Envirotech Vehicles, Inc. - Quarter Report: 2022 June (Form 10-Q)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a filer, a smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule of the Exchange Act.

 

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.  ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

 15,000,673.

 

 

 

 

 

2

		For the Three Months Ended								For the Six Months Ended
		June 30,				June 30,				June 30,				June 30,
		2022				2021				2022				2021
Sales		$	2,087,700			$	188,266			$	3,196,200			$	659,059
Cost of sales			1,260,480				147,932				1,952,042				461,366
Gross profit			827,220				40,334				1,244,158				197,693
Operating expenses
General and administrative			1,646,136				836,246				4,522,984				1,422,149
Consulting			99,518				95,108				170,318				105,358
Research and development			87,412				—				87,412				—
Total operating expenses, net			1,833,066				931,354				4,780,714				1,527,507
Loss from operations			(1,005,846	)			(891,020	)			(3,536,556	)			(1,329,814	)
Other income (expense):
Interest income, net			(4,516	)			(4,837	)			7,756				(5,759	)
Other income, net			98				2,778				(8,861	)			2,284
Total other income (expense)			(4,418	)			(2,059	)			(1,105	)			(3,475	)
Loss before income taxes			(1,010,264	)			(893,079	)			(3,537,661	)			(1,333,289	)
Income tax expense			—				—				—				(218,300	)
Net loss		$	(1,010,264	)		$	(893,079	)		$	(3,537,661	)		$	(1,551,589	)
Net loss per share to common stockholders:
Basic and diluted		$	(0.07	)		$	(0.06	)		$	(0.24	)		$	(0.19	)
Weighted shares used in the computation of net loss per share:
Basic and diluted			14,996,631				13,921,580				14,961,938				8,137,852

 

4

 

 

5

1.	Organization and Operations

2.	Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

 

8

Diluted net loss per share is calculated by dividing the Company’s net loss applicable to common stockholders by the diluted weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. The diluted weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding is the basic weighted number of shares of common stock adjusted for any potentially dilutive debt or equity securities. As of June 30, 2022, 604,711 shares of the Company’s common stock were subject to issuance upon the exercise of stock options then outstanding and 1,402,417 shares of the Company’s common stock were subject to issuance upon the exercise of warrants then outstanding.

During the six months ended June 30, 2022, the Company’s bank required compensating balances for a subsidiary’s potential lease exposure and for the Company’s credit card limit, resulting in restricted cash of $60,091.

87,412

six-months

paid-in

non-cash

— Property and equipment are stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation and amortization. The Company provides fordepreciation using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which range from

to

, except leasehold improvements, which are being amortized over the life of the lease term. Property and equipment qualify for capitalization if the purchase price exceeds $

. Major repairs and replacements, which extend the useful lives of equipment, are capitalized and depreciated over the estimated useful lives of the property. All other maintenance and repairs are expensed as incurred.

—

—Management has considered all recent accounting pronouncements issued, but not effective, and does notbelieve that they will have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements.

zero-emission

 

,

, EVTDS had subscription restricted cash of $

on its balance sheet as a result of offering a restricted subscription agreement to the stockholders of Envirotech Electric Vehicles, Inc., a Canadian entity (“EVT Canada”), to have the right to purchase two shares of EVTDS for every one common share of EVT Canada they owned. The purpose of this subscription agreement was to raise the necessary capital to close the Merger and to provide working capital for EVTDS so that it could pay off certain liabilities and pay for ongoing expenses through the closing of the Merger. A corresponding liability account was also recorded as of December 

,

. The total amount raised just prior to the Merger closing was $

. At the closing of the Merger, EVTDS satisfied its obligation to deliver $

 million in cash to ADOMANI, Inc. and repaid the majority of the items discussed above. This number has decreased to

in both categories as of December 

,

.

EVTDS entered into an exclusive distribution agreement as of October 4, 2017 to become the sole USA distributor of EVT Canada. This agreement grants EVTDS the exclusive right in the United States to promote sales, including the right to use trademarks, trade names, service marks and logos and to obtain orders based on sales targets for orders. The agreement also provides that EVT Canada. may not independently appoint additional distributors. The Company obtained this agreement in the

The following table presents the estimated allocation of the purchase price of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed for the acquisition by EVTDS of ADOMANI, Inc. via the reverse acquisition:

This allocation is based on management’s estimated fair value of the ADOMANI Inc. assets and liabilities at March 15, 2021. ADOMANI, Inc. assets were derived from a total value of $53,509,522, based on 5,635,347 shares of common stock outstanding on March 15, 2021 and the closing price that day of $0.4749 per share. The fair value of certain of the stock options assumed by EVTDS in the Merger of $2,228,757 (see Note 7) was added to reach an adjusted value of $55,738,379. From that amount, total assets acquired of $5,570,628 (including a reduction in the carrying value of finished goods inventory of $26,400 to reflect fair value) were deducted, and total acquired liabilities of $1,607,916 were added in order to arrive at the $51,775,667 of Goodwill recorded, none of which will be deductible for future income tax purposes. The Company incurred approximately $415,472 in transaction costs related to the Merger, which were expensed.

The unaudited consolidated statement of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2021 included $151,793 of revenue and a loss from operations of $(144,015) contributed by ADOMANI, Inc. and its subsidiaries, excluding EVTDS. Since the closing of the Merger on March 15, 2021, primarily due to the fact that EVTDS brought no employees or sales people to the merged entity, and that sales and operating activities have been conducted on a company-wide basis, not on the basis of either EVTDS alone or the ADOMANI entities alone, other than nominal expense items related to EVTDS leases assumed in the Merger (see Notes 9 and 11), all accounting subsequent to the closing of the Merger has been and will continue to be done on a consolidated basis. Therefore, the Company cannot segregate the operating results of operations between the formerly separate entities in the current periods.

pro forma financial information presents the combined results of operations for the Company and gives effect to the Merger discussed above as if it had occurred on January 1, 2021. The pro forma financial information is presented for illustrative purposes only and is not necessarily indicative of the results of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2021 that would have been realized if the Merger had occurred on January 1, 2021, nor does it purport to project the results of the merged entity in future periods. The pro forma financial information does not give effect to any anticipated integration costs related to the merged

319,00091,8001,826,623

As a result of the Merger closing (see Note 3), as of March 15, 2021, the Company had outstanding warrants to purchase an aggregate of 534,067 shares of common stock, 102,817 of which were exercisable. The warrants were previously issued by ADOMANI, Inc. and assumed in the
Merger. In connection with the second closing of the Financing discussed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form filed with the SEC on April 26, 2022, the Company issued additional warrants to purchase up to 958,333 shares of its common stock, all of which were exercisable as of June 30, 2022.

The Warrants issued as part of the Purchase Agreement related to the Financing contain a call provision whereby the Company, after the anniversary of the issuance date, and if the volume weighted average price of the common stock for such date exceeds four times the exercise price of the warrants for 20 consecutive trading days, may call the Warrants that have not previously been exercised, and the Warrant holders have ten trading days within which to exercise before the Warrants may be cancelled.

On January 31, 2022, the Company’s Compensation Committee granted Christian S. Rodich, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, options to purchase 2,763 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $3.62 per share and options to purchase 1,111 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $9.00 per share. The options vest ratably at 1/60th per month over five years and expire on the tenth anniversary of grant

15202250,0002.40120,00015202225,0009.00152022

As of June 30, 2022, outstanding options had intrinsic value of $1,069,171.

The Company has entered into lease agreements with SRI (the “SRI Equipment Leases”), pursuant to which the Company leases equipment used in connection with the operation of its business. The SRI Equipment Leases provide for the leasing of two vehicles that commenced on January 1, 2020 and the combined rent under such leases is $3,880 per month, and a separate SRI Equipment Lease provides for a trailer lease that commenced on December 1, 2019, under which the rent is $3,891 per month. The total monthly payment obligations of the Company under the SRI Equipment Leases is $7,771.

The Company has entered into a commercial lease agreement (the “ABCI Office Lease”) with Alpha Bravo Charlie, Inc. (“ABCI”) that commenced on April 1, 2020, for the lease of office space in Porterville, California. The monthly rent for this facility is $2,800. See Notes 9 and 11. Phillip W. Oldridge, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, and a member of its board of directors, is a director of ABCI.

