Acacia Research (ACTG) Risk Factors

The cost of operating oil and natural gas properties, is often uncertain, and cost and timing factors can adversely affect the economics of a well. The efforts of our Energy Operations Business may be uneconomical if its properties are productive but do not produce as much oil and natural gas as estimated. Furthermore, the operations of our Energy Operations Business may be curtailed, delayed or canceled as a result of other factors, including: high costs, shortages or delivery delays of equipment, labor or other services; unexpected operational events and conditions; adverse weather conditions and natural disasters; injection plant or other facility or equipment malfunctions and equipment failures or accidents; title disputes; unitization difficulties; pipe or cement failures, casing collapses or other downhole failures; compliance with environmental and other governmental requirements; lost or damaged oilfield service tools; unusual or unexpected geological formations and reservoir pressure; loss of injection fluid circulation; restrictions in access to, or disposal of,water used or produced in oil and natural gas production; costs or delays imposed by or resulting from compliance with regulatory requirements; fires, blowouts, surface craterings, explosions and other hazards that could also result in personal injury and loss of life, pollution and suspension of operations; and uncontrollable flows of oil or well fluids. If any of these factors were to occur with respect to a particular property, Benchmark could lose all or a part of its investment in the property, or it could fail to realize the expected benefits from the property, either of which could materially and adversely affect the financial condition or results of operations.

Our business model requires qualified and competent professionals and management teams to identify and develop advantaged opportunities and to direct day-to-day activities of our operating businesses, as the case may be. Accordingly, recruiting and retaining qualified personnel is important to our strategy and operating businesses' operations. Additionally, although our operating businesses have adequate personnel for the current business environment, unpredictable increases in demand for goods and services may exacerbate the risk of not having sufficient numbers of trained or qualified personnel, which could have a negative impact on our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity. Our operating businesses also need qualified and competent personnel to execute their business plans and serve their customers, suppliers and other stakeholders. In order to compete, we must attract, retain, and motivate both executives and other key employees, and our failure to do so could harm our financial performance. Hiring and retaining qualified executives, operations personnel (including operating partners), engineers, technical staff, sales, marketing and support positions are and will be critical to businesses, and competition for experienced employees in the industries of our operating businesses can be intense. To help attract, retain, and motivate qualified employees and management, we must offer a competitive compensation package, which could include a combination of cash, cash-based incentive awards and share-based incentive awards, such as restricted stock units. Because our cash-based and share-based incentive awards are dependent upon the performance conditions relating to our performance and the performance of the price our common stock and other performance-based metrics, the future value of such awards are uncertain. If the anticipated value of such incentive awards does not materialize, or if the total compensation package ceases to be viewed as competitive, our ability to attract, retain, and motivate employees could be weakened, which could harm our results of operations. Our success will further substantially depend on our ability to attract and retain key members of our management team and officers. If we lose one or more of these key employees, our results of operations, and in turn, the value of our common stock could be materially adversely affected. Although we may enter into employment agreements with our officers, there can be no assurance that the entire term of any employment agreement will be served or that any employment agreement will be renewed upon expiration.

Outsourced providers and component suppliers have played, and will continue to play, a key role in Printronix's manufacturing operations, field installation and support, and many of its transactional and administrative functions, such as information technology, facilities management, and certain elements of its finance organization. These providers and suppliers might suffer financial setbacks, be acquired by third parties, become subject to exclusivity arrangements that preclude further business with our Industrial Operations Business or be unable to meet its requirements or expectation due to independent business decisions, or force majeure events that could interrupt or impair its continued ability to perform as we expect. Although our Industrial Operations Business may attempt to select reputable providers and suppliers and attempt to secure its performance on terms documented in written contracts, it is possible that one or more of these providers or suppliers could fail to perform as we expect, or fail to secure or protect intellectual property rights, and such failure could have an adverse impact on our Industrial Operations Business. In some cases, the requirements of Industrial Operations Business's business mandate that it obtain certain components and sub-assemblies included in its products from a single supplier or a limited group of suppliers. Where practical, our Industrial Operations Business endeavors to establish alternative sources to mitigate the risk that the failure of any single provider or supplier will adversely affect its business, but this is not feasible in all circumstances. There is therefore a risk that a prolonged inability to obtain certain components or secure key services could impair our Industrial Operations Business's ability to manage operations, ship products and generate revenues, which could adversely affect its results of operations and damage its customer relationships.

