Commitments and Contingencies
|12 Months Ended|
Dec. 31, 2016
|Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]|
|Commitments and Contingencies||
e Company self-insures our product liability, automotive, workers' compensation, and general liability losses up to $250 per occurrence. Catastrophic coverage has been purchased from third party insurers for occurrences in excess of $250 up to $40,000. The two risk areas involving the most significant accounting estimates are workers' compensation and automotive liability. Actuarial valuations performed by the Company's outside risk insurance expert were used by the Company's management to form the basis for workers' compensation and automotive liability loss reserves. The actuary contemplated the Company's specific loss history, actual claims reported, and industry trends among statistical and other factors to estimate the range of reserves required. Risk insurance reserves are comprised of specific reserves for individual claims and additional amounts expected for development of these claims, as well as for incurred but not yet reported claims. The Company believes that the liability of approximately $1,675 recorded for such risk insurance reserves is adequate as of December 31, 2016.
As of December 31, 2016, the Company has provided certain vendors and insurers letters of credit aggregating $5,559 related to our product purchases and insurance coverage of product liability, workers' compensation, and general liability.
The Company self-insures our group health claims up to an annual stop loss limit of $200 per participant. Aggregate coverage is maintained for annual group health insurance claims in excess of 125% of expected claims. Historical group insurance loss experience forms the basis for the recognition of group health insurance reserves. Provisions for losses expected under these programs are recorded based on an analysis of historical insurance claim data and certain actuarial assumptions. The Company believes that the liability of approximately $1,722 recorded for such group health insurance reserves is adequate as of December 31, 2016.
On October 1, 2013, Hillman Group filed a complaint against Minute Key Inc., a manufacturer of fully-automatic, self-service key duplication kiosks, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Western Division), seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of a U.S. patent issued to Minute Key Inc. on September 10, 2013. Hillman Group's filing against Minute Key Inc. was in response to a letter dated September 10, 2013 in which Minute Key Inc. alleged that Hillman Group's FastKey™ product infringes the newly-issued patent.
On October 23, 2013, Minute Key Inc. filed an answer and counterclaim against the Hillman Group alleging patent infringement. Minute Key Inc. also requested that the court dismiss the Hillman Group's complaint, enter judgment against the Hillman Group that we are willfully and deliberately infringing the patent, grant a permanent injunction, and award unspecified monetary damages to Minute Key Inc.
Minute Key Inc. later filed two motions on March 17, 2014 seeking to voluntarily withdraw its counterclaim alleging infringement by Hillman Group and also to dismiss Hillman Group's complaint for non-infringement and invalidity. Shortly after an April 23, 2014 court-ordered mediation, Minute Key Inc. provided Hillman Group with a covenant promising not to sue for infringement of two of its patents against any existing Hillman Group product, including the FastKey™ and Key Express™ products.
Hillman Group filed a motion on May 9, 2014 seeking to add additional claims to the case against Minute Key Inc. under Federal and Ohio state unfair competition statutes. These claims relate to Minute Key Inc.'s business conduct during competition with Hillman Group over a mutual client.
In an August 15, 2014 order, the court granted Minute Key Inc.'s March 17, 2014 motions to dismiss the claims relating to patent infringement and also granted Hillman Group's May 9, 2014 motion to add its unfair competition claims.
Hillman Group formally amended its complaint to add the unfair competition claims on September 4, 2014, and Minute Key Inc. answered on September 29, 2014 without filing any counterclaims. Minute Key Inc. filed a motion on October 1, 2014 to move the case from Cincinnati to either the District of Colorado or the Western District of Arkansas. The court denied that motion on February 3, 2015.
It is not yet possible to assess the impact, if any, that the lawsuit will have on the Company. As a result of the Minute Key Inc. covenant not to sue, however, the Company's FastKey™ and Key Express™ products no longer face any threat of patent infringement liability from two of Minute Key Inc.'s patents. The scope of the lawsuit has changed from a bilateral dispute over patent infringement to a lawsuit solely about Minute Key Inc.'s business conduct. After a conference with the court on March 2, 2015, the court entered a new scheduling order to govern the case on March 12, 2015. A revised case schedule was subsequently issued on October 1, 2015. Fact and expert discovery are now complete. Minute Key filed a motion for summary judgment on February 8, 2016. The court denied that motion on July 8, 2016. Following the denial of Minute Key Inc.’s summary judgment motion, a jury trial was held between August 24, 2016 and September 6, 2016. The jury returned a verdict in Hillman Group’s favor on September 6, 2016 finding that Minute Key Inc.’s actions violated the Federal Lanham Act and the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Following this verdict against Minute Key Inc., Hillman Group has filed post-trial motions for recovery of its costs, attorney fees, pre-and post-judgment interest, and an injunction. Minute Key Inc. filed a post-trial motion to set aside the jury verdict. All post-trial motions are pending before the court.
In addition, legal proceedings are pending which are either in the ordinary course of business or incidental to the Company's business. Those legal proceedings incidental to the business of the Company are generally not covered by insurance or other indemnity. In the opinion of the Company's management, the ultimate resolution of the pending litigation matters will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position, operations, or cash flows of the Company.
No definition available.
The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.
Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef