COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES The Company leases facilities and certain machinery and equipment under various non-cancelable operating leases and executory contracts expiring through December 2021. Certain non-cancelable leases are classified as capital leases and the leased assets are included in property and equipment, at cost. Future annual minimum payments as of July 31, 2019 , are as follows: Operating Leases Capital Lease Obligations Purchase Obligations Debt Principal &amp; Interest Total (In thousands) For the fiscal years ended July 31: 2020 $ 16,534 $ 147 $ 26,800 $ 7,121 $ 50,602 2021 11,755 136  7,121 19,012 2022 8,082 104  7,121 15,307 2023 4,899 37  364,245 369,181 2024 3,544   15,593 19,137 Thereafter 19,895    19,895 $ 64,709 $ 424 $ 26,800 $ 401,201 $ 493,134 Total rent and equipment lease expense charged to continuing operations was $19.0 million and $19.2 million for the fiscal years ended July 31, 2019 and 2018 , respectively. From time to time, the Company agrees to provide indemnification to its clients in the ordinary course of business. Typically, the Company agrees to indemnify its clients for losses caused by the Company. As of July 31, 2019 , the Company had no recorded liabilities with respect to these arrangements. Purchase obligations represent an estimate of all open purchase orders and contractual obligations in the ordinary course of business for which the Company has not received the goods or services. Although open purchase orders are considered enforceable and legally binding, the terms generally allow us the option to cancel, reschedule, and adjust the Company's requirements based on its business needs prior to the delivery of goods or performance of services. Legal Proceedings On April 13, 2018, a purported shareholder, Donald Reith, filed a verified complaint, Reith v. Lichtenstein, et al., 2018-277 (Del. Ch.) in the Delaware Court of Chancery. The complaint alleges class and derivative claims for breach of fiduciary duty and/or aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment against the Company's Board of Directors, Warren Lichtenstein, Glen Kassan, William T. Fejes, Jack L. Howard, Jeffrey J. Fenton, Philip E. Lengyel and Jeffrey S. Wald; and stockholders Steel Holdings, Steel Partners, L.P., SPHG Holdings, Handy &amp; Harman Ltd. and WHX CS Corp. (collectively, "Steel Parties") in connection with the acquisition of $35 million of the Series C Convertible Preferred Stock by SPHG Holdings and equity grants made to Lichtenstein, Howard and Fejes on December 15, 2017 (collectively, "Challenged Transactions"). The Company is named as a nominal defendant. The complaint alleges that although the Challenged Transactions were approved by a Special Committee consisting of the independent members of the Board (Messrs. Fenton, Lengyel and Wald), the Steel Parties dominated and controlled the Special Committee, who approved the Challenged Transactions in breach of their fiduciary duty. Plaintiff alleges that the Challenged Transactions unfairly diluted shareholders and therefore unjustly enriched Steel Holdings, SPHG Holdings and Messrs. Lichtenstein, Howard and Fejes. The complaint also alleges that the Board made misleading disclosures in the Company's proxy statement for the 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders in connection with seeking approval to amend the 2010 Incentive Award Plan to authorize the issuance of additional shares to accommodate certain shares underlying the equity grants. Remedies requested include rescission of the Series C Convertible Preferred Stock and equity grants, disgorgement of any unjustly obtained property or compensation and monetary damages. On June 8, 2018, defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to plead demand futility and failure to state a claim. On June 28, 2019, the Court denied most of the motion to dismiss allowing the matter to proceed. Discovery is proceeding. We are unable at this time to provide a calculation of potential damages or litigation loss that is probable or estimable. Although there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome, the Company believes it has meritorious defenses, continues to deny liability, and intends to defend this litigation vigorously.