Printronix's financial performance depends in part upon its ability to successfully forecast the timing and extent of customer demand and reseller demand to manage worldwide distribution and inventory levels. Unexpected fluctuations in customer demand or in reseller inventory levels could disrupt ordering patterns and may adversely affect its financial results, inventory levels and cash flows. In addition, the financial failure or loss of a key customer, reseller or supplier could have a material adverse impact on its financial results. Our Industrial Operations Business must also address production and supply constraints, including product disruptions caused by quality issues, and delays or disruptions in the supply of key components necessary for production. Such delays, disruptions or shortages may result in lost revenue or in additional costs to meet customer demand. Our Industrial Operations Business's future results of operations and ability to effectively grow or maintain market share may be adversely affected if it is unable to address these issues on a timely basis.

The future results of operations of our Industrial Operations Business may be adversely affected if it is unable to continue to develop, manufacture and market products that are reliable, competitive, and meet customers' needs. The markets for matrix printers, associated supplies and software are aggressively competitive, especially with respect to pricing and the introduction of new technologies and products offering improved features and functionality. In addition, the introduction of any significant new and/or disruptive technology or business model by a competitor that substantially changes the markets into which our Industrial Operations Business sells its products or demand for the products it sells could severely impact sales of their products and our results of operations. The impact of competitive activities on the sales volumes or our revenue, or our inability to effectively deal with these competitive issues, could have a material adverse effect on our ability to attract and retain customers and maintain or grow market share. The competitive pressure to develop technology and products and to increase investment in research and development and marketing expenditures also could cause significant changes in the level of the operating expenses of our Industrial Operations Business.

The success of our intellectual property business is heavily dependent on obtaining and enforcing patents. Patent acquisition and enforcement is costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. Obtaining and enforcing patents across various industries, including the life science industry, involves a high degree of technological and legal complexity. Our patent rights may be affected by developments or uncertainty in U.S. or foreign patent statutes, patent case law, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") rules and regulations and the rules and regulations of foreign patent offices. In addition, the United States may, at any time, enact changes to U.S. patent law and regulations, including by legislation, by regulatory rulemaking, or by judicial precedent, that adversely affect the scope of patent protection available and weaken the rights of patent owners to obtain patents, enforce against patent infringement and obtain injunctions and/or damages. For example, over the past several years, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court issued various opinions, and the USPTO modified its guidance for practitioners on multiple occasions, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. Other countries may likewise enact changes to their patent laws in ways that adversely diminish the scope of patent protection and weaken the rights of patent owners to obtain patents, enforce against patent infringement, and obtain injunctions and/or damages. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. We cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in our patents or in third-party patents, and whether Congress or other foreign legislative bodies may pass patent reform legislation that is unfavorable to us, which, may in turn, affect the value of our patent assets. Further, the United States and other governments may, at any time, enact changes to law and regulation that create new avenues for challenging the validity of issued patents. For example, the America Invents Act created new administrative post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter-partes review, and derivation proceedings that allow third parties to challenge the validity of issued patents. This applies to all of our U.S. patents, even those issued before March 16, 2013. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in U.S. federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future. Additionally, new rules regarding the burden of proof in patent enforcement actions could significantly increase the cost of our enforcement actions, and new standards or limitations on liability for patent infringement could negatively impact our revenue derived from such enforcement actions. In addition, recent federal court decisions have lowered the threshold for obtaining attorneys' fees in patent infringement cases and increased the level of deference given to a district court's fee-shifting determination. These decisions may make it easier for district courts to shift a prevailing party's attorneys' fees to a non-prevailing party if the district court believes that the case was weak or conducted in an abusive manner. As a result, defendants in patent infringement actions brought by non-practicing entities may elect not to settle because these decisions make it much easier for defendants to get attorneys' fees. Finally, it is difficult to predict the outcome of patent enforcement litigation at the trial level and outcomes can be unfavorable. It can be difficult to understand complex patented technologies, and as a result, this may lead to a higher rate of unfavorable litigation outcomes. Moreover, in the event of a favorable outcome, there is often a higher rate of successful appeals in patent enforcement litigation than more standard business litigation. Such appeals are expensive and time consuming, resulting in increased costs and a potential for delayed or foregone revenue opportunities in the event of modification or reversal of favorable outcomes. Although we diligently pursue enforcement litigation, we cannot predict with reliability the decisions made by juries and trial courts.

