The dispute about a contract between Walmart and DECN has it's basis that goes back to 2011.
DECN's 10-Q notes that the Company was approached by the largest retailer in the world, recentlyix revealed to be Wal-Mart by DECN President and CFO Keith Berman, regarding the sale of GenStrip at its 5,000+ stores globally. DECN reports that a contract was negotiated in September 2010 and subsequently renegotiated and renewed in April 2011. However, while conducting market research during this time and seeking pre-orders, DECN reports that initial market interest was greater than the product capacity of the Company's contract manufacturer, and the Company ended the pre-order initiative while remaining confident there is a very large opportunity for GenStrip in a market dominated by four large pharmaceutical manufacturers which DECN reports sell similar products at similar pricing.
From a legal point of view it is rather clear:
1.) A contract was negotiated, renegotiated and renewed in April 2011. This would mean, a contract was signed and dated however like always with a clause, that the contract could be re-negotiated if and when both parties would agree to it. (This is a common text)
You are not renegotiating and renew something if there would not have been a basis for it and a basis for it is a signed Agreement/contract. Without being signed and dated, a contract could not be valid and what is not valid cannot be renegotiated.
But that there must have been a signed agreement is confirmed as well by the wording: Renewed. And of course logic dictates you cannot renew something which did not exist and which would therefore have had no legal Basis.
So the text from 10Q is more than clear: There was a signed and dated contract between the mentioned parties.