In connection with the closing of the Merger in March, 2021, the Company purchased two electric trucks from Mr. Oldridge for an aggregate purchase price of $128,000. The purchase price for such vehicles was paid in full to Mr. Oldridge during the three months ended June 30, 2021. Prior to the closing of the Merger, Mr. Oldridge had permitted the two vehicles to be used by the Company as customer demonstration vehicles for no cost. The purchase price of $64,000 per vehicle was less than the purchase price of $83,000 per vehicle that ADOMANI, Inc. had paid to EVTDS for similar vehicles in prior transactions. One of the vehicles purchased by the Company was subsequently sold to a customer of the Company in March 2021 and the second truck remains in the Company’s inventory at June 30, 2022.

December 

,

, the Company entered into employment agreements with Phillip W. Oldridge (the “Oldridge Agreement”), its Chief Executive Officer, and with Susan M. Emry (the “Emry Agreement”), its Executive Vice President. According to the Oldridge Agreement, effective as of March 

,

, Mr. Oldridge will receive an annual base salary of $

, payable in semi-monthly installments consistent with the Company’s payroll practices. Mr. Oldridge will also receive participation in medical insurance, dental insurance, and the Company’s other benefit plans. Under the Oldridge Agreement, Mr. Oldridge will also receive an amount equal to

percent of the net income of the Company on an annual basis and will be eligible for a bonus at the sole discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”). The Oldridge Agreement also provides for an automobile monthly allowance of $

. Mr. Oldridge’s employment shall continue until terminated in accordance with the Oldridge Agreement. If Mr. Oldridge is terminated without cause or if he terminates his employment for good reason, Mr. Oldridge will be entitled to receive

(i) one-year

of base salary, (ii) reimbursement of reimbursable expenses in accordance with the Oldridge Agreement, (iii) any bonus that would have been payable within the

months following the date of termination, and (iv) the value of any accrued and unused paid time off as of the date of termination. According to the Emry Agreement, effective on January 

,

, Mrs. Emry will receive an annual base salary of $

and will be eligible for a bonus at the sole discretion of the Board. Mrs. Emry will also receive participation in medical insurance, dental insurance, and the Company’s other benefit plans. Mrs. Emry’s employment shall continue until terminated in accordance with the Emry Agreement. If Mrs. Emry is terminated without cause or if she terminates her employment for good reason, Mrs. Emry will be entitled to receive

(i) one-year

of base salary, (ii) reimbursement of reimbursable expenses in accordance with the Emry Agreement, and (iii) the value of any accrued and unused paid time off as of the date of termination.

Except as set forth below, we know of no material, existing or pending, legal proceedings against our Company, nor are we involved as a plaintiff in any material proceeding or pending litigation. There are no proceedings in which any of our directors, officers or affiliates, or any registered or beneficial stockholder, is an adverse party or has a material interest adverse to our interest.

S-1914285,

On or about July 18, 2021, GreenPower and GP Greenpower Industries Inc., (collectively “the GreenPower entities”) filed a counterclaim against David Oldridge, Phillip Oldridge, the Company and other companies in Supreme Court of British Columbia Action No. S207532. The counterclaim alleges that David Oldridge, Phillip Oldridge, the Company and other companies committed the tort of abuse of process by causing 42 Design Works Inc., to commence a lawsuit against the GreenPower entities. Additionally, GreenPower entities also advanced claims against David Oldridge, Phillip Oldridge, the Company and other companies for conspiracy. The pleadings in this lawsuit have not closed and we intend to vigorously defend the counterclaim

On February 3, 2020, the Company acquired substantially all the assets of Ebus in a foreclosure sale through a credit bid in the amount of $582,000, representing the amount then owed by Ebus to the Company evidenced by a secured promissory note. Following the Company’s successful credit bid at the foreclosure sale, Ebus’s obligations under the note were extinguished and the Company was entitled to take possession of substantially all of the assets of Ebus. While the Company was able to take possession of some of the assets, Ebus prevented the Company from taking possession of all of the assets purchased at the foreclosure sale. As a result, on April 13, 2020, the Company filed a complaint captioned ADOMANI, Inc. v. Ebus, Inc., et al., in the Superior Court of California for the County of Los Angeles, Case No. 20ST CV 14275, against Ebus and certain of its insiders and affiliates seeking to recover the remainder of the assets and related damages. On January 14, 2021, a cross-complaint was filed against the Company by Ebus, Inc. and Anders B. Eklov for Unjust Enrichment and Conversion of Domain Name, seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief. A settlement agreement was entered into on March 15, 2022.

