Note 7 – Commitments and Contingencies

Advisory Board

On December 4, 2019, the Company established a cannabinoid and hemp (“CBD”) Advisory Board, whose role is to provide input to management and the board of directors regarding the identification and assessment of business opportunities in the cannabinoid and hemp industry. Each member shall be compensated for their initial 24 months of service with the issuance of Company stock with a fair market value of $25,000. Pursuant to the agreement, such shares shall be fully vested by May 31, 2020. During the three months ended March 31, 2020, the Company recorded a charge of $41,667, which is reflected in administrative expense within the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss.

Commitments

ChubeWorkx

On August 17, 2016, pursuant to a Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) with ChubeWorkx Guernsey Limited (“ChubeWorkx”), which settled all pending claims between the Company and ChubeWorkx. Specifically, the Company and ChubeWorkx agreed to voluntarily dismiss (i) the action in the United States Federal Court, District of New Jersey brought by the Company against ChubeWorkx for outstanding amounts due to the Company under a promissory note and (ii) the action in The High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division Commercial Court, Royal Courts of Justice, United Kingdom brought by ChubeWorkx against the Company arising from an exclusive licensing agreement between ChubeWorkx and the Company (“Licensing Agreement”).

In return for the Company regaining the full rights to sell breath technology products, under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, ChubeWorkx is entitled to receive a royalty of 5% of the Company’s gross revenues (the “ChubeWorkx Royalty”) until ChubeWorkx has earned an aggregate $5,000,000, after which point ChubeWorkx will no longer be entitled to receive any royalties from the Company and the Company shall have no further obligation to ChubeWorkx. The Settlement Agreement further allows the Company to retain 50% of the ChubeWorkx Royalty until the full $549,609 cash component of the monies owed by ChubeWorkx to the Company as described above has been satisfied. The Company recorded royalty expense of $13,816 and $31,284 for the three months ended March 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively, which are included in sales and marketing expenses on the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss. As of March 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, the Company owed ChubeWorkx royalties of $6,908 and $4,906, respectively, which is included in trade and other payables within the condensed consolidated balance sheet.

Other terms of the Settlement Agreement included: 1) as security for all earned but unpaid royalties, the pledge by the Company to ChubeWorkx of all Company assets, worthy to satisfy its obligations, including all inventory and receivables, with the exception of (i) distribution contracts of the Company or any of its affiliates, (ii) customer lists, (iii) manufacturing processes (including all intellectual property required to use those processes and exploit products made thereby), and (iv) all equipment required to perform said manufacturing processes and other equipment; 2) as security of the settlement sum which remains unpaid by the Company, the pledge to ChubeWorkx of all Company (i) distribution contracts of the Company or any of its affiliates, (ii) customer lists, (iii) manufacturing processes (including all intellectual property required to use those processes and exploit products made thereby), and (iv) all equipment required to perform said manufacturing processes and other equipment; and 3) the grant of voting proxy by ChubeWorkx to the Company which allows the Company to vote ChubeWorkx’s shares for corporate formalities under certain conditions. 

The pledged assets are only at risk in the event that the Company cannot satisfy any outstanding royalty payment obligations subject to various cure periods and/or through a restructuring and/or liquidation under the United States Bankruptcy laws of the Company in favor of payment of said obligation.

Litigation

Watts v. Gormally, et al., No. 2:18-15992 (D.N.J.) and Chan v. Gormally, et al., No. 2:19-cv-4989 (D.N.J.)

