QUEST PATENT RESEARCH CORP - Annual Report: 2020 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020

or

☐ TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from _____________________ to _____________________

Commission file number 33-18099-NY

QUEST PATENT RESEARCH CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (888) 743-7577

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐  No ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. ☐

Note - Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act from their obligations under those Sections.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒  No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☒  No ☐

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers in response to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendments to this Form 10-K. ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐  No ☒

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter: $1,616,612 as of June 30, 2020.

As of April 2, 2021, the registrant had 533,334,630 shares of common stock outstanding.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

As used in this annual report, the terms “we,” “us,” “our,” and words of like import, and the “Company” refers to Quest Patent Research Corporation and its subsidiaries, unless the context indicates otherwise.

FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contain “forward-looking statements,” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, all of which are subject to risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as “expects,” “plans,” “will,” “forecasts,” “projects,” “intends,” “estimates,” and other words of similar meaning. One can identify them by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. These statements are likely to address our growth strategy, financial results and product and development programs. One must carefully consider any such statement and should understand that many factors could cause actual results to differ from our forward looking statements. These factors may include inaccurate assumptions and a broad variety of other risks and uncertainties, including some that are known and some that are not. No forward looking statement can be guaranteed and actual future results may vary materially.

These risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our control, include, and are not limited to: 

In addition, factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and in particular, the risks discussed under the caption “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” as well as those discussed in other documents we file with the SEC. We undertake no obligation to revise or publicly release the results of any revision to these forward-looking statements, except as required by law. Given these risks and uncertainties, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. 

Information regarding market and industry statistics contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K is included based on information available to us that we believe is accurate. It is generally based on industry and other publications that are not produced for purposes of securities offerings or economic analysis. We have not reviewed or included data from all sources. Forecasts and other forward-looking information obtained from these sources are subject to the same qualifications and the additional uncertainties accompanying any estimates of future market size, revenue and market acceptance of products and services. We do not assume any obligation to update any forward-looking statement. As a result, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. 

PART I

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 twelve intellectual property portfolios, which principally consist of patent rights. Our twelve intellectual property portfolios include the portfolios which we acquired from Intellectual Ventures Assets 16, LLC (“Intellectual Ventures”) and seven of its affiliates. 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 licenses granted as part of the settlement of patent infringement lawsuits. 

We generate revenue from two sources:

We previously received management fees for managing litigation related to our intellectual property rights. We do not currently receive these fees; we do not have any agreements that provide for such payments and we cannot assure you that we will generate revenue from such fees in the future. Our agreement with QFL does not provide for any payment to us of management fees.

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 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.

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. However, our financial position may affect our ability to conduct adequate due diligence with respect to intellectual property rights. This due diligence effort is conducted by our chief executive officer.

It is frequently 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 fund litigation ourselves, we may enter into an agreement with a third party, which may be the patent owner or the former patent owner who transferred the patent rights to us, or an independent third party. 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.

Recent Development

Set forth below is a discussion of recent agreements which we entered into with QFL to provide us with a financing facility, funds to make a payment due to Intellectual Partners and for working capital and an agreement with Intellectual Partners to restructure our loan agreement and related agreements. The agreement with Intellectual Partners restated our agreements with United Wireless Holdings, Inc. (“United Wireless”) which had been assigned to Intellectual 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 are filed as exhibits to this Form 10-K

Summary of Agreements with QPRC Finance LLC

On February 22, 2021, we entered into a series of agreements, all dated February 19, 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:

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 respective affiliates of Intellectual Ventures granted to secure the obligations of CXT and MRED pursuant to their applicable patent purchase agreements.

Registration Rights Agreement

Pursuant to the Registration Rights Agreement, we agreed to file 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 required to file the registration statement by the second business day following the earlier of (x) the date on which the Company is next required to file its financial statements on Form 10-K or Form 10-Q under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and (y) the date on which the Company actually files its financial statements on Form 10-K or Form 10-Q under the Exchange Act, in each case without regard to any extension pursuant to Rule 12b-25 under the Exchange Act (the “Initial Filing Deadline”); provided, that, if our common stock is not quoted on an existing trading market for the purpose of conducting an at the market offering under Rule 415 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, the Initial Filing Deadline shall be no earlier than the second business day following the date on which the QFL provides the Company with written information as to the fixed price at which it plans to offer and sell the Registrable Securities (as defined in the Registration Rights Agreement) pursuant to the registration statement. 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”).

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 agreed to file a registration statement with the SEC covering up to a maximum of 50,000,000 of the Shares, Conversion Shares and Options Shares. We are required to file the registration statement by the earlier of the 2nd Business Day following the date on which we (x) are next required to file our financial statements on Form 10-K or Form 10-Q under the Exchange Act, and (y) actually files its financial statements on Form 10-K or Form 10-Q under the Exchange Act, in each case without regard to any extension pursuant to Rule 12b-25 under the Exchange Act. We are required to have the registration statement declared effective by the SEC within 120 days of the closing if the registration statement is not subject to a full review by the SEC and 180 days if the registration statement is subject to a full review. The registration rights agreements provides for us to pay damages in the event that we do not meet the required deadlines.

