolios, engaging in licensing activities and monetizing the rights through licensing and managing
and monitoring any litigation with respect to our intellectual property as well as defending any actions by potential licensees seeking
a declaratory judgment that they do not infringe. The loss of Mr. Scahill would materially impair our ability to conduct our business.
Although we have an employment agreement with Mr. Scahill, the employment agreement does not ensure that Mr. Scahill will remain with
us.
Any equity funding we obtain may result in
significant dilution to our stockholders. Because of our financial position, our continuing losses and our negative working capital
from operations, we do not expect that we will be able to obtain any debt financing for our operations. Our stock price has generally
been trading at a price which is less than $0.02 per share for more than the past two years. As a result, it will be very difficult for
us to raise funds in the equity markets. However, in the event that we are able to raise funds in the equity market, the sale of shares
would result in significant dilution to the present stockholders, and even a modest equity investment could result in the issuance of
a very significant number of shares.
Risks Relating to Monetizing our Intellectual
Property Rights
We may not be able to monetize our intellectual
property portfolios. Although our business plan is to generate revenue from our intellectual property portfolios, we have not been
successful in generating any significant positive cash flow from our portfolios, we have not generated any revenues from several of our
intellectual property portfolios and we have ceased allocating resources toward the monetization of several of our portfolios. We cannot
assure you that we will be able to generate any significant revenue from our existing portfolios or that we will be able to acquire new
intellectual property rights that will generate significant revenue.
If we are not successful in monetizing our
portfolios, we may not be able to continue in business. Although we have ownership of some of our intellectual property, we also license
the rights pursuant to agreements with the owners of the intellectual property. If we are not successful in generating revenue for those
parties who have an interest in the results of our efforts, those parties may seek to renegotiate the terms of our agreements with them,
which could both impair our ability to generate revenue from our intellectual property and make it more difficult for us to obtain rights
to new intellectual property rights. If we continue to be unable to generate revenue from our existing intellectual property portfolios
and any new portfolios we may acquire, we may be unable to continue in business.
If we are not successful in patent litigation,
the defendants may seek to have the court award attorneys’ fees to them against us which could result in the bankruptcy of the plaintiff
subsidiary and may result in a default under our agreement QFL. The United States patent laws provide that “the court in exceptional
cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.” Although the patents are owned by our subsidiaries and any judgment
would be awarded against the subsidiaries, the subsidiaries have no assets other than the patent rights. Our funding sources for our patent
litigation do not provide for the funding source to pay any judgment against us. Thus, if any defendants obtain a judgment against one
of our subsidiaries, they may seek to enforce their judgment against the patents owned by the subsidiary or seek to put the subsidiary
into bankruptcy and acquire the patents in the bankruptcy proceeding. As a result, it is possible that an adverse verdict in a petition
for legal fees could result in the loss of the patents owned by the subsidiary and a default under our agreement with QFL.
Our inability to acquire intellectual property
portfolios will impair our ability to generate revenue and develop our business. We do not have the personnel to develop patentable
technology by ourselves. Thus, we need to depend on acquiring rights to intellectual property and intellectual property portfolios from
third parties on an ongoing basis. In acquiring intellectual property rights, there are delays in (i) identifying the intellectual property
which we may want to acquire, (ii) negotiating an agreement with the owner or holder of the intellectual property rights, and (iii) generating
revenue from those intellectual property rights which we acquire. During these periods, we will continue to incur expenses with no assurance
that we will generate revenue. We currently hold intellectual property portfolios from which we have not generated any revenue to date,
and we cannot assure you that we will generate revenue from our existing intellectual property portfolios or any additional intellectual
properties which we may acquire.
We may be unable to enforce our intellectual
property rights unless we obtain third party funding. Because of the expense of litigation and our lack of working capital, we may
be unable to enforce our intellectual property rights unless we obtain the agreement of a third party to provide funding in support of
our litigation. We cannot assure you that QFL or any other funding source provide us the any necessary funding, and the failure to obtain
such funding may impair our ability to monetize our intellectual property portfolio or continue in business.
