3 unchanged sentences
In addition, USCF, as the general partner of UNL and the Related Public Funds may, from time to time, be involved in litigation arising out of its operations in the ordinary course of business.
−Removed: Except as described herein, neither UNL nor USCF is currently party to any material legal proceedings.
+Added: Except as described herein, USCF is not currently party to any material legal proceedings.
+Added: Optimum Strategies Action
+Added: On April 6, 2022, USO and USCF were named as defendants in an action filed by Optimum Strategies Fund I, LP, a purported investor in call option contracts on USO (the “Optimum Strategies Action”).
+Added: The action was in the U.S.
+Added: District Court for the District of Connecticut at Civil Action No.
+Added: 3:22-cv-00511.
+Added: The Optimum Strategies Action asserted claims under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “1934 Act”), Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act (“CUSA”).
+Added: It purported to challenge statements in registration statements that became effective in February 2020, March 2020, and on April 20, 2020, as well as public statements between February 2020 and May 2020, in connection with certain extraordinary market conditions and the attendant risks that caused the demand for oil to fall precipitously, including the COVID-19 global pandemic and the Saudi Arabia-Russia oil price war.
+Added: The complaint was seeking damages, interest, costs, attorney’s fees, and equitable relief.
+Added: On March 15, 2023, the court granted the USO defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint.
+Added: In its ruling, the court granted the USO defendants’ motion to dismiss, with prejudice, the plaintiff’s claims under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and a claim for control person liability under Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.
+Added: Having dismissed all claims over which the court had original jurisdiction, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s state law claim under CUSA and dismissed the claim without prejudice.
+Added: No notice of appeal was filed.
Settlement of SEC and CFTC Investigations
31 unchanged sentences
The Amended Lucas Class Complaint purports to have been brought by an investor in USO on behalf of a class of similarly-situated shareholders who purchased USO securities between February 25, 2020 and April 28, 2020 and pursuant to the challenged registration statements.
−Removed: Lucas Class Complaint seeks to certify a class and to award the class compensatory damages at an amount to be determined at trial as well as costs and attorney’s fees.
+Added: The Amended Lucas Class Complaint seeks to certify a class and to award the class compensatory damages at an amount to be determined at trial as well as costs and attorney’s fees.
The Amended Lucas Class Complaint named as defendants USCF, USO, John P.
62 unchanged sentences
USCF, USO, and the other defendants intend to vigorously contest the claims in In re United States Oil Fund, LP Derivative Litigation.
−Removed: Optimum Strategies Action
−Removed: On April 6, 2022, USO and USCF were named as defendants in an action filed by Optimum Strategies Fund I, LP, a purported investor in call option contracts on USO (the “Optimum Strategies Action”).
−Removed: The action was in the U.S.
−Removed: District Court for the District of Connecticut at Civil Action No.
−Removed: 3:22-cv-00511.
−Removed: The Optimum Strategies Action asserted claims under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “1934 Act”), Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act (“CUSA”).
−Removed: It purported to challenge statements in registration statements that became effective in February 2020, March 2020, and on April 20, 2020, as well as public statements between February 2020 and May 2020, in connection with certain extraordinary market conditions and the attendant risks that caused the demand for oil to fall precipitously, including the COVID-19 global pandemic and the Saudi Arabia-Russia oil price war.
−Removed: The complaint was seeking damages, interest, costs, attorney’s fees, and equitable relief.
−Removed: On March 15, 2023, the court granted the USO defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint.
−Removed: In its ruling, the court granted the USO defendants’ motion to dismiss, with prejudice, the plaintiff’s claims under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and a claim for control person liability under Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.
−Removed: Having dismissed all claims over which the court had original jurisdiction, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s state law claim under CUSA and dismissed the claim without prejudice.
−Removed: No notice of appeal was filed.
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.