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, with courts operating on a reduced schedule. As a result, 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 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, we purchased three groups of patents from Intellectual Ventures 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 Intellectual Ventures 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 to IV 64 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; 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 directly by United Wireless 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. As of December 31, 2020, cumulative distributions did not total $975,000 and CXT did not pay the difference to IV 34/37 within ten days. Non-payment which is not cured within 30 days after written notice from IV 34/37 would constitute an Acceleration Event under the agreement, following which, in addition to any other remedies available under the agreement, all outstanding minimum cumulative distributions would become due and payable within thirty days. As of the date of filing, no such written notice of non-payment has been given by IV 34/37. 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, CXT will distribute 50% 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. (“M-RED”), 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. In March 2021, M-RED paid IV 113/108 $114,952 in cumulative distributions Non-payment which is not cured within 30 days after written notice from IV 113/108 would constitute an Acceleration Event under the agreement, following which, in addition to any other remedies available under the agreement, all outstanding minimum cumulative distributions would become due and payable within thirty days. As of the date of filing, no such written notice of non-payment has been given by IV 113/108. 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 it 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, 2020, we did not receive any proceeds from the Mobile Data Portfolio.

Flexible Packaging - Turtle Pak^TM

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 Pak^TM 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. Revenues from the TurtlePak^TM product sales were approximately $0 and $25,000 for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively.

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.

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, 2020, we did not generate any revenue from the rich media patents.

Anchor Structure Portfolio

This portfolio, which we acquired from Intellectual Ventures in October 2015 and transferred to a newly formed 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 receives an interest in the proceeds from the program, and we have no other obligation to the third party.

In March 2018, Mariner IC brought patent infringement suits in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Acer Inc., Schneider Electric, Sharp Corporation, AsusTek Computer Inc., and Bose Corporation. In April 2018, the actions against Acer Inc., Schneider Electric and Bose Corporation were dismissed. In April 2018, Mariner IC brought patent infringement actions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against TiVo Corporation and Huawei Device Co., Ltd et.al. In August 2018, the action against Huawei Device Co., Ltd et. al. was voluntarily dismissed. In September 2018, Mariner IC brought a patent infringement action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Huawei Device Co., Ltd et. al. All suits were settled and dismissed in 2019 and our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2019 includes revenue from these settlements. We did not generate license fees from the Anchor Structure Portfolio in 2020. 

Power Management/Bus Control Portfolio

This portfolio, which is the second portfolio which we acquired from Intellectual Ventures 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 receives an interest in the proceeds from the program, and we have no other obligation to the third party.

Pursuant to the terms of the funding agreement and the partial contingency agreement with counsel, we do not have any liability or obligations with respect to the costs associated with prosecuting the actions, and we do not receive any payments for any assistance which we may provide in connection with the litigation. Both the funding source and counsel will participate in any recovery in these lawsuits.

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 Amazon.com, Inc., AsusTeK Computer Inc., TCT Mobile International Limited et. al., Kyocera Corporation, LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton, SE, Shenzhen OnePlus Science & Technology Co., Ltd., and Michael Kors Holdings Ltd.

The Michael Kors, Kyocera and Amazon actions were settled in 2019, and our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2019 includes revenue from these settlements. 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 the year ended December 31, 2020 includes revenue from these settlements.

Diode on Chip Portfolio

This portfolio, which is the third portfolio which we acquired from Intellectual Ventures 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, 2020, we did not generate any revenue from this portfolio.

CXT Portfolio

This portfolio consists of thirty United States patents and three pending continuation applications 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 patent infringement suits in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Academy Ltd., The Container Store Group, Inc. and Pier 1 Imports, Inc. 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., Stage Stores, 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.

The actions against The Container Store, Pier 1 Imports and Stage Stores were settled in 2019 and revenue for the year ended December 31, 2019 included revenue from these settlements.

The actions against Conn’s, Inc., Academy Ltd., Fossil Group, Inc., JC Penney Company, Inc., Tailored Brands, Inc., Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc., Hallmark, CC Filson, General Nutrition, Steve Madden, Ltd. and Neiman Marcus Group Ltd. were resolved in 2020 and revenue for the year ended December 31, 2020 includes revenue from any related settlements.

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.

In April 2018 PIS brought patent infringement actions in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against Lenovo Group Ltd., AsusTek Computer Inc., Lorex Technology Inc., and NETGEAR, Inc. As of December 31, 2019, all actions had been settled and revenue for the year ended December 31, 2019 incudes revenue from these settlements. We did not generate revenue from the CMOS Portfolio in 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 patent infringement suits 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. We did not generate revenue from the M-RED Portfolio in 2019. 

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.

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.

