Commitments and Contingencies |
3 Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mar. 31, 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Firm Purchase and Other Commitments
The Company is party to firm purchase commitments with some of its suppliers. A firm purchase commitment represents an agreement that specifies all significant terms, including price and timing of the transactions, and includes a disincentive for non-performance that is sufficiently large to make performance probable. This disincentive is generally in the form of a take-or-pay provision, which requires the Company to pay for committed volumes regardless of whether the Company actually acquires the materials. The Company evaluates these agreements and records a loss, if any, on firm purchase commitments using the same lower of cost or market approach as that used to value inventory.
The Company amended certain firm purchase commitments during the year ended December 31, 2022, which significantly reduced its commitments. Negotiations with other suppliers are still ongoing to blend and extend or terminate other future commitments due to supply chain constraints and cost increases for both parties. The Company recognized $600 in losses associated with firm purchase commitments during the year ended December 31, 2022. If negotiations to amend certain purchase commitments are not successful, the Company may incur additional losses in future periods.
The Company also has other commitments, including marketing and software subscription agreements and equipment leases. The equipment leases included here only relate to leases for which the equipment had not yet been delivered to the Company as of March 31, 2023. Since the Company did not receive the equipment, the related right-of-use asset and lease liability were not recognized as of March 31, 2023. However, the Company was still committed to the financing
arrangement. All other financial commitments under leasing arrangements are described in Note 8.
The amounts in the table below represent the Company’s future minimum commitments.
Legal Proceedings
Aside from the proceedings described below, the Company may be involved in legal matters arising in the ordinary course of business from time to time. While the Company believes that such matters are currently not material, there can be no assurance that matters arising in the ordinary course of business for which the Company is or could become involved in litigation will not have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition or results of operations. The Company records an accrual for legal contingencies when it determines that it is probable that it has incurred a liability and it can reasonably estimate the amount of the loss.
On August 4, 2021, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a putative class action complaint in the Delaware Chancery Court, captioned Delman v. GigCapitalAcquisitions3, LLC, et al. (Case No. 2021-0679) on behalf of a purported class of stockholders. The lawsuit names GigCapitalAcquisitions3, LLC and the Company’s former directors Dr. Katz, Dr. Dinu, and Messrs. Betti-Berutto, Mikulsky, Miotto and Wang, as defendants. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duty stemming from Gig’s merger with Lightning Systems and unjust enrichment of certain of the defendants. The lawsuit seeks, among other relief, unspecified damages, redemption rights, and attorneys’ fees. Neither the Company nor any of its current officers or directors are parties to the lawsuit. The Company’s former directors are subject to certain indemnification obligations of the Company. On January 4, 2023, the Delaware Chancery Court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss.
In addition, on October 15, 2021, the Company and certain of its officers were named as defendants in a putative securities class action. The action is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, and is captioned Shafer v. Lightning eMotors, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:21-cv02774. The lawsuit alleges violations of Sections 10(b), Section 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder for purported false or misleading statements regarding the Company’s business operations and financial condition. A related lawsuit captioned Cohen v. Lightning eMotors, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-03215, was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado on December 1, 2021. On December 17, 2021, the Cohen lawsuit was consolidated with the Shafer lawsuit. On April 22, 2022, the court appointed a lead plaintiff in the consolidated lawsuit. The lead plaintiff’s filed a consolidated complaint on May 20, 2022. On July 13, 2022, the Company and the other defendants filed a motion to dismiss the class action. On February 21, 2023, the court denied the motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs seek damages in an unspecified amount, attorneys’ fees, and other remedies. The Company believes the allegations are without merit and intends to defend vigorously against such allegations.
On February 6, 2023, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a derivative complaint in the Delaware Chancery Court, captioned Uvaydov v. Robert Fenwick-Smith, Tim Reeser, et al. (Case No. 2023-0137-LWW). The lawsuit names certain current and former officers and directors of the Company as defendants. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duty stemming from GigCapital3’s merger with Lightning Systems. The lawsuit seeks, among other relief, unspecified damages, redemption rights, and attorneys’ fees. The Company believes the allegations are without merit and intends to defend vigorously against them.
On February 24, 2023, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a derivative complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, captioned Lanham v. Robert Fenwick-Smith, et al. (Case No. 1:23-cv00507). The lawsuit names certain current and former officers and directors of the Company as defendants. The lawsuit alleges, among others, that the
defendants breached their fiduciary duty stemming from GigCapital3’s merger with Lightning Systems. The lawsuit seeks, among other relief, unspecified damages, and attorneys’ fees. The Company believes the allegations are without merit and intends to defend vigorously against them.
On March 9, 2023, the Company filed a lawsuit against Romeo Systems, Inc. and Nikola Corporation in the Larimer County District Court, Colorado (Case No. 2023CV30187) seeking damages for breach of contract and tortious interference related to the product supply agreement between the Company and Romeo dated July 13, 2020, arising from Romeo’s failure to deliver batteries under the agreement and for costs associated with a recall of the batteries. The Company initiated a voluntary recall after Romeo refused to take action as the supplier of the batteries.
Recall Campaigns
On December 16, 2022, the Company initiated a voluntary recall for certain 2021-2022 model year Lightning eMotors ZEV4 vehicles due to multiple software and hardware discrepancies internal to the Romeo battery packs installed in the ZEV4 series vehicles. The affected vehicles may fail to operate in cold temperatures, fail to start, or may lose traction power while driving, increasing the risk of an accident. Romeo has been formally notified of the recall; however, Romeo has not reached a solution to honor their battery warranty. See Note 13 under the section “Legal Proceedings”. The Company’s current remedy is to either replace the ZEV4 manufactured with Romeo battery packs with updated ZEV4 models manufactured with Proterra battery packs or to refund full value of the purchase price to the customer. The Company will seek to recover the costs and expenses associated with the recall from Romeo.
On March 27, 2023, the Company initiated a voluntary recall for certain model year 2020 FT3-43, 2019-2022 FT3-86, 2020 FE4-86 and 2019-2021 FE4-129 vehicles equipped with eMatrix battery packs. Defective structural welds and internal radiator leaks have been found in the battery packs which may result in isolation faults and cell imbalances. The affected vehicles may lose traction power, increasing the potential for collisions or experience a thermal runaway which could result in vehicle fires. The Company is currently working with eMatrix, the battery manufacturer, to develop a remedy for the structural welds and internal radiator leaks. Because the remedy is still being developed, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate a range of the potential losses associated with the recall.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||