LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
−Removed: Neither the Company nor its property is the subject of any current or pending legal proceedings, and no other such proceeding is known to be contemplated by any governmental authority.
−Removed: The Company is not aware of any other legal proceedings in which any director, officer or affiliate of the Company, any owner of record or beneficially of more than 5% of any class of the Company’s voting securities, or any associate of any such director, officer, affiliate or security holder of the Company, is a party adverse to the Company or any of its subsidiaries or has a material interest adverse to the Company or any of its subsidiaries.
+Added: than as described below, neither the Company nor its property is the subject of any current, pending, or threatened legal proceedings.
+Added: The Company is not aware of any other legal proceedings in which any director, officer or affiliate of the Company, any owner of record
+Added: or beneficially of more than 5% of any class of the Company’s voting securities, or any associate of any such director, officer,
+Added: affiliate or security holder of the Company, is a party adverse to the Company or any of its subsidiaries or has a material interest
+Added: adverse to the Company or any of its subsidiaries.
+Added: On or about June 14,
+Added: 2021, a lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the District of Idaho brought by a purported personal representative of the estate
+Added: of a minority shareholder of Placer Mining.
+Added: The named defendants include Placer Mining, certain of Placer Mining’s shareholders,
+Added: the Company, and certain of the Company’s shareholders.
+Added: The lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice on February 8, 2022 by Chief US
+Added: District Court Judge, David C.
+Added: On July 28, 2021, a lawsuit
+Added: was filed in the US District Court for the District of Idaho brought by Crescent Mining, LLC (“Crescent”).
+Added: The named defendants
+Added: include Placer Mining, Robert Hopper Jr., and the Company.
+Added: The lawsuit alleges that Placer Mining and Robert Hopper Jr.
+Added: intentionally
+Added: flooded the Crescent Mine during the period from 1991 and 1994, and that the Company is jointly and severally liable with the other defendants
+Added: for unspecified past and future costs associated with the presence of AMD in the Crescent Mine.
+Added: The plaintiff has requested unspecified
+Added: On September 20, 2021, the Company filed a motion to dismiss Crescent’s claims against it, contending that such claims
+Added: are facially deficient.
+Added: On March 2, 2022, Chief US District Court Judge, David C.
+Added: Nye granted in part and denied in part the Company’s
+Added: motion to dismiss.
+Added: The court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss Crescent’s Cost Recovery claim under CERCLA Section
+Added: 107(a), Declaratory Judgment, Tortious Interference, Trespass, Nuisance and Negligence claims.
+Added: These claims were dismissed without prejudice.
+Added: The court denied the motion to dismiss filed by Placer Mining Corp.
+Added: for Crescent’s trespass, nuisance and negligence claims.
+Added: Crescent seeks to amend its complaint, it must do so within 30 days of the court’s judgement on March 2, 2022.
+Added: The Company believes
+Added: Crescent Mining LLC’s lawsuit against Placer Mining Corp.
+Added: is without merit and intends to defend Placer Mining Corp.
+Added: pursuant to the Company’s indemnification of Placer Mining Corp in the Sale and Purchase agreement executed between the companies
+Added: for Bunker Hill Mine on December 15, 2021.
+Added: On October 26, 2021,
+Added: the Company asserted claims against Crescent in a separate lawsuit.
+Added: Bunker Hill Mining Corporation v.
+Added: Venzee Technologies Inc.
+Added: 2:21-cv-209-REP, filed in the same court on May 14, 2021.
+Added: The Company has subsequently executed a tolling agreement with Venzee
+Added: in exchange for dropping its lawsuit.
+Added: The Company originally filed this lawsuit on May 14, 2021 against other parties but has since filed
+Added: an amended complaint to include its claims against Crescent.
MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
−Removed: The enacted Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“the Act”) requires the operators of mines to include in each periodic report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission certain specified disclosures regarding the Company’s history of mine safety.
−Removed: The Company currently does not operate any mines and, as such, is not subject to disclosure requirements regarding mine safety that were imposed by the Act.
+Added: enacted Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“the Act”) requires the operators of mines to include
+Added: in each periodic report filed with the SEC certain specified disclosures regarding the Company’s history of mine safety.
+Added: currently does not operate any mines and, as such, is not subject to disclosure requirements regarding mine safety that were imposed
Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.