Peregrin Portfolio

Acquired in February 2021, this portfolio consists of eight issued United States patents which generally relate to systems and methods for processing inbound and outbound communications, for example, determining the location of a caller and routing the inbound communication to an entity in the caller’s location.

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 out-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 twelve 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 and Peregrin. 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 and the Audio Messaging is referred to as AMI.

Research and Development

Research and development expense are incurred by us in connection with the evaluation of patents. We did not incur research and development expenses during 2020 or 2019.

Consulting Contracts

On February 22, 2021, we entered into advisory service agreement with three consultants – William Gates, Crystal Nicolson and Jeff Toler 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 Mr. Gates and Ms. Nicolson, the compensation payable to each of them 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 a total of 30,000,000 shares of Common Stock, which become exercisable cumulatively as follows:

Pursuant to the agreement with Mr. Toler, 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:

Employees

As of March 27, 2021, 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, 2020, we generated a cumulative loss of approximately $21.3 million on cumulative revenues of less than $21.3 million, and our losses are continuing. We did not generate any revenue during the fourth quarter of 2020. Our total assets were approximately $3.5 million at December 31, 2020, of which approximately $2.2 million represented the book value of patents we acquired from Intellectual Ventures and its affiliates. At December 31, 2020, we had a working capital deficiency of approximately $8.2 million. Our working capital deficiency reflected a loan payable to Intelligent Partners of approximately $4.7 million, which loan payable has been terminated as part of the restructure agreement with Intelligent Partners. We cannot give assurance that we can or will ever operate profitably.

We did not generate any revenue during the fourth quarter of 2020. During the fourth quarter of 2020, 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.

Our independent auditors have included a going concern qualification in their report on our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2020. 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, 2020.

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; (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; and (iii) $1,750,000 to fund the cash payment portion of the restructure of our obligations to Intelligent Partners, which was paid directly 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 total monetization proceeds obligations (“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 Intellectual 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 Partner’s 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 it 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 the party that sold us the 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 failure to make required payments to sellers of two of our patent portfolios may result in a default under the agreements. Pursuant to our subsidiaries’ agreements with IV 34/37, with respect to the CTX portfolio, and IV 113/108 with respect to the M-RED portfolio, respectively, our subsidiaries are to pay to the sellers 50% of net recoveries, as defined, from the respective portfolios which we purchased from them, IV 34/37 and IV 113/108. These agreements provided that if the cumulative distributions did not equal or exceed specified amounts, the subsidiaries would pay the difference. As of the date of this annual report, the cumulative unpaid distributions were $600,000 to IV 34/37 and approximately $260,000 to IV 113/108. In April 2021, the parties entered into a non-binding letter of intent pursuant to which IV 34/37 and IV 113/108 would not take any action with respect to the delinquent payment while the parties negotiated an amended payment schedule. We can give no assurance that we will be able to negotiate an amended payment schedule or that IF 34/38 or IV 113/108 will not take action to enforce its remedies under the patent purchase agreement, A default under these agreements could result in a default under our agreements with QFL, and , even if it 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 CXT or M-RED to seek protection under the Bankruptcy Act if we are not able to enter into modification agreements with the Intellectual Ventures affiliates

Our business may be impaired by the effects of the COVID-91 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 has affected the court system and, with courts operating on a reduced schedule. As a result, 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 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 $0.01 per share for more than the past two years, and, because our stock price fell below $0.01 per share, our stock is traded on the OTC Pink Market. 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 revenue from our portfolios and we have not generated any revenues from several of our intellectual property 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. 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 agreements with QFL, there is no assurance that we will generate revenue from the 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, just because we obtain litigation funding, we will be successful or that any recovery we may obtain will be significant.

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 2019 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:

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 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 recently 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. 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. 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. If it becomes necessary for us to commence legal proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights, the proceedings could be 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 OTC Pink market under the symbol “QPRC.” The OTC Pink market is not a national securities exchange and does not provide the benefits to stockholders which a national exchange provides. The OTC Pink “is for all types of companies that are there by reasons of default, distress or design, which is why they are further segmented based on the level of information that they provide.” Our common stock had been traded on the OTCQB but ceased to be traded on that market because the stock price dropped below $0.01 per share. To be eligible for OTCQB, 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 $0.01. 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:

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 of 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. 

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

We do not own or lease any real property.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

None

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES.

Not Applicable

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.

Market Information

Our common stock trades on the OTC Pink market under the symbol QPRC. Any over-the-counter market quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.

Stockholders of Record

As of April 13, 2021, we had 426 record holders of our common stock.

Transfer Agent

Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company, One State Street, 30th floor, New York, New York 10004-1561 is the transfer agent for our common stock.

Dividends

We have not paid any cash dividends to date and do not anticipate or contemplate paying dividends in the foreseeable future. It is the present intention of management to utilize all available funds for the development of our business.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Agreements

The following table gives information concerning common stock that may be issued upon the exercise of options granted to certain officers, directors and consultants under their respective individual compensation agreements with us as of December 31, 2020.