Because we need to rely on third-party funding
sources to provide us with funds to enforce our intellectual property rights we are dependent upon the perception by potential funding
sources of the value of our intellectual property. Because we do not have funds to pursue litigation to enforce our intellectual property
rights, we are dependent upon the valuation which potential funding sources, which currently is QFL, give to our intellectual property
or any intellectual property we may acquire. In determining whether to provide funding for intellectual property litigation, the funding
sources need to make an evaluation of the strength of our patents, the likelihood of success, the nature of the potential defendants and
a determination as to whether there is a sufficient potential recovery to justify a significant investment in intellectual property litigation.
Typically, such funding sources receive a percentage of the recovery after litigation expenses, and seek to generate a sufficient return
on investment to justify the investment. Under our agreement with QFL, QFL is allocated all of the net proceeds (after allowable expenses)
until it has received a negotiated return. Unless QFL or any other funding source believes that it will generate a sufficient return on
investment, it will not fund litigation. If QFL does not fund our acquisition or monetization of intellectual property we propose to acquire,
we cannot assure you that we will be able to negotiate funding agreements with third party funding sources on terms reasonably acceptable
to us, if at all. Because of our financial condition, we may only be able to obtain funding on terms which are less favorable to us than
we would otherwise be able to obtain.
Although we have a funding agreement with QFL,
there is no assurance that we QFL will provide funding for portfolios we are looking to acquire or that we will generate revenue from
any funded litigation. Although the funding source makes its evaluation as to the likelihood of success, patent litigation is very
uncertain, and we cannot assure you that, we will obtain litigation funding or that, if we obtain litigation funding, we will be successful
or that any recovery we may obtain will generate any significant positive cash flow from operations for us.
Because QFL and Intelligent Partners hold a
security interest in almost all of our intellectual property and the proceeds from our intellectual property, we may not be able to raise
funds through a debt financing. Pursuant to our agreements with QFL and Intelligent Partners, we granted them a security interest
in the stock of our subsidiaries that hold the intellectual property acquired from Intellectual Ventures and in the proceeds from the
monetization of intellectual property acquired from Intellectual Ventures and our mobile data and financial data portfolios. The inability
to grant a security interest in these assets to a new lender would materially impair our ability to obtain debt financing for our operations,
and may also impair our ability to obtain financing to acquire additional intellectual property rights.
Because of our financial condition and our
having generated a loss from operations in 2021 and 2020 from our existing portfolios, we may not be able to obtain intellectual property
rights to the most advanced technologies. In order to generate meaningful revenues from intellectual property rights, we need to be
able to identify, negotiate rights to and offer technologies for which there is a developing market. Because of our financial condition
and the terms under which we obtain financing for our litigation, we may be unable to negotiate rights to technology for which there which
will be a strong developing market, or, if we are able to negotiate agreements for such intellectual property, the terms of our purchase
or license may not be favorable to us. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will be able to acquire intellectual property rights
to the technology for which there is a strong market demand.
Potential acquisitions may present risks, and
we may be unable to achieve the financial or other goals intended at the time of any potential acquisition. Our ability to grow depends,
in large part, on our ability to acquire interests in intellectual property, including patented technologies, patent portfolios, or companies
holding such patented technologies and patent portfolios. Accordingly, we intend to engage in acquisitions to expand our intellectual
property portfolios and we intend to continue to explore such acquisitions. Such acquisitions are subject to numerous risks, including
the following:
|
● |
our failure to have sufficient funding to enable us to make the acquisition, together with the terms on which such funding is available, if at all; |
|
● |
our failure to have sufficient personal to satisfy the seller that we have the personnel to monetize the assets we propose to acquire; |
|
● |
dilution to our stockholders to the extent that we use equity in connection with any acquisition; |
|
● |
our inability to enter into a definitive agreement with respect to any potential acquisition, or if we are able to enter into such agreement, our inability to consummate the potential acquisition; |
|
● |
difficulty integrating the operations, technology and personnel of the acquired entity; |
|
● |
our inability to achieve the anticipated financial and other benefits of the specific acquisition; |
|
● |
difficulty in maintaining controls, procedures and policies during the transition and monetization process; |
|
● |
diversion of our management’s attention from other business concerns, especially considering that we have only one full-time employee/officer who is responsible for performing due diligence, negotiating agreements, negotiating funding and implementing a monetization program; and |
|
● |
our failure, in our due diligence process, to identify significant issues, including issues with respect to patented technologies and intellectual property portfolios, and other legal and financial contingencies. |
If we are unable to manage these risks and other
risks effectively as part of any acquisition, our business could be adversely affected.