In February 2017, ADOMANI, Inc. signed a lease for storage space in Stockton, California to serve as a location to store vehicles and other equipment utilized for marketing and trade-show purposes. The lease is on a basis and can be terminated by either party with notice. The total amount due monthly is $1,000.

In December 2019, ADOMANI, Inc. signed a lease for combined office space and warehouse location in Corona, California. The facility had been used to conduct research and development activity, stage materials, assemble and/or manufacture vehicles, perform inspections, test demo vehicles, and securely store vehicles, equipment, parts and finished goods vehicle inventories prior to November 2020 when ADOMANI, Inc. vacated its former corporate office space in Corona, California, and made such facility the new corporate office location in addition to its prior use. The lease was for a period of 36 months, commencing on January 1, 2020, and terminating on December 31, 2022. The base rent for the term of the lease was $495,720, with $265 due per month for fire sprinkler alarm monitoring and landscape maintenance. The base rent amount due monthly was $13,108 at commencement and would have escalate to $13,906 by its conclusion. However, the Company vacated the premises effective March 31. 2022, and the lease was taken over on April 1, 2022 by its sublease tenant, as discussed below.

Quantitative information regarding the Company’s leases is as follows:

 

zero-emission

10-Q,

10-Q

non-cash

We believe that the growth and future success of our business depend on various opportunities, challenges and other factors, including the following:

COVID-19

zero-emission

zero-emission-electric

 

18

zero-emission

zero-emission

zero-emission

all-electric

all-electric

zero-emission

zero-emission

zero-emission

zero-emission

Cost of sales includes those costs related to the development, manufacture, and distribution of our products. Specifically, we include in cost of sales each of the following: material costs (including commodity costs); freight costs; labor and other costs related to the development and manufacture of our products; and other associated costs. Cost of sales also includes costs related to the valuation of inventory due to impairment, obsolescence, or shrinkage.

Selling, general and administrative expenses include all corporate and administrative functions that support our company, including personnel-related expense and stock-based compensation costs; costs related to investor relations activities; warranty costs, including product recall and customer satisfaction program costs; consulting costs; marketing-related expenses; and other expenses that cannot be included in cost of sales.

These expenses are related to our consulting and research and development activity.

non-operating

 

19

We account for income taxes in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) ASC 740 “Income Taxes,” which requires the recognition of deferred income tax assets and liabilities for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statements carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. Under FASB ASC 740, the effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period the enactment occurs. A valuation allowance is provided for certain deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that we will not realize tax assets through future operations. Because we have incurred only losses to this point, no provision for income taxes has been made in 2022.

The following discussion compares operating data for the three and six months ended June 30, 2022 to the corresponding periods ended June 30, 2021:

Sales were $2,087,700 and $188,266 for the three months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021, respectively, and $3,196,200 and $659,059 for the six months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Sales for the three months ended June 30, 2022 consisted of three cargo vans sold to factory authorized representatives, one cargo van sold to a dealer and 11 cargo vans sold primarily to customers in New Jersey who utilized a voucher from the NJ Zip program, three cab and chassis trucks and three resale buses were also sold. Sales for the six months ended June 30, 2022 consisted of the sales in the second quarter plus 10 cargo vans sold to factory authorized representatives and two vans sold to the Newark Public Library in New Jersey who utilized a voucher from the NJ Zip program. Sales attributable to higher vehicle selling price were $317,150 and $192,736 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2022, respectively.

Cost of sales were $1,260,480 and $147,932 for the three months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021, respectively, and $1,952,042 and $461,366 for the six months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Cost of sales for the three and six months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021 consisted of the costs related to the sale of the vehicles sold as described above and for the costs of providing maintenance and inspection services.

non-cash

non-cash

non-cash

non-cash

non-cash

Consulting expenses were $99,518 and $95,108 for the three months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021, respectively, and $170,318 and $105,358 for the six months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The increase in the current year period was due primarily to payments to an Arkansas state relationship and incentive consulting firm that assisted the Company in securing the manufacturing facility in Osceola, Arkansas and to the cost of the ASC 805 valuation report related to the Merger.

