2 unchanged sentences
In addition, we may receive notifications alleging infringement of patent or other intellectual property rights.
−Removed: In November 2013, the Company’s subsidiary, Playtika, Ltd., sent an initial demand letter to Enigmatus s.r.o., a game developer in the Czech Republic, which owns various U.S.
−Removed: trademark registrations that resemble the Company’s Sloto-formative trademark names, demanding that it cease use of the trademark Slotopoly.
−Removed: In response, Enigmatus s.r.o.
−Removed: asserted that it was the owner of the Sloto-formative trademarks and denied that its game title infringed upon the Company’s trademarks.
−Removed: Enigmatus s.r.o.
−Removed: applied to register one of the Company’s trademarks in the United Kingdom and European Union, and the Company successfully opposed its applications.
−Removed: In December 2016, Enigmatus s.r.o., filed a trademark infringement lawsuit, Enigmatus, s.r.o.
−Removed: Playtika LTD and Caesars Interactive Entertainment, Inc., against Playtika, Ltd.
−Removed: and Caesars Interactive Entertainment LLC in the Federal Court of Canada asserting that the Company’s use of the Slotomania trademarks violates its proprietary and trademark rights.
−Removed: The plaintiff sought injunctive relief and monetary damages.
−Removed: Pleadings have been exchanged and documentary discovery completed.
−Removed: A hearing for summary trial was conducted between June 27-29, 2023.
−Removed: The Company has defended this case vigorously and will continue to do so.
−Removed: As the case is in preliminary stages, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, the litigation may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
On November 23, 2021, the Company, its directors and certain of its officers were named in a putative class action lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Bar-Asher v.
6 unchanged sentences
On November 30, 2022, the Company filed with the Court a motion to dismiss.
−Removed: As the case is in preliminary stages, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, the litigation may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
+Added: The Company’s motion to dismiss was granted with prejudice on March 18, 2024.
+Added: However, on April 15, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal.
+Added: The plaintiffs’ appeal has been briefed and is currently pending.
+Added: As the Company is awaiting a ruling on the appeals process, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, the litigation may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
The Company has defended this case vigorously and will continue to do so.
6 unchanged sentences
Playtika Holding Corp.
−Removed: As the case is in preliminary stages, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, the litigation may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
+Added: When the motion to dismiss in the class action case of Bar-Asher v.
+Added: Playtika Holding Corp.
+Added: was granted as discussed above, this action was administratively closed.
+Added: The Company does not expect this action to move forward until after the appeal of the class action case of Bar-Asher v.
+Added: Playtika Holding Corp.
+Added: has been decided.
+Added: As this stage, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, the litigation may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
The Company intends to vigorously defend this case.
4 unchanged sentences
On January 12, 2023, PGI filed its response to the Motion for Approval.
−Removed: On March 5, 2023, the applicant submitted his reply to PGI’s
+Added: On March 5, 2023, the applicant submitted his reply to PGI’s response.
A pre-trial hearing was held on May 4, 2023.
1 unchanged sentence
The first mediation meeting was held on August 16, 2023 and the second mediation meeting was held on January 7, 2024.
−Removed: The parties are actively working towards a settlement agreement with response to this matter and the expected range of loss is not material to the Company’s financial statements as a whole.
+Added: The parties agreed upon a settlement which was published for review by certain third parties The Office of the Attorney General filed its position on the settlement on behalf of certain professional authorities noting certain concerns regarding the proposed settlement.
+Added: A hearing on the settlement took place on December 15, 2024, during which the court provided feedback and requested clarification regarding the proposed settlement.
+Added: In response, the Company submitted a modified settlement on January 20, 2025.
+Added: An additional hearing took place on February 19, 2025, during which the Court provided additional feedback regarding the modified settlement.
+Added: The parties have been asked to consider making additional modifications at this time.
+Added: The expected range of loss is not material to the Company’s financial statements as a whole.
If a mediated resolution is not reached the Company will continue defending this case vigorously.
3 unchanged sentences
A hearing on the motions to dismiss was held on November 21, 2023.
−Removed: On January 18, 2024, the court denied Playtika Holding UK II Limited’s motion to dismiss in an oral ruling but reserved decision on the motion to dismiss the claims against the Company’s officers for a written opinion.
+Added: On January 18, 2024, the court denied Playtika Holding UK II Limited’s motion to dismiss in an oral ruling.
+Added: The court issued a written opinion on May 3, 2024 granting the motion to dismiss the claims against the Company’s officers.
As the case is in preliminary stages, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, the litigation may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
+Added: On June 7, 2024, the Company received a demand letter from counsel for Scott G.
+Added: Kormos, one of the plaintiffs in the Kormos v Playtika Holding UK II Limited, et al.
+Added: matter described above, pursuant to Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (“DGCL”), seeking disclosure of certain of the Company’s books and records, particularly relating to the share repurchase program the Company announced in May 2024.
+Added: The Company has responded to the demand, stating its belief that the demand letter fails to fully comply with the requirements of Section 220 of the DGCL.
+Added: However, in the interest of resolution and while preserving all rights, the Company has engaged in negotiations with Mr.
+Added: Kormos’ counsel regarding the production of materials in relation to the demand.
+Added: On December 12, 2024, the Company received a demand letter from counsel for Scott G.
+Added: Kormos, one of the plaintiffs in the Kormos v Playtika Holding UK II Limited, et al.