Our acquisition of intellectual property rights
may be time consuming, complex and costly, which could adversely affect our operating results. Acquisitions of patent or other intellectual
property assets, which are and will be critical to the development of our business, are often time consuming, complex and costly to consummate.
We may utilize many different transaction structures in our acquisitions and the terms of such acquisition agreements tend to be heavily
negotiated. As a result, we expect to incur significant operating expenses and may be required to raise capital during the negotiations
even if the acquisition is ultimately not consummated. Even if we are able to acquire particular intellectual property assets, there is
no guarantee that we will generate sufficient revenue related to those intellectual property assets to offset the acquisition costs. We
may also identify intellectual property assets that cost more than we are prepared to spend with our own capital resources. We may incur
significant costs to organize and negotiate a structured acquisition that does not ultimately result in an acquisition of any intellectual
property assets or, if consummated, proves to be unprofitable for us. These higher costs could adversely affect our operating results.
If we acquire technologies that are in the
early stages of market development, we may be unable to monetize the rights we acquire. We may acquire patents, technologies and other
intellectual property rights that are in the early stages of adoption in the commercial, industrial and consumer markets. Demand for some
of these technologies will likely be untested and may be subject to fluctuation based upon the rate at which companies may adopt our intellectual
property in their products and services. As a result, there can be no assurance as to whether technologies we acquire or develop will
have value that we can monetize. It may also be necessary for us to develop additional intellectual property and file new patent applications
as the underlying commercial market evolves, as a result of which we may incur substantial costs with no assurance that we will ever be
able to monetize our intellectual property.
Our intellectual property monetization cycle
is lengthy and costly and may be unsuccessful. We expect to incur significant marketing, legal and sales expenses prior to entering
into monetization events that generate revenue and cash flow from operations for us. We will also spend considerable resources educating
potential licensees on the benefits of entering into an agreement with us that may include a non-exclusive license for future use of our
intellectual property rights. Thus, we may incur significant losses in any particular period before any associated revenue stream begins.
If our efforts to convince potential licensees of the benefits of a settlement arrangement are unsuccessful, we may need to continue with
the litigation process or other enforcement action to protect our intellectual property rights and to realize revenue from those rights.
We may also need to litigate to enforce the terms of existing agreements, protect our trade secrets, or determine the validity and scope
of the proprietary rights of others. Enforcement proceedings are typically protracted and complex. The costs are typically substantial,
and the outcomes are unpredictable. Enforcement actions will divert our managerial, technical, legal and financial resources from business
operations.
We may not be successful in obtaining judgments
in our favor. We have commenced litigation seeking to monetize our intellectual property portfolios and it will be necessary for us
to commence ligation in the future. All litigation is uncertain, and a number of the actions we commenced have been dismissed by the trial
court. We cannot assure you that any litigation will be decided in our favor or that, if damages are awarded or a license is negotiated,
that we will generate any significant revenue from the litigation or that any recovery may be allocated to counsel and third party funding
source which may result in little if any revenue to us.
Our financial condition may cause both intellectual
property rights owners and potential licensees to believe that we do not have the financial resources to commence and prosecute litigation
for infringement. Because of our financial condition, both intellectual property rights owners and potential licensees may believe
that we do not have the ability to commence and prosecute sustained and expensive litigation to protect our intellection rights with the
effect that (i) intellectual property rights owners may be reluctant to grant us rights to their intellectual property and (ii) potential
licensees may be less inclined to pay for license rights from us or settle any litigation we may commence on terms which generate any
meaningful monetization.
Any patents which may be issued to us pursuant
to patent applications which we filed or may file may fail to give us necessary protection. We cannot be certain that patents will
be issued as a result of any pending or future patent applications, or that any of our patents, once issued, will provide us with adequate
protection from competing products. For example, issued patents may be circumvented or challenged, declared invalid or unenforceable,
or narrowed in scope. In addition, since publication of discoveries in scientific or patent literature often lags behind actual discoveries,
we cannot be certain that we will be the first to make additional new inventions or to file patent applications covering those inventions.
It is also possible that others may have or may obtain issued patents that could prevent us from commercializing our products or require
us to obtain licenses requiring the payment of significant fees or royalties in order to enable us to conduct our business. As to those
patents that we may acquire, our continued rights will depend on meeting any obligations to the seller and we may be unable to do so.
Our failure to obtain or maintain intellectual property rights for our inventions would lead to the loss of our investments in such activities,
which would have a material adverse effect on us.
The provisions of Federal Declaratory Judgment
Act may affect our ability to monetize our intellectual property. Under the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, it is possible for a
party who we consider to be infringing upon our intellectual property to commence an action against us seeking a declaratory judgment
that such party is not infringing upon our intellectual property rights. In such a case, the plaintiff could choose the court in which
to bring the action and we would be the defendant in the action. Common claims for declaratory judgment in patent cases are claims of
non-infringement, patent invalidity and unenforceability. Although the commencement of an action requires a claim or controversy, a court
may find a letter from us to the alleged infringer seeking a royalty for the use of our intellectual property rights to form the basis
of a controversy. In such a case, the plaintiff, rather than we, would choose the court in which to bring the action and the timing of
the action. In addition, when we commence an action as plaintiff, we may be able to enter into a contingent fee arrangement with counsel,
it is possible that counsel may be less willing to accept such an arrangement if we are the defendant. Further, we would not have the
opportunity of choosing against which party to bring the action. An adverse decision in a declaratory judgment action could significantly
impair our ability to monetize the intellectual property rights which are the subject of the litigation. We have been a defendant in one
declaratory judgment action, which resulted in a settlement. We cannot assure you that potential infringers will not be able to use the
Declaratory Judgment Act to reduce our ability to monetize the patents that are the subject of the action.
A 2014 Supreme Court decision could significantly
impair business method and software patents. In June 2014, the United States Supreme Court, in Alice v. CLS Bank, struck down
patents covering a computer-implemented scheme for mitigating “settlement risk” by using a third party intermediary, holding
the patent claims to be ineligible as being drawn to a patent-ineligible abstract idea. The courts have been dealing for many years over
what business methods are patentable. We cannot predict the extent to which the decision in Alice as well as prior Supreme Court
decisions dealing with patents, will be interpreted by courts. To the extent that the Supreme Court decision in Alice gives businesses
reason to believe that business model and software patents are not enforceable, it may become more difficult for us to monetize patents
which are held to be within the ambit of the patents before the Supreme Court in Alice and for us to obtain counsel willing to
represent us on a contingency basis. As a result, the decision in Alice could materially impair our ability to obtain patent rights
and monetize those which we do obtain.
Legislation, regulations or rules related to
obtaining patents or enforcing patents could significantly increase our operating costs and decrease our revenue. We may apply for
patents and may spend a significant amount of resources to enforce those patents. If legislation, regulations or rules are implemented
either by Congress, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or the courts that impact the patent application process, the patent
enforcement process or the rights of patent holders, these changes could negatively affect our expenses and revenue. For example, new
rules regarding the burden of proof in patent enforcement actions could significantly both increase the cost of our enforcement actions
and make it more difficult to sign licenses without litigation, changes in standards or limitations on liability for patent infringement
could negatively impact our revenue derived from such enforcement actions, and any rules requiring that the losing party pay legal fees
of the prevailing party could also significantly increase the cost of our enforcement actions. United States patent laws were amended
with the enactment of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the America Invents Act, which took effect on March 16, 2013. The America
Invents Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. In general, the legislation attempts to address issues surrounding
the enforceability of patents and the increase in patent litigation by, among other things, establishing new procedures for patent litigation.
For example, the America Invents Act changes the way that parties may be joined in patent infringement actions, increasing the likelihood
that such actions will need to be brought against individual parties allegedly infringing by their respective individual actions or activities.
The America Invents Act and its implementation increases the uncertainties and costs surrounding the enforcement of our patented technologies,
which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice has conducted
reviews of the patent system to evaluate the impact of patent assertion entities on industries in which those patents relate. It is possible
that the findings and recommendations of the Department of Justice could impact the ability to effectively license and enforce standards-essential
patents and could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the enforcement of any such patented technologies.
