XML 34 R23.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.24.1.1.u2
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
 12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
 
Compute North Bankruptcy
 
On September 22, 2022, Compute North Holdings, Inc. (currently d/b/a Mining Project Wind Down Holdings, Inc.) and certain of its affiliates (collectively, “Compute North”) filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Compute North provided operating services to the Company and hosted its mining rigs at multiple facilities. The Company delivered miners to Compute North, which then installed the mining rigs at those facilities, operated and maintained the mining rigs, and provided energy to keep the miners operating. During the course of the chapter 11 cases,
Compute North sold substantially all of their assets in a series of 363 sale transactions, including Compute North’s ownership interests in non-debtor entities that own or partially own facilities that house the Company’s miners.

On November 23, 2022, the Company and certain of its affiliates timely filed proofs of claim asserting various claims against Compute North, including: (i) claims arising under hosting agreements between the Company and Compute North LLC; (ii) claims arising under that certain Senior Promissory Note, dated as of July 1, 2022, by and between the Company, as Lender, and Compute North LLC, as Borrower; (iii) claims arising from the breach of a letter of intent between us and Compute North LLC; and (iv) claims for daily lost revenue, profits and other damages against Compute North

On February 9, 2023, the Bankruptcy Court approved a settlement stipulation between the Company and Compute North, pursuant to which the proofs of claim filed by the Company and certain of its affiliates were resolved, and the Company received a single allowed unsecured claim against Compute North LLC in the amount of $40.0 million and its Preferred Equity Interests in Compute North Holdings, Inc. in the amount of 39,597 shares of Series C Preferred Stock was confirmed. In exchange, the Company agreed to vote in favor of Compute North’s chapter 11 plan.

On February 16, 2023, the Bankruptcy Court confirmed Compute North’s chapter 11 plan (the “Plan”), pursuant to which Compute North will liquidate its remaining assets and distribute proceeds arising therefrom in accordance with the waterfall set forth in the Plan. In its disclosure statement filed on December 19, 2022, the Compute North Debtors projected that holders of allowed general unsecured claims could recover anywhere between 8% to 65% on their claims, while holders of preferred equity interests are expected to recover nothing on their interests. The Plan became effective on March 31, 2023. At this time, the Company cannot predict the quantum of its potential recovery on account of its allowed general unsecured claim and preferred equity interests or the timing of when it would receive any distributions under the Plan on account of its claims and interests.

Derivative Complaints
 
On February 18, 2022, a shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, against current and former members of the Company’s board of directors (the “Board”) and senior management. The complaint is based on allegations substantially similar to the allegations in the December 2021 putative class action complaint, related to the Company’s disclosure of an SEC investigation the Company previously made on November 15, 2021. On March 4, 2022, the Company was served the complaint. On April 4, 2022, the defendants moved to dismiss the complaint.

On May 5, 2022, a second shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, against current and former members of the Company’s Board and senior management. The second shareholder derivative complaint is based on allegations substantially similar to the allegations in the February 18, 2022 derivative complaint. On May 11, 2022, the defendants moved to dismiss the second shareholder derivative complaint.

On June 1, 2022, the Court entered an order consolidating the two derivative actions. A June 13, 2022 scheduling order provided for plaintiffs to file a consolidated complaint and for renewed motions to dismiss the consolidated shareholder derivative complaint. On November 22, 2022, before a consolidated complaint was due, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed both actions without prejudice. On November 23, 2022, both actions were closed.

On June 22, 2023, a shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit for Broward County, Florida, against current members of the Company’s Board and senior management, alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment based on allegations substantially similar to the allegations in the March 30, 2023 putative class action complaint.

On July 8, 2023, a second shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, against current and former members of the Company’s Board and senior management, alleging claims under Sections 14(a), 10(b), and 21D of the Securities Exchange Act of 1943 (the “Exchange Act”), and for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and waste of corporate assets, based on allegations substantially similar to the allegations in the March 30, 2023 putative class action complaint.

