Contingencies In August 2015, a purported stockholder of Charter, Matthew Sciabacucchi, filed a lawsuit in the Delaware Court of Chancery, on behalf of a putative class of Charter stockholders, challenging the transactions involving Charter, TWC, A/N, and Liberty Broadband announced by Charter on May 26, 2015. The lawsuit, which named as defendants Charter and its board of directors, alleged that the transactions resulted from breaches of fiduciary duty by Charters directors and that Liberty Broadband improperly benefited from the challenged transactions at the expense of other Charter stockholders. The lawsuit has proceeded to the discovery phase. Charter denies any liability, believes that it has substantial defenses, and is vigorously defending this lawsuit. Although Charter is unable to predict the outcome of this lawsuit, it does not expect the outcome will have a material effect on its operations, financial condition or cash flows. The California Attorney General and the Alameda County, California District Attorney are investigating whether certain of Charters waste disposal policies, procedures and practices are in violation of the California Business and Professions Code and the California Health and Safety Code. That investigation was commenced in January 2014. A similar investigation involving TWC was initiated in February 2012. Charter is cooperating with these investigations. While the Company is unable to predict the outcome of these investigations, it does not expect that the outcome will have a material effect on its operations, financial condition, or cash flows. On December 19, 2011, Sprint Communications Company L.P. (Sprint) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas alleging that TWC infringed certain U.S. patents purportedly relating to Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services. At the trial, the jury returned a verdict of $140 million against TWC and further concluded that TWC had willfully infringed Sprints patents. The court subsequently declined to enhance the damage award as a result of the purported willful infringement and awarded Sprint an additional $6 million, representing pre-judgment interest on the damages award. The Company has now paid the verdict, interest and costs in full. The Company continues to pursue indemnity from its vendors and has brought a patent suit against Sprint (TC Tech, LLC v. Sprint) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware implicating Sprint's LTE technology and a similar suit against T-Mobile USA, Inc. in the Western District of Texas. The ultimate outcomes of the pursuit of indemnity against the Companys vendors and the TC Tech litigation cannot be predicted. The Company does not expect the outcome of its indemnity claims nor the outcome of the TC Tech litigation will have a material adverse effect on its operations or financial condition. Sprint filed a second patent suit against Charter and Bright House Networks, LLC on December 2, 2017 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. This suit alleges infringement of 11 patents related to the Company's provision of VoIP services (ten of which were asserted against Legacy TWC in the matter described above). On February 18, 2020 Sprint filed a lawsuit against Charter, Bright House, and TWC in the District Court for Johnson County, Kansas. Sprint alleges that Charter misappropriated trade secrets from Sprint years ago through employees hired by Bright House. Sprint asserts that the alleged trade secrets relate to the VoIP business of Charter and Bright House. Charter has removed this case to the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. Sprint filed a third patent suit against Charter on May 17, 2018 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. This suit alleges infringement of two patents related to the Company's video on demand services. The court transferred this case to the United States District Court for the District of Delaware on December 20, 2018 pursuant to an agreement between the parties. While the Company is vigorously defending these suits and is unable to predict the outcome of the Sprint lawsuits, the Company does not expect that the litigation will have a material effect on its operations, financial condition, or cash flows. In addition to the Sprint litigation described above, the Company and its parent companies are defendants or co-defendants in several additional lawsuits involving alleged infringement of various intellectual property relating to various aspects of their businesses. Other industry participants are also defendants in certain of these cases or related cases. In the event that a court ultimately determines that the Company infringes on any intellectual property, the Company may be subject to substantial damages and/or an injunction that could require the Company or its vendors to modify certain products and services the Company offers to its subscribers, as well as negotiate royalty or license agreements with respect to the intellectual property at issue. While the Company believes the lawsuits are without merit and intends to defend the actions vigorously, no assurance can be given that any adverse outcome would not be material to the Companys consolidated financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. The Company cannot predict the outcome of any such claims nor can it reasonably estimate a range of possible loss. The Company and its parent companies are party to other lawsuits, claims and regulatory inquiries that arise in the ordinary course of conducting their business. The ultimate outcome of these other legal matters pending against the Company cannot be predicted, and although such lawsuits and claims are not expected individually to have a material adverse effect on the Companys consolidated financial condition, results of operations or liquidity, such lawsuits could have, in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on the Companys consolidated financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. Whether or not the Company ultimately prevails in any particular lawsuit or claim, litigation can be time consuming and costly and injure the Companys reputation.