On November 9, 2018, Cale Watts (“Watts Plaintiff”) filed a verified shareholder derivative complaint alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and waste of corporate assets based on alleged material weaknesses in controls, management, and documentation (the “Watts Action”). On January 14, 2019, the parties reached an agreement in principle to settle the Watts Action that included corporate reforms and a payment of attorneys’ fees of $200,000. The parties finalized a Stipulation of Settlement on March 4, 2019. On February 7, 2019, Tiffany Chan, Jasmine Henderson, and Don Danesh (“Chan Plaintiffs”) filed a verified shareholder derivative complaint alleging violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 14a-9, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and waste of corporate assets based on the same circumstances as the Watts Action (the “Chan Action”). The Chan Action further alleged that the Company should not have settled the Watts Action because the Watts Action plaintiffs lacked standing and the settlement would cause irreparable harm to the Company and its shareholders. On March 22, 2019, the Watts Plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary approval of the proposed settlement, approving the proposed form and method of providing notice of the settlement, scheduling a hearing for final approval of the settlement (“Watts Motion for Preliminary Approval”). On April 1, 2019, the Chan Plaintiffs filed an Opposition to the Motion for Preliminary Approval and a Motion to Intervene and Stay Proceedings (“Motion to Intervene and Stay”). Subsequently, the Watts Plaintiff, Chan Plaintiffs, and Defendants reached an agreement in principle to settle the Watts and Chan Actions that included corporate reforms and a payment of attorneys’ fees of $325,000. On October 2, 2019, the Watts Plaintiff filed an Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of the Settlement (the “Omnibus Motion for Preliminary Approval”). The Omnibus Motion for Preliminary Approval was granted on January 8, 2020. Plaintiffs filed their motion for final approval of the proposed settlement on May 7, 2020. The return date for Motion for Final Approval is June 1, 2020.

With respect to the Watts, Chan and another previous matter which has since been settled, the Company maintains D&O liability insurance coverage, with a company retention of $500,000. The D&O liability insurance coverage provides insurance coverage to both the Company and its directors and officers for covered defense and indemnification. During the year ended December 31, 2018, the Company recorded a cumulative charge of $500,000, representing the insurance carrier retention requirement. The insurance carrier has provided notice that it has reserved certain rights, and through the date of the filing of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, the Company may incur additional costs related to these matters, the amounts of which are not able to be determined at this time.

NovoTek Therapeutics Inc. and NovoTek Pharmaceuticals Limited v. Akers Biosciences, Inc.

On June 21, 2019, the Company received a complaint, filed by Novotek Therapeutics Inc., and Novotek Pharmaceuticals Limited (collectively, “Novotek”), Beijing-based entities, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleging, among other things, breach of contract. Novotek is seeking, among other things, damages in the amount of $1,551,562, plus interest, disbursements and attorneys’ fees. The Company vigorously disputes the allegations in the complaint and has retained counsel to defend it. On September 16, 2019, the Company filed a partial motion to dismiss the complaint, which was fully submitted as of November 4, 2019. The Company is not yet able to determine the amount of the Company’s exposure, if any.

Litigation, continued

Neelima Varma v. Akers Biosciences, Inc. and St. David’s Healthcare Partnership, L.P., LLP CAUSE NO: D-1-GN-19-004262

On July 25, 2019, the Company was notified that on July 23, 2019, a complaint was filed by Neelima Varma, against the Company and St. David’s Healthcare Partnership, L.P., LLP (“St. David’s”), in the district court of Travis County, Texas, alleging, among other things, negligence, gross negligence and strict product liability, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty and fraudulent misrepresentation and omission, with respect to a medical device which the Company had sold through one its distributors to St. David’s. Ms. Varma is seeking aggregate monetary relief from the Company and St. David’s in excess of $1,000,000. On September 20, 2019, the Company filed the original answer to plaintiff’s original petition and on October 1, 2019, the Company received from plaintiff their first interrogatories and request for production of documents. The Company carries product liability insurance. The insurance carrier has provided notice that it has reserved certain rights. The Company and its insurance carrier will contest this complaint vigorously. The Company believes that its product liability insurance coverage will be adequate to cover the potential exposure for this matter.

Douglas Carrara v. Akers Biosciences, Inc., John Does 1-10, and XYZ Corp. 1-10, Docket No. ESX-L-5272-19 (N.J. Super. Ct., Essex County):

Douglas Carrara, a former executive, has sued the Company over the termination of his employment. The executive seeks contractual severance pay in the amount of $200,000. The executive asserts that the termination was without cause within the meaning of his employment agreement, which provides for severance of one year’s salary in the event of termination without cause. The executive also seeks indemnification for approximately $10,000 in attorneys’ fees that he contends he incurred related to company business. On August 29, 2019, the Company filed an answer to the second amended complaint and the parties have exchanged documents and interrogatories as part of the discovery process. A discovery cutoff has been set for June 24, 2020. With regard to both claims, the executive seeks to recover his attorneys’ fees under a fee-shifting provision in his employment agreement. With respect to the matter, the Company believes that the ultimate liability from the resolution of this matter will not be material to the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

The Company intends to establish a rigorous defense of all claims. All legal fees were expensed as and when incurred.