3
INTRODUCTORY NOTE
Unless the context otherwise requires, in this Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Annual Report”) “we”, “us”, “our” and the “Company” mean ParkerVision, Inc.
Forward-Looking Statements
We believe that it is important to communicate our future expectations to our shareholders and to the public. This Annual Report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including, in particular, statements about our future plans, objectives, and expectations under the headings “Item 1. Business” and “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” When used in this Annual Report and in future filings by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the words or phrases “will likely result”, “management expects”, “we expect”, “will continue”, “is anticipated”, “estimated” or similar expressions are intended to identify such “forward-looking statements.” Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements, each of which speaks only as of the date made. Such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from historical results and those presently anticipated or projected, including the risks and uncertainties set forth in this Annual Report under the heading “Risk Factors” and in our other periodic reports. Examples of such risks and uncertainties include general economic and business conditions, competition, unexpected changes in technologies and technological advances, the timely development and commercial acceptance of new products and technologies, reliance on key business and sales relationships, reliance on our intellectual property, the outcome of litigation and the ability to obtain adequate financing in the future. We have no obligation to publicly release the results of any revisions which may be made to any forward-looking statements to reflect anticipated events or circumstances occurring after the date of such statements.
Item 1. Business.
We were incorporated under the laws of the state of Florida on August 22, 1989. We are in the business of innovating fundamental wireless technologies. We design, develop and market our proprietary radio frequency (“RF”) technologies and products for use in semiconductor circuits for wireless communication products. We anticipate our future business will include both licensing of our intellectual property and the sale of integrated circuits based on our technology for incorporation into wireless devices designed by our customers. In addition, from time to time, we offer engineering consulting and design services to our customers, for a negotiated fee, to assist them in developing prototypes and/or products incorporating our technologies. We are primarily focused on incorporating our technologies into mobile handsets for 3G and 4G cellular networks, but our technologies are applicable to other wireless products that incorporate RF transmitters, receivers, and/or transceivers, some of which are related to networks serving mobile handsets such as data cards, femtocells, machine-to-machine, and embedded applications. Our technology can also be applied to non-cellular radio applications such as military radios and cable modems.
Our business operates under a single segment. Refer to our financial statements in Item 8 to this Annual Report for financial data including our net losses from operations and total assets.
Recent Developments
In July 2011, we filed a complaint in the United States District Court of the Middle District of Florida against Qualcomm Incorporated (“Qualcomm”) seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief for infringement of seven of our patents related to radio-frequency receivers and the down-conversion of electromagnetic signals (the “Complaint”). Qualcomm filed an Answer and Counterclaim to our Complaint (the “Counterclaim”) in which Qualcomm denied infringement and alleged invalidity and unenforceability of each of our patents. Qualcomm also named our long-time patent prosecution counsel, Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox PLLC
4
(“SKGF”) as a co-defendant in its Counterclaim and further alleged that we aided and abetted SKGF in its alleged breach of fiduciary duty to Qualcomm and tortiously interfered with Qualcomm’s contractual relationship with SKGF. In November 2011, we filed a motion to dismiss nine counts of Qualcomm’s Counterclaim and a motion to strike certain of Qualcomm’s affirmative defenses. SKGF also filed a motion to dismiss Qualcomm’s claims against them. In February 2012, we filed an amended Complaint which dropped two patents from our original Complaint and added one patent which was not included in our original Complaint. In March 2012, Qualcomm filed an amended Counterclaim which dropped two counts from the original Counterclaim. Qualcomm also filed a motion to dismiss our claims of indirect patent infringement. The court has not yet ruled on these motions.
In November 2011, Qualcomm also filed a motion for preliminary injunction against SKGF. In February 2012, the court denied as moot Qualcomm’s motion for preliminary injunction. Instead, the Court approved a protective order, which all parties negotiated and agreed to, that enables SKGF to continue delivering legal advice and services to ParkerVision provided that they do not represent ParkerVision in the lawsuit or advise the Company regarding Qualcomm’s alleged infringement.
The court has set a hearing on claim construction for August 10, 2012, a deadline for fact discovery of November 30, 2012, and a trial date of August 5, 2013. Discovery in the case has recently commenced. At this time, we do not believe it is possible to predict the outcome of these proceedings. The law firm of McKool Smith is representing us in this litigation on a partial contingency basis.
General Development of Business
Our business has been primarily focused on the development and marketing of our RF technologies for mobile applications. Our technologies represent unique, proprietary methods for processing RF waveforms in wireless applications. Our technologies apply to both transmit and receive functions of a radio transceiver. A portion of our transmit technology is marketed as Direct2Power™, or d2p™, and enables the transformation of a baseband data signal to an RF carrier waveform, at the desired power output level, in a single unified operation. A portion of our receiver technology is marketed as Direct2Data™, or d2d™, and enables the direct conversion of an RF carrier to a baseband data signal. Our development and marketing efforts since 2005 have been primarily focused on a portion of our transmit technologies; however, incorporation of some of our receiver technology in mobile applications is also contemplated in our product plans. Our patent infringement litigation is based on some of our receiver intellectual property (“IP”).
We completed the first d2p integrated circuit (“IC”) which embodied many of the advancements of our technology in 2006. This enabled us to create partially-integrated prototype radios for demonstration purposes. Since 2006, we have continued to further develop our prototype ICs and related demonstration platforms. Our prototypes support functionality that is multi-band (meaning multiple frequencies) and multi-mode (meaning multiple cellular standards and corresponding modulation formats). Our ICs support multiple bands of cellular and PCS (Personal Communications Service) frequencies and support the current and emerging cellular standards including GSM/EDGE, CDMA, W-CDMA, and HSUPA. We are also able to demonstrate 802.16e WiMax and LTE standards with our current ICs.
In concert with advancing our prototypes, we began cultivating potential customer relationships, primarily in the mobile handset industry. We believe our direct customers will likely be the mobile handset manufacturers and their chipset suppliers in the mobile handset industry. We have also cultivated relationships with the network providers who exert significant influence on the OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers) in the mobile handset industry.
Our lack of tenure in the mobile handset industry coupled with the unique nature of our technology resulted in lengthy and intense technology evaluation and due diligence efforts by potential customers. Furthermore, in order to utilize our technology in a mobile handset application, our RF chipsets must interface with the baseband processor that generates the data to be transmitted. Although our technology is capable of interfacing with any baseband processor, the development of the interface between the baseband processor and our chipset requires a cooperative effort with the baseband provider.