Proposed legislation may affect our ability
to conduct our business. There are presently pending or proposed a number of laws which, if enacted, may affect the ability of companies
such as us to generate revenue from our intellectual property rights. Typically, these proposed laws cover legal actions brought by companies
which do not manufacture products or supply services but seek to collect licensing fees based on their intellectual property rights and,
if they are not able to enter into a license, to commence litigation. Although a number of such bills have been proposed in Congress,
we do not know which, if any, bills will be enacted into law or what the provisions will be and, therefore, we cannot predict the effect,
if any, that such laws, if passed by Congress and signed by the president, would provide. However, we cannot assure you that legislation
will not be enacted which would impair our ability to operate by making it more difficult for us to commence litigation against a potential
licensee or infringer. To the extent that an alleged infringer believes that we will not prevail in litigation, it would be more difficult
to negotiate a license agreement without litigation.
The unpredictability of our revenues may harm
our financial condition. Our revenues from licensing have typically been lump sum payments entered into at the time of the license,
which may be in connection with the settlement of litigation, and not from licenses that pay an ongoing royalty. Due to the nature of
the licensing business and uncertainties regarding the amount and timing of the receipt of license and other fees from potential infringers,
stemming primarily from uncertainties regarding the outcome of enforcement actions, rates of adoption of our patented technologies, the
growth rates of potential licensees and certain other factors, our revenues, if any, may vary significantly from quarter to quarter, which
could make our business difficult to manage, adversely affect our business and operating results, cause our quarterly results to fall
below market expectations and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
Our success depends in part upon our ability
to retain the qualified legal counsel to represent us in patent enforcement litigation. The success of our licensing business may
depend upon our ability to retain the qualified legal counsel to prosecute patent infringement litigation. As our patent enforcement actions
increase, it will become more difficult to find the preferred choice for legal counsel to handle all of our cases because many of these
firms may have a conflict of interest that prevents their representation of us or because they are not willing to represent us on a contingent
or partial contingent fee basis.
Our reliance on representations, warranties
and opinions of third parties may expose us to certain material liabilities. From time to time, we rely upon the representations and
warranties of third parties, including persons claiming ownership of intellectual property rights, and opinions of purported experts.
In certain instances, we may not have the opportunity to independently investigate and verify the facts upon which such representations,
warranties and opinions are made. By relying on these representation, warranties and opinions, we may be exposed to liability in connection
with the licensing and enforcement of intellectual property and intellectual property rights which could have a material adverse effect
on our operating results and financial condition.
In connection with patent enforcement actions,
counterclaims may be brought against us and a court may rule against us in counterclaims which may expose us and our operating subsidiaries
to material liabilities. In connection with patent enforcement actions, it is possible that a defendant may file counterclaims against
us or a court may rule that we have violated statutory authority, regulatory authority, federal rules, local court rules, or governing
standards relating to the substantive or procedural aspects of such enforcement actions. In such event, a court may issue monetary sanctions
against us or our operating subsidiaries or award attorney’s fees and/or expenses to the counterclaiming defendant, which could
be material, and if we or our operating subsidiaries are required to pay such monetary sanctions, attorneys’ fees and/or expenses,
such payment could materially harm our operating results, our financial position and our ability to continue in business.
Trial judges and juries may find it difficult
to understand complex patent enforcement litigation, and as a result, we may need to appeal adverse decisions by lower courts in order
to successfully enforce our patents. It is difficult to predict the outcome of patent enforcement litigation at the trial level. It
is often difficult for juries and trial judges to understand complex, patented technologies, and, as a result, there is a higher rate
of successful appeals in patent enforcement litigation than more standard business litigation. Regardless of whether we prevail in the
trial court, appeals are expensive and time consuming, resulting in increased costs and delayed revenue, and attorneys may be less likely
to represent us in an appeal on a contingency basis especially if we are seeking to appeal an adverse decision. Although we may diligently
pursue enforcement litigation, we cannot predict the decisions made by juries and trial courts.
More patent applications are filed each year
resulting in longer delays in getting patents issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. We hold a number of pending
patents and may file or acquire rights to additional patent applications. We have identified a trend of increasing patent applications
each year, which we believe is resulting in longer delays in obtaining approval of pending patent applications. The application delays
could cause delays in recognizing revenue, if any, from these patents and could cause us to miss opportunities to license patents before
other competing technologies are developed or introduced into the market.
U.S. Federal courts are becoming more crowded,
and, as a result, patent enforcement litigation is taking longer. Patent enforcement actions are almost exclusively prosecuted in
federal district courts. In May 2017, the United States Supreme Court, in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Groups Brands, held that
a corporate defendant may be sued either in its state of incorporation, or where it has committed acts of infringement and has a regular
and established place of business. To the extent that the Supreme Court decision in TC Heartland concentrates patent litigation
in districts within states popular for business incorporation, such as the Federal District Court for the District of Delaware, such courts
may become increasingly crowded. Federal trial courts that hear patent enforcement actions also hear criminal and other civil cases. Criminal
cases always take priority over patent enforcement actions. As a result, it is difficult to predict the length of time it will take to
complete any enforcement action. Moreover, we believe there is a trend in increasing numbers of civil lawsuits and criminal proceedings,
and, as a result, we believe that the risk of delays in patent enforcement actions will have a significant effect on our business in the
future unless this trend changes.
Any reductions in the funding of the United
States Patent and Trademark Office could have an adverse impact on the cost of processing pending patent applications and the value of
those pending patent applications. Our primary assets are our patent portfolios, including pending patent applications before the
United States Patent and Trademark Office. The value of our patent portfolios is dependent upon the issuance of patents in a timely manner,
and any reductions in the funding of the United States Patent and Trademark Office could negatively impact the value of our assets. Further,
reductions in funding from Congress could result in higher patent application filing and maintenance fees charged by the United States
Patent and Trademark Office, causing an unexpected increase in our expenses.
The rapid development of technology may impair
our ability to monetize intellectual property that we own. In order for us to generate revenue from our intellectual property, we
need to offer intellectual property that is used in the manufacture or development of products. Rapid technological developments have
reduced the market for products using less advanced technology. To the extent that technology develops in a manner in which our intellectual
property is not a necessary element or to the extent that others design around our intellectual property, our ability to license our intellectual
property portfolios or successfully prosecute litigation will be impaired. We cannot assure you that we will have rights to intellectual
property for most advanced technology or that there will be a market for products which require our technology.
The intellectual property management business
is highly competitive. A large number of other companies seek to obtain rights to new intellectual property and to market existing
intellectual property. Most of these companies have significantly both greater resources that we have and industry contacts which place
them in a better position to generate new business. Further, our financial position, our lack of executive personnel and our inability
to generate revenue from our portfolio can be used against us by our competitors. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in obtaining
intellectual property rights to new developing technologies.
As intellectual property enforcement litigation
becomes more prevalent, it may become more difficult for us to voluntarily license our intellectual property. We believe that
the more prevalent intellectual property enforcement actions become, the more difficult it will be for us to voluntarily license our
intellectual property rights, and we generally have not been successful in negotiating licenses without litigation. As a result, we may
need to increase the number of our intellectual property enforcement actions to cause infringing companies to license the intellectual
property or pay damages for lost royalties.
Weak global economic conditions may cause potential
licensees to delay entering into licensing agreements, which could prolong our litigation and adversely affect our financial condition
and operating results. Our business depends significantly on strong economic conditions that would encourage potential licensees to
enter into license agreements for our intellectual property rights. The United States and world economies have recently experienced weak
economic conditions and the recent Russian invasion in Ukraine has exacerbated these conditions, including those resulting from inflation
and supply line issues. Uncertainty about global economic conditions poses a risk as businesses may postpone spending in response to tighter
credit, negative financial news and declines in income or asset values. This response could have a material adverse effect on the willingness
of parties infringing on our assets to enter into settlements or other revenue generating agreements voluntarily.
If we are unable to adequately protect our
intellectual property, we may not be able to compete effectively. Our ability to compete depends in part upon the strength
of the intellectual property and intellectual property rights that we own or may hereafter acquire in our technologies, brands and content
and our ability to protect such intellectual property rights. We rely on a combination of patent and intellectual property laws and agreements
to establish and protect our patent, intellectual property and other proprietary rights. The efforts we take to protect our patents, intellectual
property and other proprietary rights may not be sufficient or effective at stopping unauthorized use of our patents, intellectual property
and other proprietary rights. In addition, effective trademark, patent, copyright and trade secret protection may not be available or
cost-effective in every country in which we have rights. There may be instances where we are not able to protect or utilize our patent
and other intellectual property in a manner that maximizes competitive advantage. If we are unable to protect our patent assets and intellectual
property and other proprietary rights from unauthorized use, the value of those assets may be reduced, which could negatively impact our
business. Our inability to obtain appropriate protections for our intellectual property may also allow competitors to enter our markets
and produce or sell the same or similar products as those covered by our intellectual property rights. In addition, protecting our intellectual
property and intellectual property rights is expensive and diverts our critical and limited managerial resources. If any of the foregoing
were to occur, or if we are otherwise unable to protect our intellectual property and proprietary rights, our business and financial results
could be impaired. Commencing legal proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights is burdensome and expensive. In addition,
our intellectual property rights could be at risk if we are unsuccessful in, or cannot afford to pursue, those proceedings. We also rely
on trade secrets and contract law to protect some of our intellectual property rights. We will enter into confidentiality and invention
agreements with our employees and consultants. Nevertheless, these agreements may not be honored and they may not effectively protect
our right to our un-patented trade secrets and know-how. Moreover, others may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary
information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets and know-how.
