Commitments and Contingencies Legal Contingencies In October 2013, the Company removed the former owner of Productions Graphics from his role as President of Productions Graphics, the Companys French subsidiary. He had been in that role since the Companys 2011 acquisition of Productions Graphics, a European business then principally owned by him. In December 2013, the former owner of Productions Graphics initiated a wrongful termination claim in the Commercial Court of Paris seeking approximately 0.7 million (approximately $1.0 million ) in fees and damages. In anticipation of this claim, in November 2013, he also obtained a judicial asset attachment order in the amount of 0.7 million (approximately $1.0 million ) as payment security; the attachment order was confirmed in January 2014, and the Company filed an appeal of the order. In March 2015, the appellate court ruled in the Companys favor in the attachment proceedings, releasing all attachments. The Company disputes the allegations of the former owner of Productions Graphics and intends to vigorously defend these matters. In February 2014, based on a review the Company initiated into certain transactions associated with the former owner of Productions Graphics, the Company concluded that he had engaged in fraud by inflating the results of the Productions Graphics business in order to induce the Company to pay him 7.1 million in contingent consideration pursuant to the acquisition agreement. In light of those findings, in February 2014, the Company filed a criminal complaint in France seeking to redress the harm caused by his conduct and this proceeding is currently pending. In addition, in September 2015, the Company initiated a civil claim in the Paris Commercial Court against the former owner of Productions Graphics, seeking civil damages to redress these same harms. In addition to these pending matters, there may be other potential disputes between the Company and the former owner of Productions Graphics relating to the acquisition agreement. The Company had paid 5.8 million (approximately $8.0 million ) in fixed consideration and 7.1 million (approximately $9.4 million ) in contingent consideration to the former owner of Productions Graphics; the remaining maximum contingent consideration under the acquisition agreemen t was 37.6 million (approximately $37.6 million at the time) and the Company has determined that none of this amount was earned and payable. In January 2014, a former finance employee of Productions Graphics initiated wrongful termination and overtime claims in the Labor Court of Boulogne-Billancourt, and he currently seeks damages of approximately 0.6 million (approximately $0.7 million ). The Company disputes these allegations and intends to vigorously defend these matters. In addition, the Companys criminal complaint in France, described above, seeks to redress harm caused by this former employee in light of his participation in the fraudulent transactions described above. The labor claim has been stayed in deference to the Companys related criminal complaint. In May 2018, shortly following the Companys announcement of its intention to restate certain historical financial statements, a putative securities class action complaint was filed against the Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors. The action, Errol Brown, et al., v. InnerWorkings, Inc., et al., was brought in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint alleges claims pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Allegations in the complaint include that the Company and its current and former officers and directors made untrue statements or omissions of material fact by issuing inaccurate financial statements for the fiscal years ending December 31, 2015 , 2016 , and 2017 , as well as all interim periods. On July 27, 2018 , the Court appointed a lead plaintiff and lead counsel for the case. Plaintiffs counsel filed an amended complaint on September 25, 2018 . On March 27, 2019, the Court granted the Companys motion to dismiss the amended complaint, and on April 16, 2019 the plaintiffs action was dismissed.