+Added: matter described above, pursuant to Section 220 of the DGCL, seeking disclosure of certain of the Company’s books and records, particularly relating to the pledge of the Company’s common stock
+Added: by Playtika Holding UK II Limited.
+Added: The Company has responded to the demand, stating its belief that the demand letter fails to fully comply with the requirements of Section 220 of the DGCL.
+Added: However, in the interest of resolution and while preserving all rights, the Company has engaged in negotiations with Mr.
+Added: Kormos’ counsel regarding the production of materials in relation to the demand.
On November 13, 2023, plaintiff Gina v.
2 unchanged sentences
After the Company removed the case to the U.S.
−Removed: District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case back to the Coffee County Circuit Court.
−Removed: The Company filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to compel arbitration and intends to oppose the plaintiff’s motion to remand.
+Added: District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case back to the Coffee County Circuit Court which the Company opposed.
+Added: The Company also filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to compel arbitration.
+Added: District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee issued an order to remand on September 26, 2024 and the Company filed a petition to appeal the order on October 7, 2024.
+Added: The Court granted the Company’s petition for permission to appeal on January 17, 2025, and the appeal has been briefed with oral arguments scheduled for February 25, 2025.
+Added: The other motions to dismiss and compel arbitration have been briefed and are currently pending.
As the case is in preliminary stages, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, the litigation may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
7 unchanged sentences
district court on September 28, 2023.
−Removed: On October 20, 2023, the plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case back to the Franklin County Circuit Court and pleadings have been exchanged on the motion to remand.
+Added: On October 20, 2023, the plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case back to the Franklin County Circuit Court which the Company opposed.
+Added: District Court for the Northern District of Alabama issued an order to remand on January 7, 2025, and the Company filed a petition to appeal the order on January 16, 2025.
As the case is in preliminary stages, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, the litigation may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
The Company intends to defend this case vigorously.
+Added: On August 22, 2024, plaintiff Dianne Fuqua filed a lawsuit against the Company and its subsidiary, Playtika Ltd., in the District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, alleging that the Company’s casino-themed social games are unlawful gambling under Kentucky law.
+Added: The lawsuit seeks to recover three times the amount paid by Kentucky residents to the Company from its games during the period from August 2019 through June 2023 plus interest, costs and any other relief plaintiff is entitled to.
+Added: The Company filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to compel arbitration on January 31, 2025.
+Added: As the case is in preliminary stages, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, the litigation may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
+Added: The Company intends to defend this case vigorously.
On February 27, 2023, the company received a deficit notice from the Ben Gurion Airport Customs House concerning the purchase of a private aircraft.
4 unchanged sentences
The Company paid the deficit notice under protest and filed a claim with the district court on December 12, 2023.
+Added: The Customs House submitted its statement of defense on April 17, 2024 and the Company submitted its response to the statement of defense on June 16.
+Added: A pre-trial meeting, which was scheduled with the court for November 14, 2024 was postponed with no new date currently set.
+Added: In the meantime, the parties have continued to engage in the discovery process and have also engaged in preliminary settlement discussions.
The Company intends to pursue this case vigorously.
−Removed: The Company received seven demands for arbitration in late 2022 and early 2023 alleging that its games constitute illegal gambling under applicable state law.
−Removed: These demands generally attempted to recover amounts spent by third parties on the Company’s games by relying on state gambling loss recovery statutes.
−Removed: All of these demands have either been dismissed or resolved, on an individual basis, at an immaterial value.
+Added: On June 1, 2024, the Company received pre-arbitration notices from a law firm purporting to represent 5,264 claimants who have played the Company’s games and intend to file arbitration demands alleging that the Company’s games are unlawful or that they otherwise have suffered harm for which recovery is available.
+Added: On July 26, 2024, the law firm filed arbitration demands on behalf of 4,549 claimants.
+Added: On September 13, 2024, the arbitrator requested that the Company waive certain dispute resolution provisions in its terms of service as a condition to its administering the arbitration.
+Added: The Company declined to waive such provisions and, as a result, the arbitration was closed on October 3, 2024.
+Added: On September 16, 2024, the Company received pre-arbitration notices from the same law firm purporting to represent an additional 2,560 claimants alleging the same claims as the other claimants.
+Added: As of the date hereof, the Company lacks adequate information to assess the nature or validity of these claims.
+Added: As such, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, these claims may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
+Added: The Company intends to defend these claims vigorously.
+Added: On October 17, 2024, the Company received pre-arbitration notices from a different set of affiliated law firms purporting to represent 798 claimants who have played the Company’s games and intend to file arbitration demands alleging that the Company’s games are unlawful and that the claimants made purchases in the Company’s games which were the result of unfair and deceptive practices that violate consumer protection laws.
+Added: On January 31, 2025, the affiliated law firms filed arbitration demands on behalf of approximately 1,500 claimants.
+Added: As these claims are in preliminary stages, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, they may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
+Added: The Company intends to defend these claims vigorously.
+Added: In December 2024, the Company provided to the Seller parties in the Youda Games acquisition the calculation of the earnout amount.
+Added: The Sellers have disputed the calculation of the earnout amount.
+Added: As this dispute is in the preliminary stages, the Company cannot estimate what impact, if any, it may have on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
+Added: The Company intends to defend its positions vigorously.
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.