15. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

 

Funding Commitment Agreement

 

On November 1, 2023, the Company entered into a Funding Commitment Agreement with KBROS, the Product Handler pursuant to the Product Handling Agreement as defined in Note 5. Pursuant to this agreement, the Company committed to provide annual funding to the Product Handler from time to time in the minimum amount of $2,500,000 to enable the Product Handler to purchase inventory from Company-approved vendors (“Vendors”). The Company may, without notice to Product Handler, elect not to advance funding for any inventory sold by particular Vendors with respect to which the Company reasonably feels insecure. This Agreement concerns a funding commitment, and not the purchase of Products from Product Handler or Vendors.

 

For further details regarding the settlement agreement, see Note 11.

 

Legal Proceedings — Kingbird Ventures, LLC

 

On July 11, 2025, the Company, along with several of its current and former officers and directors and other parties, was named as a defendant in an action filed in the Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County, Nevada, captioned Kingbird Ventures, LLC v. Sean Dollinger, et al. The complaint alleged, among other things, breach of fiduciary duties, violations of Nevada Revised Statutes Sections 78.650, 78.630, 207.400, 90.570, and 32.010, alter ego liability, and civil conspiracy. The complaint sought, among other things, unspecified monetary damages, a declaratory judgment, injunctive relief to freeze the assets of the Company and certain other defendants, and relief to prevent material corporate decisions by the Company.

 

On September 22, 2025, the Company entered into two settlement agreements with Kingbird Ventures and the other parties named therein to resolve all matters related to the litigation.

 

The First Settlement Agreement resolved the direct claims asserted by Kingbird Ventures against the Company and other defendants, providing for the dismissal of all direct claims with prejudice, mutual releases among the parties, a cash payment obligation of $13,000,000 from the Nevada Defendants (as defined in the First Settlement Agreement), and customary provisions including no admission of liability and confidentiality.

 

The Second Settlement Agreement resolved the stockholder derivative claims brought on behalf of the Company against certain current and former officers and directors, providing for the dismissal of the derivative action with prejudice, subject to court approval, mutual releases among the parties, and customary provisions including no admission of liability, cooperation undertakings, and confidentiality.

 

The Company recognized the full settlement amount of $13,000,000 as legal settlement expense in the consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2025, presented as a separate line item within other expense to distinguish it from the Company’s ongoing operating results. As of December 31, 2025, the settlement obligation has been paid in full and no remaining liability is recorded on the consolidated balance sheet in connection with this matter.

Historical Timeline

Fiscal YearFiled
2025Apr 15, 2026Showing above
2024Mar 31, 2025
2023Apr 1, 2024

About Commitments Disclosures

Commitments and contingencies disclosures catalog a company's off-balance-sheet obligations and legal exposures — purchase commitments, guarantee arrangements, pending litigation, and regulatory proceedings. These items represent potential future cash outflows that may not appear as liabilities on the balance sheet until they become probable and estimable.

Key signals: litigation reserves and disclosed loss ranges quantify management's estimate of legal exposure, but unquantified "reasonably possible" losses often represent the larger risk. Watch for changes in language around pending cases — shifts from "remote" to "reasonably possible" or increases in estimated loss ranges signal deteriorating outcomes. Unconditional purchase obligations and take-or-pay contracts create fixed cost structures that reduce operational flexibility. Guarantee arrangements for subsidiaries or joint ventures can create cascading obligations. Compare the total commitment schedule against projected free cash flow to assess whether the company can meet its obligations without additional financing.