A summary of the status of our equity grants and changes is set forth below:

No warrants or options were granted or exercised in 2020. 

On February 19, 2021, the board of directors amended the 2017 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) increasing the shares the Company can issue under the plan to 500,000,000 shares of common stock pursuant to non-qualified stock options, restricted stock grants and other equity-based incentives, and the amendment to the Plan became effective upon the closing of the agreements with QFL, which was February 22, 2021. In connection with the increase in the shares of common stock issuable pursuant to the plan, the board;

Recent sales of unregistered securities.

We did not sell any unregistered securities during since the beginning of the year ended December 31, 2020 other than issuances that were reported in our SEC filings.

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

We are a smaller reporting company as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and are not required to provide the information under this item.

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this report. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. See “Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.” Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors discussed in “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report.

Overview

Our principal operations include the development, 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 ten 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 either 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 generate revenue from two sources:

We previously received management fees for managing litigation related to our intellectual property rights. We do not currently receive these fees, we do not have any agreements that provide for such payments and we may not generate revenue from such fees in the future.

To a significantly lesser extent, we generate revenue from sale of packaging materials based on our TurtlePak^TM technology. We did not generate any revenue from our TurtlePak^TM in the year ended December 31, 2020. Our gross profit from sales reflects the cost of contract manufacturing and labor. We did not generate any revenue from the TurtlePak^TM Portfolio other than from the sale of products using our technology.

Because of the nature of our business transactions to date, we recognize revenues from licensing upon execution of a license agreement following settlement of litigation and not over the life of the patent. Thus, we would recognize revenue when we enter into the agreement pursuant to which we are to receive the license fee or settlement payment. Although we intend to seek to develop portfolios of intellectual property rights that provide us for a continuing stream of revenue, to date we have not been successful in doing so, and we cannot give you any assurance that we will be able to generate any significant revenue from licenses that provide a continuing stream of revenue. Thus, to the extent that we continue to generate cash from single payment licenses, our revenues can, and are likely to, vary significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. Our gross profit from license fees reflects any royalties which we pay in connection with our license. 

Our agreements with our funding sources have typically provided that the funding source pay the litigation costs and receive a percentage of the recovery, thus reducing our recovery in connection with any settlement of the litigation. To the extent that our counsel represents us on a contingent fee basis, our recovery would also be reduced by the percentage of the settlement payable to counsel. From September 2015 until December 2020, under our agreements with Intelligent Partners, as the assignee of United Wireless, and under the terms of our agreements to purchase certain intellectual property portfolios, a portion of our recovery may be payable to Intelligent Partners or the seller of the intellectual property rights. All of these payments, which are reflected as cost of revenues, significantly reduce the net payment to us.

On October 22, 2015, we, together with certain of our subsidiaries, and United Wireless, entered into a securities purchase agreement and related agreements, pursuant to which, among other actions, we issued our 10% secured convertible promissory notes due September 30, 2020 to United Wireless. The rights of United Wireless under the securities purchase agreement and the related notes were assigned to Intelligent Partners. The proceeds of the notes were used to purchase certain of our intellectual portfolios. 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 have the resources to make, and we did not make, payments due on September 30, 2020. As a result of the possibility that Intelligent Partners could declare a default under the securities purchase agreement and the note, which would likely to result in our seeking protection under the Bankruptcy Act, we were not able to obtain any litigation financing and no litigation counsel would represent us on a contingency fee basis. Accordingly, we did not generate any revenue during the fourth quarter of 2020, and we devoted our efforts to negotiating a funding agreement with QFL and a restructure of our agreement with Intelligent Partners, which was required by QFL as a condition to entering into a funding agreement with us.

Agreements for QFL and Intelligent Partners

On February 22, 2020, we entered into a funding agreement with QFL and a restructure agreement with Intelligent Partners.

Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement with QFL, 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. 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. Our obligations to QFL are secured by the proceeds from the patents acquired with their funding, the patents and all general intangibles now or hereafter arising from or related to the foregoing and the proceeds and products of the foregoing. We also granted QFL a ten-year warrant 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, 2031on a cash or cashless basis, subject to certain limitations on exercisability. 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 our capital stock (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. We also 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, and granted QFL registration rights with respect to the common stock issuable upon exercise of the warrants. We also granted QFL certain board observation rights. Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, the all of the net proceeds from the monetization of the intellectual property acquired with funds from QFL are paid directly to QFL. After QFL has received a negotiated rate of return, we and QFL share net proceeds equally until QFL achieves its investment return, as defined in the agreement. Thereafter, we retain 100% of all net proceeds. Except in an Event of Default, as defined therein, all payments by us 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 us are received, or to be received.

