13 unchanged sentences
The Company has filed a denial to the claims and intends to vehemently defend itself against the allegations.
−Removed: Apache Corporation
−Removed: In December 2018, Apache Corporation (“ Apache ”) sued Camber, Sezar Energy, L.P., and Texokcan Energy Management Inc., in the 129th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas (Cause 2018-89515).
−Removed: Apache alleged causes of action for Breach of Contract, Money Had & Received and Conversion, relating to amounts Apache alleged it was owed under a joint operating agreement.
−Removed: Apache is seeking $656,908 in actual damages, exemplary damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, court costs, and other amounts to which it may be entitled.
−Removed: Camber filed a general denial to the claims and asserted the affirmative defense of failure to mitigate.
−Removed: On July 13, 2020, Apache filed a Second Amended Petition against Camber, Sezar, Texokcan, N&B Energy, LLC, and Richard N.
−Removed: Azar, II alleging Breach of Contract, Defaults under a Joint Operating Agreement, Money Had & Received and Conversion, relating to amounts Apache allegedly overpaid Sezar and Azar and Unjust Enrichment.
−Removed: On October 26, 2020, the Company entered into an agreement with Apache to obtain a release of all liability (both parties provided mutual releases) for $20,000, which was paid in October 2020, and the litigation against the Company was dismissed.
−Removed: On September 12, 2019, N&B Energy filed a petition in the District Court for the 285th Judicial District of Bexar County, Texas (Case #2019CI11816).
−Removed: Pursuant to the petition, N&B Energy raises claims against the Company for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, money had and received and disgorgement, in connection with $706,000 which it alleges it is owed under the July 2018 Asset Purchase Agreement between the Company and N&B Energy (the “ Sale A g reement ”), for true-ups and post-closing adjustments associated therewith.
−Removed: The petition sought amounts owed, pre- and post-judgment interest, and attorney’s fees.
−Removed: On October 21, 2020, the arbitrator issued an Interim Stage II Order granting an award that acknowledged the claims of both parties that resulted in an arbitration award in favor of N&B Energy of approximately $52,000, which was paid in December 2020.
−Removed: Litigation Following Short Report
−Removed: The Company was the target of a “short” report issued by Kerrisdale Capital in early October, 2021, and as a result of such short report there was an action commenced against the Company, James Doris and Frank Barker by or on behalf of certain shareholders of Camber in connection with losses alleged to have been suffered by the shareholders.
−Removed: The Company and Messrs.
−Removed: Doris and Barker have retained the firm of Baker Botts LLP to defend the action, and deny the allegations contained in the claim.
+Added: Shareholder-Related Litigation
+Added: The Company was the target of a “short” report issued by Kerrisdale Capital in early October, 2021, and as a result of such short report, on October 29, 2021, a Class Action Complaint (i.e.
+Added: C.A.No.4:21-cv-03574) was filed against the Company, its CEO and CFO by Ronald E.
+Added: Coggins, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v.
+Added: Camber Energy, Inc., et al .;
+Added: District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, pursuant to which the Plaintiffs are seeking to recover damages alleged to have been suffered by them as a result of the defendants’ violations of federal securities laws.
+Added: The defendants deny the allegations contained in the Class Action Complaint and have engaged Baker Botts L.L.P.
+Added: to defend the action.
+Added: On or about June 30, 2022, the Company was made aware of a Shareholder Derivative Complaint filed in the U.S.
+Added: District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division (Case No.
+Added: 4:22-cv-2167) against the Company, its current directors, and certain of its former directors (the “Houston Derivative Complaint” and, together with the Nevada Derivative Complaint, the “Derivative Complaints”).
+Added: The allegations contained in the Houston Derivative Complaint involve state-law claims for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment and a federal securities claim under Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
+Added: On January 20, 2023, the U.S.
+Added: District Court held that certain claims brought by the plaintiff relating to director actions and statements made in proxy statements prior to June 30, 2019, were time barred, but did not dismiss certain claims brought by plaintiff relating to director actions and statements made in proxy statements after June 30, 2019.
+Added: Pursuant to Article 6 of the Amended and Restated Bylaws, on February 15, 2023, the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) formed a Committee of the Board (the “Special Litigation Committee”) to investigate, analyze, and evaluate the remaining allegations in the Houston Derivative Complaint.
+Added: The Special Litigation Committee’s investigation and evaluation remains ongoing.
+Added: At this time, we are not able to predict the outcome of the Special Litigation Committee investigation or these claims.
+Added: The defendants deny the allegations contained in the Class Action Complaint and Houston Derivative Compliant and have engaged Baker Botts L.L.P.
+Added: to defend the actions.
+Added: On or about April 18, 2022, the Company was made aware of a Shareholder Derivative Complaint filed with the District Court in Clark County, Nevada (Case No.:
+Added: A-22-848486-B) against the Company and its directors, and on or about May 4, 2022 the Company was made aware of a second Shareholder Derivative Complaint filed with the District Court in Clark County, Nevada (Case No.
+Added: A-22-852069-B) against the Company and its directors.
+Added: On July 18, 2022, the shareholder plaintiff in Case No.
+Added: A-22-848486-B voluntarily dismissed his lawsuit, and on December 12, 2022 the shareholder plaintiff in Case No.
+Added: A-22-852069-B voluntarily dismissed his lawsuit.
MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
1 unchanged sentence
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.