Our Energy Operations Business's revolving credit facility restricts, among other things, the ability to incur debt and pay distributions under certain circumstances, and requires it to comply with customary financial covenants and specified financial ratios. If market or other economic conditions deteriorate, the ability of our Energy Operations Business to comply with these covenants may be impaired. If our Energy Operations Business violates any provisions of its revolving credit facility that are not cured or waived within specific time periods, a significant portion of its indebtedness may become immediately due and payable, it could be prohibited from making distributions, and its lenders' commitment to make further loans may terminate. Our Energy Operations Business might not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient funds to make these accelerated payments. In addition, the obligations of our Energy Operations Business under its revolving credit facility are secured by substantially all of its assets, and if it is unable to repay our indebtedness under the revolving credit facility, the lenders could seek to foreclose on its assets. Further, the terms of our credit agreement require the pre-approval of our lenders in order to reinstate distributions on our common units. The total amount our Energy Operations Business is able to borrow under its revolving credit facility is limited by a borrowing base, which is primarily based on the estimated value of its oil and natural gas properties and its commodity derivative contracts, as determined by its lenders in their sole discretion. The borrowing base is subject to redetermination on a semi-annual basis and more frequent redetermination in certain circumstances. If its lenders were to decrease the borrowing base to a level below the then outstanding borrowings, the amount exceeding the revised borrowing base could become immediately due and payable. The negative redetermination of the borrowing base could adversely affect our Energy Operations Business's business, results of operations, financial condition and the ability to make distributions. Furthermore, in the future, our Energy Operations Business may be unable to access sufficient capital under its revolving credit facility as a result of any decrease in the borrowing base.