 

20

Research and development expenses were $87,412 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2022 and no expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2021. The increase in the current year period was due to the development of a new product lines.

The following table summarizes our cash flows from operating, investing, and financing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021:

 

non-cash

non-cash

non-cash

We expect cash used in operating activities to fluctuate significantly in future periods as a result of a number of factors, some of which are outside of our control, including, among others: the success we achieve in generating revenue; the success we have in helping our customers obtain financing to subsidize their purchases of our products; our ability to efficiently develop our dealer and service network; the costs of batteries and other materials utilized to make our products; the extent to which we need to invest additional funds in research and development; and the amount of expenses we incur to satisfy future warranty claims.

Net cash provided by investing activities during the six months ended June 30, 2022 increased by $14,753,364 to $5,943,620, as compared to cash used in investing activities of $8,809,744 during the six months ended June 30, 2021. The increase in net cash provided by investing activities during the six months ended June 30, 2022 is primarily due to a decrease in investments in marketable securities of $9,996,091 and the increased sale of marketable securities of $8,000,000, partially offset by the absence in 2022 of the $3,373,332 cash acquired in merger in 2021.

pre-merger

 

21

As of June 30, 2022, we had cash and cash equivalents of $4,270,421 and marketable securities of $2,002,472, a combined total of $6,272,894 and working capital of approximately $20.0 million. We believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund our operations during the next twelve months and beyond. However, we may not successfully execute our business plan, and if we do not, we may need additional capital to continue our operations and support the increased working capital requirements associated with the fulfillment of purchase orders.

Effective August 4, 2022, EVT secured a line of credit from Centennial Bank. Borrowings under the line of credit bears interest of 5.9% annually. There is no maturity date for the line, but Centennial Bank may at any time, in its sole discretion and without cause, demand the Company immediately repay any and all outstanding obligations under the line of credit in whole or in part. The line is secured by the cash and cash equivalents maintained by the Company in its Centennial Bank accounts. Borrowings under the line may not exceed $1,000,000 of such cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities balances. There was no principal amount outstanding on June 30, 2022 and there is no current plan to borrow from it.

We do not have any contractual obligations for ongoing capital expenditures at this time. We do, however, purchase equipment necessary to conduct our operations on an as needed basis and will begin increasing those expenditures as the Company transfers assembly and corporate functions to the newly announced Osceola Arkansas facility.

10-Q

Our condensed consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with AAP. The preparation of our condensed consolidated financial statements and related disclosures requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, costs and expenses, and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities in our financial statements. We base our estimates on historical experience, known trends and events and various other factors that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. We evaluate our estimates and assumptions on an ongoing basis. Our actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

We define our critical accounting policies as those accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America that require us to make subjective estimates and judgments about matters that are uncertain and are likely to have a material impact on our financial condition and results of operations as well as the specific manner in which we apply those principles.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, or JOBS Act, and may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including reduced disclosure about our executive compensation arrangements, exemption from the requirements to hold non-binding advisory votes on executive compensation and golden parachute payments and exemption from the auditor attestation requirement in the assessment of our internal control over financial reporting. We may take advantage of these exemptions until the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of our initial public offering or until such earlier time that we are no longer an “emerging growth company.”

We are also a “smaller reporting company” as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company if either (i) the market value of our shares held by non-affiliates is less than $250 million or (ii) our annual revenue is less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and the market value of our shares held by non-affiliates is less than $700 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter. If we are a smaller reporting company at the time we cease to be an emerging growth company, we may continue to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are available to smaller reporting companies.

 

22

We are exposed to market risks in the ordinary course of our business. We do not currently face material market risks such as interest rate fluctuation risk and foreign currency exchange risk. Our cash and cash equivalents include cash in readily available checking and money market accounts. These investments are not dependent on interest rate fluctuations that may cause the principal amount of these investments to fluctuate, and we do not expect such fluctuation will have a material impact on our financial conditions. If we issue additional debt in the future, we will be subject to interest rate risk. The majority of our expenses are denominated in the U.S. dollar.