Risks Concerning our Common Stock
There is a limited market for our common stock,
which may make it difficult for you to sell your stock. Our common stock trades on the OTCQB market under the symbol “QPRC.”
The OTCQB market is not a national securities exchange and does not provide the benefits to stockholders which a national exchange provides.
Furthermore, according to the OTC Markets website, the OTCQB “is for early-stage and developing U.S. and international companies.
To be eligible, companies must be current in their reporting and undergo an annual verification and management certification process.
Companies must meet $0.01 bid test and may not be in bankruptcy.” There is a limited trading market for our common stock and our
common stock has frequently traded for less than $0.02. From August 28, 2020 to May 7, 2021 our common stock was delisted from the OTCQB
and traded on the OTC Pink because our stock price fell below $0.01 per share for more than 30 consecutive trading days. Accordingly,
there can be no assurance as to the liquidity of any markets that may develop for our common stock, the ability of holders of our common
stock to sell our common stock, or the prices at which holders may be able to sell our common stock. Further, because of the thin float,
the reported bid and asked prices may have little relationship to the price you would pay if you wanted to buy shares or the price you
would receive if you wanted to sell shares.
Because our common stock is a penny stock,
you may have difficulty selling our common stock in the secondary trading market. Our common stock fits the definition of a penny
stock and therefore is subject to the rules adopted by the SEC regulating broker-dealer practices in connection with transactions in penny
stocks. The SEC rules may have the effect of reducing trading activity in our common stock making it more difficult for investors to purchase
and sell their shares. The SEC’s rules require a broker or dealer proposing to effect a transaction in a penny stock to deliver
the customer a risk disclosure document that provides certain information prescribed by the SEC, including, but not limited to, the nature
and level of risks in the penny stock market. The broker or dealer must also disclose the aggregate amount of any compensation received
or receivable by him in connection with such transaction prior to consummating the transaction. In addition, the SEC’s rules also
require a broker or dealer to make a special written determination that the penny stock is a suitable investment for the purchaser and
receive the purchaser’s written agreement to the transaction before completion of the transaction. The existence of the SEC’s
rules may result in a lower trading volume of our common stock and lower trading prices. Further, some broker-dealers will not process
transactions in penny stocks. Many brokers do not trade in penny stocks and stock that are not listed on a stock exchange.
Our lack of internal controls over financial
reporting may affect the market for and price of our common stock. Our disclosure controls and our internal controls over financial
reporting are not effective. Since we became engaged in the intellectual property management business in 2008, we have not had the financial
resources or personnel to develop or implement systems that would provide us with the necessary information on a timely basis so as to
be able to implement financial controls. Our continued poor financial condition together with the fact that we have one full time employee,
who is both our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, makes it difficult for us to implement a system of internal controls
over financial reporting, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to develop and implement the necessary controls. The absence of
internal controls over financial reporting may inhibit investors from purchasing our shares and may make it more difficult for us to raise
debt or equity financing.
Our lack of a full-time chief financial officer
could affect our ability to develop financial controls, which could affect the market price for our common stock. We do not have a
full-time chief financial officer. At present, our chief executive officer, who does not have an accounting background, is also acting
as our chief financial officer. We do not anticipate that we will be able to hire a qualified chief financial officer unless our financial
condition improves significantly. The lack of an experienced chief financial officer, together with our lack of internal controls, may
impair our ability to raise money through a debt or equity financing, the market for our common stock and our ability to enter into agreements
with owners of intellectual property rights.