We believe it is likely that scientific and political attention to issues concerning the extent, causes of and responsibility for climate change will continue, with the potential for further regulations and litigation that could affect the operations of our Energy Operations Business. Our Energy Operations Business operations result in greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions. In December 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (the "EPA") published its findings that emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHG present a danger to public health and the environment. Based on these findings, the EPA began adopting and implementing regulations that restrict emissions of GHG under existing provisions of the federal Clean Air Act ("CAA"), including requirements to reduce emissions of GHG from motor vehicles, requirements associated with certain construction and operating permit reviews for GHG emissions from certain large stationary sources, reporting requirements for GHG emissions from specified large GHG emission sources, including certain owners and operators of onshore oil and natural gas production and rules requiring so-called "green completions" of natural gas wells constructed after January 2015. Our Energy Operations Business currently monitors GHG emissions from operations in accordance with the GHG emissions reporting rule. Data collected from our GHG monitoring activities to date indicate that our Energy Operations Business does not exceed the threshold level of GHG emissions triggering a reporting obligation. To the extent it exceeds the applicable regulatory threshold level in the future, our Energy Operations Business will report the emissions beginning in the applicable period. Also, the U.S. Congress has, from time to time, considered legislation to reduce emissions of GHG, and almost one-half of the states, either individually or through multi-state regional initiatives, have begun implementing legal measures to reduce emissions of GHG. On August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 ("IRA") created the Methane Emissions Reduction Program to incentivize methane emission reductions and, for the first time ever, impose a fee on GHG emissions from certain facilities that exceed specified emissions levels. Further, on November 11, 2022, the EPA issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking on methane and GHG emissions from new and existing sources in the oil and natural gas industry. On December 2, 2023, the EPA issued a prepublication version of a final rule to reduce methane and volatile organic chemicals emissions from the oil and natural gas sector, which strengthens and expands the EPA's November 1, 2021 proposed revisions to the New Source Performance Standards program established under Section 111 of the CAA and creates new emissions restrictions for existing sources as well. On November 17, 2023, the EPA issued a final rule that enables states to implement more stringent methane emissions standards than the federal guidelines require. In addition, under the Paris Agreement, which went into effect on November 4, 2016, countries are required to establish increasingly stringent nationally determined contributions ("NDC"), which set GHG emission reduction goals, every five years beginning in 2020 to mitigate climate change. The United States exited the Paris Agreement in November 2020 but rejoined the agreement effective February 19, 2021. In April 2021, the United States made its NDC submittal, setting a goal to achieve a 50 to 52% reduction from 2005 levels in economy-wide net greenhouse gas pollution in 2030. Further, in November 2021, the United States and other countries entered into the Glasgow Climate Pact, which includes a range of measures designed to address climate change, including but not limited to the phase-out of fossil fuel subsidies, reducing methane emissions 30% by 2030, and cooperating toward the advancement of the development of alternative sources of energy. The adoption and implementation of any legislation or regulations to reduce GHG emissions or imposing additional GHG reporting obligations could require our Energy Operations Business to incur significant costs to reduce emissions of GHG associated with operations. Any such legislation or regulatory programs could also increase the cost of consuming, and thereby reduce demand for, the oil and natural gas produced by our Energy Operations Business. Consequently, legislation and regulatory programs to reduce emissions of GHGs could have a material adverse effect on our Energy Operations Business. Reduced demand for the oil and natural gas that it produces could also have the effect of lowering the value of its reserves. In addition, there have also been efforts in recent years to influence the investment community, including investment advisors, investment fund managers and certain family foundations, universities, individual investors and sovereign wealth, pension and endowment funds, promoting divestment of, or limit investment in, fossil fuel equities and pressuring lenders to limit or stop funding to companies engaged in the extraction of fossil fuel reserves. Such environmental activism and initiatives aimed at limiting climate change and reducing air pollution could interfere with the business activities, operations and ability to access capital by or of our Energy Operations Business. Finally, increasing attention to the risks of climate change has resulted in an increased possibility of lawsuits or investigations brought by public and private entities against companies engaged in oil and natural gas production in connection with their GHG emissions. Should we be targeted by any such litigation or investigations, we may incur liability, which, to the extent that societal pressures or political or other factors are involved, could be imposed without regard to the causation of or contribution to the asserted damage, or to other mitigating factors. The ultimate impact of GHG agreements, legislation and measures on our financial performance is highly uncertain because we are unable to predict, for a multitude of individual jurisdictions, the outcome of political decision-making processes and the variables and trade-offs that inevitably occur in connection with such processes. In an interpretative guidance on climate change disclosures, the SEC indicated that climate change could have an effect on the severity of weather (including hurricanes, droughts and floods), sea levels, the arability of farmland and water availability and quality. If such effects were to occur, there is the potential for our Energy Operations Business's exploration and production operations to be adversely affected. Potential adverse effects could include damages to facilities, or to transportation, pipeline and refinery owned by others on which its operations depend, from powerful winds or rising waters in low-lying areas, disruption of production, less efficient or non-routine operating practices necessitated by climate effects and increased costs for insurance coverage in the aftermath of such effects. Any future exploration and development activities and equipment could also be adversely affected by severe weather conditions such as hurricanes or freezing temperatures, which may cause a loss of production from temporary cessation of activity from regional power outages or lost or damaged facilities and equipment. Such severe weather conditions could also impact access to drilling and production facilities for routine operations, maintenance and repairs and the availability of and access to, necessary third-party services, such as gathering, processing, compression and transportation services. These constraints and the resulting shortages or high costs could delay or temporarily halt our Energy Operations Business's operations and materially increase its operation and capital costs, which could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations. Significant physical effects of climate change could also have an indirect effect on the financing and operations of our Energy Operations Business by disrupting the transportation or process-related services provided by it or other midstream companies, service companies or suppliers with whom it has a business relationship. Our Energy Operations Business may not be able to recover through insurance some or any of the damages, losses or costs that may result from potential physical effects of climate change.

Printronix derives a significant amount of revenue from a concentrated number of retailers, distributors, and manufacturers. Any negative change involving these retailers, distributors, and manufacturers, including industry consolidation, store closings, reduction in purchasing levels or bankruptcies, could negatively impact the sales of Printronix and may have a material adverse effect on our Industrial Operations Business's results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.