Contemporaneously with the execution of the agreement with QFL, we entered into a restructure agreement with Intelligent Partners to eliminate any obligations we had with respect to the outstanding notes and the securities purchase agreement. 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. Under these MPAs, Intelligent Partners receives a 60% interest in the proceeds from our intellectual property owned by the eight Subsidiary Guarantors. Intelligent Partners also participates in the monetization proceeds from new intellectual property that we acquire until the total payments under all the monetization participation agreements equal $2,805,000, as follows: for net proceeds between $0 and $1,000,000, Intelligent Partners receives 10% of the net proceeds realized from new patents, except that if, in any calendar quarter, net proceeds realized by us exceed $1,000,000, Intelligent Partners’ entitlement for that quarter only shall increase to 30% on the portion of net proceeds in excess of $1,000,000 but less than $3,000,000. If in the same calendar quarter, net proceeds exceed $3,000,000, Intelligent Partners’ entitlement for that quarter only shall increase to 50% on the portion of net proceeds in excess of $3,000,000. The payments with respect to the new patents terminate once total payments to Intelligent Partners under all monetization participation agreements reach $2,805,000. The payments to Intellectual Partners with respect new patents are payable from the proceeds which are allocated to us under the QFL agreements, which start after QFL has received a negotiated rate of return.

Inventor Royalties, Contingent Litigation Funding Fees and Contingent Legal Expenses

In connection with the investment in certain patents and patent rights, certain of our operating subsidiaries executed agreements which grant to the former owners of the respective patents or patent rights, the right to receive inventor royalties based on future net revenues (as defined in the respective agreements) generated as a result of licensing and otherwise enforcing the respective patents or patent portfolios.

Our operating subsidiaries may engage third party funding sources to provide funding for patent licensing and enforcement. The agreements with the third party funding sources may provide that the funding source receives a portion of any negotiated fees, settlements or judgments. In certain instances, these third party funding sources are entitled to receive a significant percentage of any proceeds realized until the third party funder has recouped agreed upon amounts based on formulas set forth in the underlying funding agreement, which may reduce or delay and proceeds due to us.

Our operating subsidiaries may retain the services of law firms in connection with their licensing and enforcement activities. These law firms may be retained on a contingent fee basis whereby the law firms are paid by the funding source on a scaled percentage of any negotiated fees, settlements or judgments awarded based on how and when the fees, settlements or judgments are obtained. Depending on the amount of any recovery, it is possible that all the proceeds from a specific settlement may be paid to the funding source and legal counsel.

The economic terms of the inventor agreements, funding agreements and contingent legal fee arrangements associated with the patent portfolios owned or controlled by our operating subsidiaries, if any, including royalty rates, proceeds sharing rates, contingent fee rates and other terms, vary across the patent portfolios owned or controlled by the operating subsidiaries. Inventor royalties, payments to non-controlling interests, payments to third party funding providers and contingent legal fees expenses fluctuate period to period, based on the amount of revenues recognized each period, the terms and conditions of revenue agreements executed each period and the mix of specific patent portfolios with varying economic terms and obligations generating revenues each period. Inventor royalties, payments to third party funding sources and contingent legal fees expenses will continue to fluctuate and may continue to vary significantly period to period, based primarily on these factors.

In December 2018, we entered into a funding agreement whereby a third party agreed to provide funds to us to enable us to support our structured licensing programs for the CMOS and M-RED portfolios. Under the funding agreement, the third party receives an interest in the proceeds from the programs, and we have no other obligation to the third party. As of December 31, 2020, the third party funding source advanced $150,000 for costs and expenses, and has no further obligation to provide additional funds. Under the terms of the funding agreement, the third party funder is entitled to a priority return of funds advanced from net proceeds recovered.

In connection with any litigation seeking to enforce our intellectual property rights, it is possible that a defendant may request and/or a court may rule that an operating subsidiary has 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 its operating subsidiaries or award attorney’s fees and/or expenses to a defendant(s), which could be material, and if required to be paid by us or its operating subsidiaries, could materially harm our operating results and financial position. Since the operating subsidiaries do not have any assets other than the patents, and the Company does not have any available financial resources to pay any judgment which a defendant may obtain against a subsidiary, such a judgement may result in the bankruptcy of the subsidiary and/or the loss of the patents, which are the subsidiaries’ only assets. 

At present, we are pursuing litigation with respect to the CXT portfolio and MRED portfolio. The actions are described in Item 1. Business. We cannot estimate when or whether we will receive any revenue from these litigations, or whether, in the event we do not prevail, the defendant will not obtain an award of legal fees against our plaintiff subsidiary which could result in the bankruptcy of the subsidiary and a default under our agreements with QFL and Intelligent Partners.

Restricted Stock Grants and Options

In February 2021, we issued restricted stock grants to consultants (30,000,000 shares) and to our officers and directors (74,000,000 shares) all of which vested immediately. The value of the shares will be reflected as non-cash compensation in the first quarter of 2021. Also in February 2021, we granted restricted stock options to consultants (90,000,000 shares) and to our chief executive officer (60,000,000 shares). With respect to two of the consultants and the chief executive officer the options become cumulatively exercisable as follows: 1/3^rd at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, becoming exercisable upon the commencement of trading of the Common Stock on the OTCQB; 1/3^rd 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 with stockholders’ equity of at least $5,000,000; and 1/3^rd at an exercise price of $0.05 per share on the date on which the Common Stock is listed for trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market or the New York Stock Exchange. We will incur non-cash compensation with respect to the value of the options, based of Black-Scholes valuation, as the options become exercisable.

