NOTE 7 ? COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Legal Matters On March 12, 2012, GenSpera instituted a declaratory judgment action against Annastasiah Mhaka ( Mhaka ) in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland: GenSpera, Inc. v. Mhaka, Civil Action No. MJG-12-772 (D. Md.). In its complaint, GenSpera, as the exclusive licensee of the inventions described and claimed in the U.S. Patent No. 7,468,354 ( the  354 patent ) and U.S. Patent No. 7,767,648 ( the  648 patent ), sought a declaratory judgment that Mhaka should not be added to either the  354 patent or the  648 patent as an inventor. On April 2, 2012, Mhaka filed and served her answer and counterclaim, in which she sought to be added as an inventor to the  354 patent and the  648 patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 256. On November 1, 2012, Mhaka filed a second complaint in Maryland state court, asserting state tort claims against GenSpera and Drs. Samuel Denmeade and John Isaacs. On May 1, 2013, the District Court granted GenSpera s motion for summary judgment in the original case. Reserving any ruling on the issue of whether Mhaka s state law tort claims were preempted by federal patent law, the Court denied defendants  motion to dismiss Mhaka s complaint in the second case and directed Mhaka to re-file her claims as counterclaims in the original action. On May 14, 2013, Mhaka filed an amended answer and counterclaims in the consolidated action, re-pleading her tort claims as counterclaims. On June 3, 2013, GenSpera (along with Drs. Denmeade and Isaacs) filed a reply to the counterclaims, denying their allegations and raising a number of affirmative defenses. On January 2, 2014, Drs. Isaacs and Denmeade moved for summary judgment on the grounds that Mhaka s tort claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and GenSpera joined in the motion. On May 6, 2014, GenSpera moved separately for summary judgment, a motion that Drs. Denmeade and Isaacs joined in part. On September 12, 2014, the District Court granted GenSpera s motion for summar