## 16. Contingencies 

## InvestPic, LLC 

In November 2010, InvestPic, LLC filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against Morningstar, Inc. and several other companies alleging that each defendant infringes U.S. Patent No. 6,349,291, which relates to methods for performing statistical analysis on investment data and displaying the analyzed data in graphical form. InvestPic seeks, among other things, unspecified damages because of defendants’ alleged infring- ing activities and costs. Morningstar is evaluating the lawsuit but cannot predict the outcome of the proceeding. 

## Egan-Jones Rating Co. 

In June 2010, Egan-Jones Rating Co. filed a complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania against Realpoint, LLC and Morningstar, Inc. in connection with a December 2007 agreement between Egan-Jones and Realpoint for certain data-sharing and other services. In addition to damages, Egan-Jones filed a petition seeking an injunction to temporarily prevent Morningstar from offering corporate credit ratings through December 31, 2010. In September 2010, the court denied Egan-Jones’s request for a preliminary injunction against Morningstar’s corporate credit ratings business. Realpoint and Morningstar continue to vigorously contest liability on all of Egan-Jones’ claims for damages. We can- not predict the outcome of the proceeding. 

## Business Logic Holding Corporation 

In November 2009, Business Logic Holding Corporation filed a com- plaint in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois against Ibbotson Associates, Inc. and Morningstar, Inc. relating to Ibbotson’s prior commercial relationship with Business Logic. Business Logic is alleging that Ibbotson Associates and Morningstar violated Business Logic’s rights by using its trade secrets to develop a proprietary web-service software and user interface that connects plan par- ticipant data with the Ibbotson Wealth Forecasting Engine. Business Logic seeks, among other things, injunctive relief and unspecified damages. Ibbotson and Morningstar answered the complaint, and Ibbotson asserted a counterclaim against Business Logic alleging trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract, seeking dam- ages and injunctive relief. While Morningstar and Ibbotson Associates are vigorously contesting the claims against them, we cannot predict the outcome of the proceeding. 

## Morningstar Associates, LLC Subpoena from the New York Attorney General’s Office 

In December 2004, Morningstar Associates, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Morningstar, Inc., received a subpoena from the New York Attorney General’s office seeking information and documents related to an investigation the New York Attorney General’s office is conducting. The subpoena asks for documents relating to the investment consulting services the company offers to retirement plan providers, including fund lineup recommendations for retirement plan sponsors. Morningstar Associates has provided the requested information and documents. 

In 2005, Morningstar Associates received subpoenas seeking infor- mation and documents related to investigations being conducted by the SEC and United States Department of Labor. The subpoenas were similar in scope to the New York Attorney General subpoena. In January 2007 and September 2009, respectively, the SEC and Department of Labor each notified Morningstar Associates that it had ended its investigation, with no enforcement action, fines, or penalties. 

In January 2007, Morningstar Associates received a Notice of Proposed Litigation from the New York Attorney General’s office. The Notice centers on disclosure relating to an optional service offered to retirement plan sponsors (employers) that select 401(k) plan services from ING, one of Morningstar Associates’ clients. The Notice gave Morningstar Associates the opportunity to explain why the New York Attorney General’s office should not institute proceed- ings. Morningstar Associates promptly submitted its explanation and has cooperated fully with the New York Attorney General’s office. 

We cannot predict the scope, timing, or outcome of this matter, which may include the institution of administrative, civil, injunctive, or criminal proceedings, the imposition of fines and penalties, and other remedies and sanctions, any of which could lead to an adverse impact on our stock price, the inability to attract or retain key employ- ees, and the loss of customers. We also cannot predict what impact, if any, this matter may have on our business, operating results, or financial condition. 

In addition to these proceedings, we are involved in legal proceed- ings and litigation that have arisen in the normal course of our business. Although the outcome of a particular proceeding can never be predicted, we do not believe that the result of any of these other matters will have a material adverse effect on our business, operat- ing results, or financial condition. 

