NOTE 13 - CLAIMS

The following parties have filed claims against Hammer Fiber Optics Investments Ltd and are not secured:

Calvi Electric v. Hammer Fiber Optics Inv, Ltd.	$	9209.69
15 Corporate Place, LLC v. Open Data	$	1,621,529
Horizon Blue Cross v. Hammer Fiber Optics Inv, Ltd.	$	17,308.58
Cross River Fiber v. Hammer Fiber Optics Inv, Ltd.	$	273,220

The matter of 15 Corporate Place, LLC v. Open Data Centers, LLC is currently set to move to a trial on May, 16, 2022. The claim is secured only by the security deposit provided under the lease agreement. Claims are only against the subsidiary, which does not currently have any assets, and there is no other security under the lease. Open Data Centers, LLC operated a single data center facility in Piscataway, NJ, on the premise of the plaintiff. The plaintiff is in possession of the premises and a security deposit made by the founders of the LLC in 2012. ODC, as a defendant, has made several attempts to resolve the matter and has offered the landlord assistance in leasing the space it once occupied to a new tenant. These offers have not been accepted by the Plaintiff.

Cross River Fiber has advanced its claim against Hammer Fiber Optics Investments, Ltd. Cross River Fiber has expanded its claim to include Hammer Fiber Optics Holdings Corp, 1stPoint Communications, LLC, Endstream Communications, LLC, Open Data Centers, LLC, Manhattan Carrier Company, LLC, Erik Levitt personally, Local Telecommunications Services - FL, LLC, Local Telecommunications Services - NY, LLC, American Network Inc and Hammer Wireless Corporation. There never was, nor has there ever been, a contract between any of these entities or Mr. Levitt personally and Cross River Fiber, nor is there any security under the agreement between Cross River Fiber and Hammer Fiber Optics Investments, Ltd. Cross River Fiber, LLC prepared a motion to dismiss Hammer Fiber Optics Investments Ltd's response to its discovery request and Hammer Fiber Optics Investments Ltd. intends to modify its discovery request to include any additional information requested by Plaintiff. The claims in this matter are similar to those made by Zayo Group and Crown Castle Fiber, which were both settled.