We may face risks associated with the costs of raw materials, primarily batteries, as we go into production. To the extent these and other risks materialize, they could have a material effect on our operating results or financial condition. We currently anticipate that our international selling, marketing and administrative costs related to foreign sales, if any, will be largely denominated in United States dollars, which may create foreign currency exchange risk exposure.

13a-15(e)

15d-15(e)

Due to the staff reductions and voluntary resignations, we experienced beginning in the fourth quarter of 2020 and continuing through the date of this filing, we increased our reliance on outsourced accounting help during such periods and for all periods thereafter through the date of this filing. As a result of such changes, we have been unable to maintain the levels of segregation of duties during such periods at the levels of prior periods, and such changes to our disclosure controls and procedures have significantly affected our internal control over financial reporting during the three months ended June 30, 2022. We have yet to fully resolve such deficiencies as of the date of this filing. We have engaged, and continue to seek additional, experienced accounting professionals with relevant expertise to provide additional accounting services intended to supplement our efforts and mitigate the negative effects of such recent changes to our disclosure controls and procedures.

In designing and evaluating our disclosure controls and procedures, management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, cannot provide absolute assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. In addition, the design of disclosure controls and procedures must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and that management is required to apply judgment in evaluating the benefits of possible controls and procedures relative to their costs. Similarly, an evaluation of controls cannot provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, have been detected.

 

23

Except as set forth below, we know of no material, existing or pending, legal proceedings against our Company, nor are we involved as a plaintiff in any material proceeding or pending litigation. There are no proceedings in which any of our directors, officers or affiliates, or any registered or beneficial stockholder, is an adverse party or has a material interest adverse to our interest.

S-1914285,

On or about July 18, 2021, GreenPower and GP Greenpower Industries Inc., (collectively “the GreenPower entities”) filed a counterclaim against David Oldridge, Phillip Oldridge, the Company and other companies in Supreme Court of British Columbia Action No. S207532. The counterclaim alleges that David Oldridge, Phillip Oldridge, the Company and other companies committed the tort of abuse of process by causing 42 Design Works Inc., to commence a lawsuit against the GreenPower entities. Additionally, GreenPower entities also advanced claims against David Oldridge, Phillip Oldridge, the Company and other companies for conspiracy. The pleadings in this lawsuit have not closed and we intend to vigorously defend the counterclaim.

On May 10, 2022, the Company, together with other defendants, filed a Motion to Dismiss and/or Stay the lawsuit pending the outcome of the Canadian litigation. Hearing on this Motion set for October 7, 2022. We believe that the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the action.

On August 23, 2018, a purported class action lawsuit captioned M.D. Ariful Mollik v. ADOMANI, Inc. et al., Case No. RIC 1817493, was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside against us, certain of our executive officers, Edward R. Monfort, the former Chief Technology Officer and a former director of ADOMANI, Inc., and the two underwriters of our offering of common stock under Regulation A in June 2017. This complaint alleges that documents related to our offering of common stock under Regulation A in June 2017 contained materially false and misleading statements and that all defendants violated Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act, and that we and the individual defendants violated Section 15 of the Securities Act, in connection therewith. The plaintiff seeks on behalf of himself and all class members: (i) certification of a class under California substantive law and procedure; (ii) compensatory damages and interest in an amount to be proven at trial; (iii) reasonable costs and expenses incurred in this action, including counsel fees and expert fees; (iv) awarding of rescission or recessionary damages; and (v) equitable relief at the discretion of the court. Plaintiff’s counsel has subsequently filed a first amended complaint, a second amended complaint, a third amended complaint, and a fourth amended complaint. Plaintiff Mollik was replaced by putative class representatives Alan K. Brooks and Electric Drivetrains, LLC. Alan K. Brooks was subsequently dropped as a putative class representative. On October 27, 2020, we answered the fourth amended complaint, generally denying the allegations and asserting affirmative defenses. On November 5, 2019, Network 1 and Boustead Securities (together the “Underwriters”) filed a cross-complaint against the Company seeking indemnification under the terms of the underwriting agreement the Company and the Underwriters entered for the Company’s initial public offering (the “Underwriting Agreement”). On December 10, 2019, the Company filed its answer to the Underwriters’ cross-complaint, generally denying the allegations and asserting affirmative defenses. Also on this date, the Company filed a cross-complaint against the Underwriters seeking indemnification under the terms of the Underwriting Agreement. On January 14, 2020, Mr. Monfort filed a cross- complaint against the Underwriters seeking indemnification under the terms of the Underwriting Agreement. On January 15, 2020, Mr. Monfort filed a cross-complaint against the Company seeking indemnification under the terms of the Company’s Amended and Restated Bylaws and Section 145 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. On February 18, 2020, we filed an answer to Mr. Monfort’s cross-complaint, generally denying the allegations and asserting affirmative defenses.