Results of Operations

Years Ended December 31, 2020 and 2019

The following table shows the revenue and cost of revenue from our two categories of revenue for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019:

Revenues for the year ended December 31, 2020 were $5,488,088, as compared with $4,143,169 in 2019, an increase of $1,344,919, or approximately 32.5%. The increase in 2020 principally reflects an increase in patent licensing fees of $1,370,193, or 33.3%. Our licensing fees reflect the settlement of litigation for infringement of our patent rights. These fees are one-time fees, with the result that there is no continuity of revenues from period to period, and any revenue we generate in future periods will be solely dependent upon the results of pending and future litigation. We cannot assure you that we will generate any revenue from patent licensing fees in the future. The patent licensing fees for 2020 resulted from licensing and settlements of Power Management/Bus Control Portfolio, the CXT Portfolio, the MRED Portfolio and the Financial Data Portfolio. The patent licensing fees of $4,117,895 in 2019 resulted from the licensing and settlements of Power Management/Bus Control Portfolio, the CXT Portfolio, the Anchor Structure Portfolio and the CMOS Portfolio litigations. Our revenue, at least in the near future if not longer, may be affected by factors relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. See “Item 1. Business – Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on our Business.”

Cost of revenues was approximately $4,693,000 for 2020 as compared with approximately $3,391,000 for 2019. Our cost of revenue includes expenses which we incurred in connection with our pending litigations and fees we pay to litigation funding sources, legal counsel, prior owners and pursuant to monetization proceeds agreements in connection with license fees. Cost of revenue for 2020 includes approximately $4,693,000 of litigation and licensing fees paid to litigation funding sources and legal counsel in connection with the Power Management/Bus Control, the CXT Portfolio, the MRED Portfolio and the Financial Data Portfolio licensing programs. Cost of revenues for 2019 includes approximately $3,384,000 of litigation and licensing fees paid to litigation funding sources and legal counsel in connection with the Power Management/Bus Control, the CXT Portfolio, the Anchor Structure Portfolio and the CMOS Portfolio licenses, approximately $2,000 for management support services in connection with management of the Mobile Data Portfolio, and approximately $5,000 relating to TurtlePak^TM. We did not have any sales or cost of sales relating to TurtlePak^TM for 2020.

Selling, general, and administrative expenses for 2020 increased by approximately $292,000, or approximately 24%, from approximately $1,222,000 in 2019 to approximately $1,514,000 in 2020. Our principal selling, general and administrative expense for 2020 and 2019 was amortization expense of approximately $648,000 and approximately $529,000 for 2020 and 2019, respectively, related to amortization of the patent assets acquired from Intellectual Ventures in October 2015, IV 34/37 in July 2017, and IV 62/71 in January 2018 and IV 113/108. Selling, general and administrative expenses also reflect executive compensation, which was approximately $300,000 for 2020 and 2019.

Other expense consists primarily of interest expense of approximately $804,000 in 2020 as compared with approximately $808,000 in 2019. In 2020, we recognized a $275,000 gain on derivative liability as compared with $55,000 loss on derivative liability in 2019. Other income in 2020 reflects miscellaneous income of $1,000. Other expense in 2019 reflect a $28,000 gain on forgiveness of debt. As a result of the termination of our obligations under the United Wireless notes, commencing in 2021, we no longer have a derivative liability. See Note 4 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. 

We had an income tax expense of approximately $65,000 for 2020 as compared with approximately $5,000 in 2019. The income tax expense results primarily from foreign taxes paid with respect to certain of our settlement agreements.

As a result of the foregoing we had a net loss of approximately $1,313,000, or $0.00 per share (basic and diluted) for 2020 compared to net loss of approximately $1,309,000, or $0.00 per share (basic and diluted), for 2019.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

At December 31, 2020, we had current assets of approximately $1,287,000, current liabilities of approximately $9,497,000. Our current liabilities at December 31, 2020 include approximately $4,673,000 payable to Intelligent Partners, which was due and payable on September 30, 2020 and subsequently restructured, and loans payable of $147,000 and accrued interest of approximately $285,000 due to former directors and minority stockholders. As of December 31, 2020, we have an accumulated deficit of approximately $21,281,000 and a negative working capital of approximately $8,210,000. Other than salary to our chief executive officer, we do not contemplate any other material operating expense in the near future other than normal general and administrative expenses, including expenses relating to our status as a public company filing reports with the SEC. Because our agreements with our litigation funding sources do not require us to make any payments relating to the litigation, we do not incur expenses with respect to litigation covered by the funding sources.