Our stock price may be volatile and your investment
in our common stock could suffer a decline in value. As of the date of this annual report, there has only been limited trading activity
in our common stock. There can be no assurance that any significant market will ever develop in our common stock. Because of the low public
float and the absence of any significant trading volume, the reported prices may not reflect the price at which you would be able to sell
shares if you want to sell any shares you own or buy shares if you wish to buy share. Further, stocks with a low public float may be more
subject to manipulation than a stock that has a significant public float. The price may fluctuate significantly in response to a number
of factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include, but are not limited to, the following, in addition to the risks
described above and general market and economic conditions:
| ● | our
low stock price, which may result in a modest dollar purchase or sale of our common stock having a disproportionately large effect on
the stock price; |
| ● | the
effect of the COVID-19 pandemic and the response to the pandemic on the market both generally and on penny stocks; |
| ● | the
market’s perception as to our ability to generate positive cash flow or earnings from our intellectual property portfolios; |
| ● | changes
in our or securities analysts’ estimate of our financial performance; |
| ● | our
ability or perceived ability to obtain necessary financing for operations and for the monetization of our intellectual property rights; |
| ● | the
market’s perception of the effects of legislation or court decisions on our business; |
| ● | the
market’s perception that a defendant may obtain a judgement against a subsidiary and foreclose on the intellectual property of
the subsidiary, which may result in a default under our agreement with QFL and, even if a default is not claimed, QFL may not provide
financing for us; |
| ● | the
effects or perceived effects of the potential convertibility of convertible notes issued by us; |
| ● | the
results or anticipated results of litigation by or against us; |
| ● | the
anticipated or actual results of our operations; |
| ● | events
or conditions relating to the enforcement of intellectual property rights generally; |
| ● | changes
in market valuations of other intellectual property marketing companies; |
| ● | any
discrepancy between anticipated or projected results and actual results of our operations; |
| ● | the
market’s perception or our ability to continue to make our filings with the SEC in a timely manner; |
| ● | actions
by third parties to either sell or purchase stock in quantities which would have a significant effect on our stock price; and |
| ● | other
matters not within our control. |
Raising funds by issuing equity or convertible
debt securities could dilute the value of the common stock and impose restrictions on our working capital. If we were to raise additional
capital by issuing equity securities, either alone or in connection with a non-equity financing, the value of the then outstanding common
stock could decline. If the additional equity securities were issued at a per share price less than the per share value of the outstanding
shares, which is customary in the private placement of equity securities, the holders of the outstanding shares would suffer a dilution
in value with the issuance of such additional shares. Because of the low price of our stock and our working capital deficiency, the dilution
to our stockholders could be significant. We may have difficulty in raising funds through the sale of debt securities because of both
our financial position, the lack of any collateral on which a lender may place a value, and the absence of any history of significant
monetizing of our intellectual property rights. If we are able to raise funds from the sale of debt securities, the lenders may impose
restrictions on our operations and may impair our working capital as we service any such debt obligations.
Our failure to have filed reports with the
SEC may impair the market for and the value of our common stock and may result in liability to us. We did not file reports with the
SEC from 2003 until December 2014. We filed our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 on December 15, 2014; our Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2013 on April 10, 2015; and our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 on August 18, 2015. Our failure
to have made such filings may affect both the market for our common stock and the value of our common stock as well as the willingness
of investors to purchase our stock. Further, because we did not have current information concerning our business and operations available,
we have potential liability resulting from our failure to have been current in our SEC filings, and the SEC has broad power to take action
against us for our failure to have been in compliance with the reporting requirement of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Although
the SEC permits an issuer to file an omnibus 10-K covering the periods for which filings were not made, the SEC is not foreclosed from
seeking enforcement action for our filing delinquencies. Any such action could have a material adverse effect upon us and the market for
and price of our common stock.
Because we have a classified board of directors,
it may be more difficult for a third party to obtain control of us. As a result of the approval by our stockholders of our amended and
restated certificate of incorporation, our board of directors is a classified board, which means that at each annual meeting, the stockholder
will vote for only one-third of the board. A classified board of directors may make it more difficult for a third party to gain control
of us which may affect the opportunity of our stockholders to receive any potential benefit which could be available from a third party
seeking to obtain control over us.
We do not intend to pay any cash dividends
in the foreseeable future. We have not paid any cash dividends on our common stock and do not intend to pay cash dividends on our
common stock in the foreseeable future.