On July 12, 2023, a third shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, against current and former members of the Company’s Board and senior management, alleging claims under Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and for breach of fiduciary duty, based on allegations substantially similar to the allegations in the March 30, 2023 putative class action complaint.

On July 13, 2023, a fourth shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit for Broward County, Florida, against current members of the Company’s Board and senior management,
alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and waste of corporate assets, based on allegations substantially similar to the allegations in the March 30, 2023 putative class action complaint.

On August 14, 2023, the two derivative actions pending in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada were consolidated (the “Nevada Derivative Action”). On October 16, 2023, the parties to the derivative actions pending in the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit for Broward County, Florida filed an agreed order to stay both actions pending completion of the Nevada Derivative Action.

Putative Class Action Complaint

On March 30, 2023, a putative class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, against the Company and present and former senior management, alleging claims under Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act arising out of the Company’s announcement of accounting restatements on February 28, 2023. The defendants’ time to respond has been extended until after the appointment of a lead plaintiff. To date, no lead plaintiff has been appointed.

Information Subpoena
 
On October 6, 2020, the Company entered into a series of agreements with multiple parties to design and build a data center for up to 100-megawatts in Hardin, Montana. In conjunction therewith, the Company filed a Current Report on Form 8-K on October 13, 2020. Such Current Report of Form 8-K discloses that, pursuant to a Data Facility Services Agreement, the Company issued 6,000,000 shares of restricted common stock, in transactions exempt from registration under Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933(the “Securities Act”). During the quarter ended September 30, 2021, the Company and certain of its executives received a subpoena to produce documents and communications concerning the Hardin, Montana data center facility described in the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 13, 2020. The Company received an additional subpoena from the SEC on April 10, 2023, relating to, among other things, transactions with related parties. The Company understands that the SEC may be investigating whether or not there may have been any violations of the federal securities law. The Company is cooperating with the SEC.

Ho v. Marathon
 
On January 14, 2021, Plaintiff Michael Ho (“Plaintiff” or “Ho”) filed a Civil Complaint for Damages and Restitution (the “Complaint”) against the Company. The Complaint alleges six causes of action against the Company:

1)    Breach of Written Contract;

2)    Breach of Implied Contract;

3)    Quasi-Contract;

4)    Services Rendered;

5)    Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Relations; and

6)    Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Relations, which is the one plead against “all Defendants” and is most likely to involve later named defendants.

The claims arise from the same set of facts where Ho alleges that the Company profited from commercially-sensitive information he shared with the Company and then it refused to compensate him for his role in securing the acquisition of a supplier of energy for the Company. On February 22, 2021, the Company responded to the Complaint with a general denial and the assertion of applicable affirmative defenses. Then, on February 25, 2021, the Company removed the action to the United States District Court in the Central District of California, where the action remains pending. The Company filed a motion for summary judgment/adjudication of all causes of action. On February 11, 2022, the Court granted the motion and dismissed Ho’s 2nd, 5th and 6th causes of action. Discovery is substantially closed. The Court held a pre-trial conference on February 24, 2022, where it vacated the March 3, 2022 trial date and ordered the parties to meet and confer on a new trial date. The Court discussed the various theories of damages maintained by the parties. In its ruling on the summary judgment motion and at the pre-trial conference on February 24, 2022, the Court noted that a jury is more likely to accept $0.2 million as an appropriate damages amount if liability is found, as opposed to the various theories espoused by Ho that result in multi-million-dollar recoveries. Due to outstanding issues of fact and law, it is impossible to predict the outcome at this time; however, after consulting legal counsel, the Company is confident that it will prevail in this litigation, since it did not have a contract with Mr. Ho and he did not disclose any commercially-sensitive information under any mutual
nondisclosure agreement that was used to structure any joint venture with energy providers. The trial is likely to commence on or around April 8, 2024.