As a result of our restructure of our agreement with Intelligent Partners, the outstanding notes to Intelligent Partners were cancelled and replaced with agreements that provide for payments if we receive proceeds from our intellectual property as described above under “Agreements for QFL and Intelligent Partners.” If the note payable to Intelligent Partners were excluded from current liabilities, we would have a pro forma working capital deficiency of approximately $3,500,000.

For 2020, we used approximately $246,000 in operations. Our cash flow used in operations for 2020 reflected our loss of approximately $1,300,000, and the amount used in operations increased primarily by a decrease in accounts payable and accrued expenses of approximately $471,000, and the gain on derivative liability of $275,000 offset by a decrease in accounts receivable of approximately $750,000, depreciation and amortization of approximately $648,000, amortization of debt discount of approximately $435,000 and bad debt expense of $66,000.

For 2019, we had cash flow from operations $746,523 in our operations, reflecting our loss of $1,310,295, which was offset principally by depreciation and amortization of our intellectual property rights of $529,486, amortization of debt discount on the loan from United Wireless of $349,691, an increase in accounts receivable of $1,850,375, an increase in account payable and accrued liabilities of $954,806,and decreased by the $55,000 loss on derivative liability, and increased by a gain on forgiveness of debt of $27,628 and accrued but unpaid interest of $8,700.

Cash flow from financing activities for 2020 reflected the proceeds of an SBA loan of approximately $172,000, the payment of the purchase price of patents of approximately $194,000 and proceeds from the sale of future revenues of approximately $95,000 offset by payment made on the sale of future revenues of approximately $20,000. Under the agreement with the litigation funder, the third party lender receives an interest in the proceeds.

Cash flow from financing activities in 2019 included repayments to the third party in the amount of approximately $130,000, the payment of the purchase price of patents of approximately $156,000 and the payment of $16,000 of a loan from a third party.

In 2020 and 2019, cash flow from investing activities included $95,000 and $75,000, respectively for the purchase of patents from third parties.

In 2020 we did not have non-cash investing and financing activities. In 2019, non-cash investing and financing activities consisted of an account payable of $1,238,219 representing the $1,500,000 payment due to Intellectual Ventures, net of $75,000 advanced at closing and imputed interest of $336,781.

We cannot assure you that we will be successful in generating future revenues, in obtaining additional debt or equity financing or that such additional debt or equity financing will be available on terms acceptable to us, if at all, or that we will be able to obtain any third party funding in connection with any of our intellectual property portfolios.

Historically, our only source of financing was loans from officers and directors. In October 2015, we entered into an agreement with United Wireless, pursuant to which provided us with funds to purchase intellectual property.

We cannot predict the success of any pending or future litigation seeking to enforce our intellectual property rights.

In February 2021, we signed a funding agreement with QFL, as described in “Overview” and under “Recent Developments” in Item 1. Business.

As noted below, there is a substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. 

Critical Accounting Policies

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is based upon our financial statements that have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates including the allowance for doubtful accounts, the salability and recoverability of our products, income taxes and contingencies. We base our estimates on historical experience and on other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form our basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

Principles of Consolidation

Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with US GAAP and present the financial statements of us and our wholly-owned subsidiary. In the preparation of our consolidated financial statements, intercompany transactions and balances are eliminated.

Use of Estimates and Assumptions

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Revenue Recognition

We adopted ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers as of January 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective transition method. The core principle of the revenue recognition standard is that a company should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The following five steps are applied to achieve that core principle:

A performance obligation is a promise in a contract to transfer a distinct good or service to the customer and is the unit of account in ASC 606. In order to identify the performance obligations in a contract with a customer, a company must assess the promised goods or services in the contract and identify each promised good or service that is distinct. A performance obligation meets ASC 606’s definition of a “distinct” good or service (or bundle of goods or services) if both of the following criteria are met:

If a good or service is not distinct, the good or service is combined with other promised goods or services until a bundle of goods or services is identified that is distinct. 

The transaction price is the amount of consideration to which an entity expects to be entitled in exchange for transferring promised goods or services to a customer. The consideration promised in a contract with a customer may include fixed amounts, variable amounts, or both. When determining the transaction price, an entity must consider the effects of all of the following:

Variable consideration is included in the transaction price only to the extent that it is probable that a significant reversal in the amount of cumulative revenue recognized will not occur when the uncertainty associated with the variable consideration is subsequently resolved.

The transaction price is allocated to each performance obligation on a relative standalone selling price basis.

The transaction price allocated to each performance obligation is recognized when that performance obligation is satisfied, at a point in time or over time as appropriate. 

In general, we are required to make certain judgments and estimates in connection with the accounting for revenue contracts with customers. Such areas may include identifying performance obligations in the contract, estimating the timing of satisfaction of performance obligations, determining whether a promise of consideration, whether a license to intellectual property or an entitlement to payment of a percentage of net proceeds, is distinct from other promised goods or services, evaluating whether consideration transfers to a customer at a point in time or over time, allocating the transaction price to separate performance obligations, determining whether contracts contain a significant financing component, and estimating revenues recognized at a point in time for licensed sales. 

