6. Commitments and Contingencies Legal In August 2011, Ameranth, Inc. (Ameranth) filed a patent infringement action against a number of defendants, including Grubhub Holdings Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, Case No. 3:11-cv-1810. Ameranth subsequently initiated additional actions for infringement of a related patent, including separate actions against Grubhub Holdings Inc., Case No. 3:12-cv-739, and Seamless North America, LLC, Case No. 3:12-cv-737, which were consolidated along with approximately 40 other cases Ameranth filed in the same district. In September 2018, the district court granted summary judgment (on another defendants motion) of unpatentability on the sole remaining patent and vacated the December 3, 2018 jury trial date for the claims against Grubhub Holdings Inc. and Seamless North America, LLC. In October 2018, the district court entered final judgment on all claims in the case in which summary judgment was granted, and then stayed the remaining cases (including the cases against Grubhub and Seamless). Ameranth then appealed this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In November 2019, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district courts findings of unpatentability in all material respects, and remanded certain dependent claims to the district court. The Company believes this case lacks merit and that it has strong defenses to all of the infringement claims. The Company intends to defend the suit vigorously. The Company has not recorded an accrual related to this lawsuit as of March 31, 2020 , as it does not believe a material loss is probable. On November 20, 2019, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a putative class action complaint against the Company, Chief Executive Officer Matthew Maloney, and President and Chief Financial Officer Adam DeWitt in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Case No. 19 Civ. 7665. The complaint asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, based on its allegation that the defendants made false and misleading statements about the Companys growth, competitive landscape, and strategy. The complaint seeks unspecified compensatory damages and attorneys fees, among other relief. Pursuant to a court scheduling order, the plaintiffs will have until May 29, 2020, to file an amended complaint, and the matter is expected to be fully briefed by November 2020. The defendants believe that the lawsuit is without merit and that a material loss is not probable. However, given the early stage of the proceedings, a reasonable estimate of the amount of any possible loss or range of loss cannot be made at this time. In addition to the matters described above, from time to time, the Company is involved in various other legal proceedings arising from the normal course of business activities, including labor and employment claims, some of which relate to the alleged misclassification of independent contractors. The Company currently has a number of pending putative class actions, Private Attorney General Act lawsuits and arbitrations alleging the misclassification of independent contractors. In January 2020, California State Assembly Bill 5 (AB5) went into effect, which codifies a test to determine whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor under California law. In light of AB5, the Company expects to continue to receive an increased number of misclassification claims. Nonetheless, t he Company believes that its approach to classification is supported by the law and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously in these matters . The Company does not believe any of the foregoing claims will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. However, there is no assurance that any claim will not be combined into a collective or class action. During the three months ended March 31, 2020, the Company recorded a $12.5 million accrual related to the settlement of certain of these matters. Indemnification In connection with the merger of Seamless North America, LLC, Seamless Holdings Corporation and Grubhub Holdings Inc. in August 2013, the Company agreed to indemnify Aramark Holdings Corporation for negative income tax consequences associated with the October 2012 spin-off of Seamless Holdings Corporation that were the result of certain actions taken by the Company through October 29, 2014, in certain instances subject to a $ 15.0 million limitation. Management is not aware of any actions that would impact the indemnification obligation .