 

24

On March 2, 2021, Electric Drivetrains filed its motion for class certification. On March 17, 2021, the court held a case management conference. At the case management conference, the court set a tentative schedule for class discovery and briefing on the motion for class certification. On June 2, 2021, Electric Drivetrains and ADOMANI filed a stipulation extending the deadline for class certification discovery proposing the following deadlines: close of class discovery on September 28, 2021; defendants’ opposition to the motion for class certification due on October 28, 2021; plaintiff’s reply in support of its motion due on November 29, 2021; a case management conference on December 13, 2021 to set a date for hearing on the merits of the motion for class certification. Electric Drivetrains settled its claims against Mr. Monfort. The Underwriters have reached settlements with Electric Drivetrains on the primary claims in this matter. All defendants are maintaining their cross claims against each other. On July 13, 2021, Electric Drivetrains’ counsel moved to be relieved as counsel and on August 23, 2021, the court granted this motion. Also on August 23, 2021, the Clerk of Court issued an order to show cause why the complaint should not be stricken and matter dismissed for failure to retain new counsel to Electric Drivetrains. On October 28, 2021, Electric Drivetrains filed a substitution of attorney, substituting J. Ryan Gustafson of Good Gustafson Aumais LLP as its new counsel. On December 10, 2021, the Court vacated the order to show cause. On January 20, 2022, Mr. Monfort dismissed his cross-complaint for indemnification against the Company. Electric Drivetrains has, on several occasions, forwarded its proposed Fifth Amended Complaint, in which it: i) drops certain class allegations; ii) adds certain state law claims; iii) and drops certain factual allegations but leaves the remaining claims against defendants intact. The Company is considering whether to stipulate the most recent proposed Fifth Amended Complaint. A status conference is scheduled for September, 2022. We believe that the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend the action.

On January 20, 2022, Mr. Monfort dismissed his cross-complaint for indemnification against the Company in the Mollik action. On April 8, 2022, the Company and Boustead Securities, LLC (“Boustead”) settled their respective cross-claims against each other in both the Mollik action and Brooks action in exchange for the Company paying fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) in cash and 20,415 shares of common stock and mutual releases between parties. On August 5, 2022, the Santa Clara Superior Court approved this Settlement rendering it finally effective, with consideration being forthcoming. There are no longer any cross claims pending in the Mollik action.

On February 3, 2020, the Company acquired substantially all the assets of Ebus in a foreclosure sale through a credit bid in the amount of $582,000, representing the amount then owed by Ebus to the Company evidenced by a secured promissory note. Following the Company’s successful credit bid at the foreclosure sale, Ebus’s obligations under the note were extinguished and the Company was entitled to take possession of substantially all of the assets of Ebus. While the Company was able to take possession of some of the assets, Ebus prevented the Company from taking possession of all the assets purchased at the foreclosure sale. As a result, on April 13, 2020, the Company filed a complaint captioned ADOMANI, Inc. v. Ebus, Inc., et al., in the Superior Court of California for the County of Los Angeles, Case No. 20ST CV 14275, against Ebus and certain of its insiders and affiliates seeking to recover the remainder of the assets and related damages. On January 14, 2021, a cross-complaint was filed against the Company by Ebus, Inc. and Anders B. Eklov for Unjust Enrichment and Conversion of Domain Name, seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief. A settlement agreement was entered into on March 15, 2022.

 

25

10-K

In connection with the settlement of the Brooks Case, the Company issued 38,495 shares to Mr. Brooks for a total value of $197,500 on March 10, 2022. These securities were issued in reliance on the exemption under Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

None.

Not applicable.

None.

 

26

10-Q

 

 

 

 

27

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this Quarterly Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

 

 

 

28