Patent Licensing Fees

Revenue is recognized upon transfer of control of promised bundled intellectual property rights and other contractual performance obligations to licensees in an amount that reflects the consideration we expect to receive in exchange for those intellectual property rights. Revenue contracts that provide promises to grant “the right” to use intellectual property rights as they exist at the point in time at which the intellectual property rights are granted, are accounted for as performance obligations satisfied at a point in time and revenue is recognized at the point in time that the applicable performance obligations are satisfied and all other revenue recognition criteria have been met.

For the periods presented, revenue contracts executed by the Company primarily provided for the payment of contractually determined, one-time, paid-up license fees in consideration for the grant of certain intellectual property rights for patented technologies owned or controlled by the Company’s operating subsidiaries. Intellectual property rights granted included the following, as applicable: (i) the grant of a non-exclusive, retroactive and future license to manufacture and/or sell products covered by patented technologies, (ii) a covenant-not-to-sue, (iii) the release of the licensee from certain claims, and (iv) the dismissal of any pending litigation. The intellectual property rights granted were perpetual in nature, extending until the legal expiration date of the related patents. The individual intellectual property rights are not accounted for as separate performance obligations, as (a) the nature of the promise, within the context of the contract, is to transfer combined items to which the promised intellectual property rights are inputs and (b) the Company’s promise to transfer each individual intellectual property right described above to the customer is not separately identifiable from other promises to transfer intellectual property rights in the contract.

Since the promised intellectual property rights are not individually distinct, the Company combined each individual IP right in the contract into a bundle of IP rights that is distinct, and accounted for all of the intellectual property rights promised in the contract as a single performance obligation. The intellectual property rights granted were “functional IP rights” that have significant standalone functionality. The Company’s subsequent activities do not substantively change that functionality and do not significantly affect the utility of the IP to which the licensee has rights. The Company’s subsidiaries have no further obligation with respect to the grant of intellectual property rights, including no express or implied obligation to maintain or upgrade the technology, or provide future support or services. The contracts provide for the grant (i.e. transfer of control) of the licenses, covenants-not-to-sue, releases, and other significant deliverables upon execution of the contract. Licensees legally obtain control of the intellectual property rights upon execution of the contract. As such, the earnings process is complete and revenue is recognized upon the execution of the contract, when collectability is probable and all other revenue recognition criteria have been met. Revenue contracts generally provide for payment of contractual amounts within 30-90 days of execution of the contract. Contractual payments made by licensees are generally non-refundable. We do not have any significant payment terms, as payment is received shortly after goods are delivered or services are provided, therefore there is no significant financing component or consideration payable to the customer in these transactions.

Licensed Sales

The balance of our revenue in 2019, from licensed sales, was not significant but included sales-based revenue contracts pursuant to purchase orders. There was no sales-based revenue in 2020. There is only one distinct performance obligation in each purchase order, transfer of the promised good to the customer, and the customer can benefit from the good together with other resources readily available to the customer. For licensed sales, the transaction price is allocated to the performance obligation on a relative standalone selling price basis per the purchase order, and the Company includes in the transaction price some or all of an amount of estimated variable consideration to the extent that it is probable that a significant reversal in the amount of cumulative revenue recognized will not occur when the uncertainty associated with the variable consideration is subsequently resolved. Estimates are generally based on historical levels of activity, if available. Notwithstanding, revenue is recognized for a licensed sale when the performance obligation has been satisfied – transfer of the good to the customer. The purchase order generally provides for payment of contractual amounts within 30 days of transfer of the goods to the customer, therefore there is no significant financing component or consideration payable to the customer in these transactions. 

Cost of Revenues

Cost of revenues include the costs and expenses incurred in connection with our patent licensing and enforcement activities, including inventor royalties paid to original patent owners, contingent litigation funding fees, contingent legal fees paid to external patent counsel, other patent-related legal expenses paid to external patent counsel, licensing and enforcement related research, consulting and other expenses paid to third-parties and the amortization of patent-related investment costs. These costs are included under the caption “Cost of revenues” in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. No such fees are recognized as a cost of revenue to the extent that we have no obligation with respect to fees prior to a settlement or license.

Inventor Royalties, Contingent Litigation Funding Fees and Contingent Legal Expenses.

Inventor royalties are expensed in the consolidated statements of operations in the period that the related revenues are recognized. Contingent litigation funding and legal fees are expensed in the consolidated statements of operations in the period that the related revenues are recognized. In instances where there are no recoveries from potential infringers, no contingent litigation funding fees are due.

Accounts Receivable

Accounts receivable, which generally relate to licensed sales, are presented on the balance sheet net of estimated uncollectible amounts. The Company records an allowance for estimated uncollectible accounts in an amount approximating anticipated losses. Individual uncollectible accounts are written off against the allowance when collection of the individual accounts appears doubtful. We recorded an allowance for doubtful accounts of $66,000 and $0 as of December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively.

Intangible Assets