Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

In a previously disclosed lawsuit filed by Streck, Inc. (Streck), venued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska (the Nebraska Court), Streck alleged patent infringement involving certain patents issued to Streck relating to the addition of reticulocytes to hematology controls. Streck was seeking a royalty on sales of integrated hematology controls containing reticulocytes. The Company has reason to believe that R&D Systems, and not Streck, first invented the inventions claimed in these patents and several other patents issued to Streck. As a result, the Company requested, and in 2007 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) declared, an interference to determine priority of invention between a patent application filed by R&D Systems and five Streck patents, including each of the patents involved in the lawsuit. On November 2, 2009, the interference board ordered that judgment for the Company and against Streck be entered; finding that R&D Systems was the first to invent the integrated hematology controls containing reticulocytes.

Table of Contents

Days earlier, on October 28, 2009, at the conclusion of trial in the Nebraska Court, a jury decided that the Company did not meet its burden of demonstrating by clear and convincing evidence that the Streck patents were invalid. The jury also found that a reasonable license royalty rate was 12.5%, and that R&D Systems did not willfully infringe, resulting in a judgment in favor of Streck in the amount of approximately $170,000 including court-related costs. On September 30, 2010, the Nebraska Court upheld the jury verdict and, in a related action, reversed the ruling of the USPTO interference board. The Nebraska Court entered an injunction prohibiting the making and selling of the products that are the subject of the lawsuit.

In October 2010, the Company appealed the adverse decisions of the Nebraska Court to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. On October 20, 2011, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion upholding the District Court’s interference-related finding of priority in favor of Streck, and on January 10, 2012, the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court’s infringement finding and permanent injunction. The Company filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, seeking to reverse or vacate the Federal Circuit affirmances. The Petition was not granted, and in June 2012, the Company paid $170,000 in full satisfaction of the judgment and court-related costs.