What changed in this filing

/stocks — the workspaceLOADING

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

2026-08-19 compared with 2026-05-20 · 117 added, 51 removed, 58 unchanged (74% of the section changed)

1 unchanged sentence

Vivakor, Inc.

Al-Dali International General Trading and Contracting Company, et al ., Case No.

International General Trading and Contracting Company, et al., Case No.

JDFC603 251052410 (Kuwait Court of First Instance, Mar.

25, 2025)—Plaintiff, Vivakor, Inc., has asserted claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and injunctive relief against Defendants Al-Dali Global Trading and Contracting Company, Al-Sayer Construction General Trading and Contracting Company, and Kuwait Oil Company relating to the placement and operation of oilfield remediation processing equipment in Kuwait.

Plaintiff seeks total damages in excess of $15,000,000.00.

2025)— Plaintiff, Vivakor, Inc., has asserted claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and injunctive relief against

Defendants Al-Dali Global Trading and Contracting Company, Al-Sayer Construction General Trading and Contracting Company, and Kuwait

Oil Company relating to the placement and operation of oilfield remediation processing equipment in Kuwait.

Plaintiff seeks total damages

in excess of $15,000,000.00.

Vivakor, Inc., et al., v.

Unique Funding Solutions, LLC et al.

Unique Funding Solutions, LLC et al., Cause No.

DC-25-05926 (95th Dist.

Ct., Dallas Cty., Tex.—April 15, 2025)—Plaintiffs allege fraud, fraudulent liens, fraudulent inducement, conversion, money had and received, and seek a declaratory judgment relating to claims of Defendants for payment on a receivables factoring contract claiming damages in excess of $5 million.

The case is in initial pleadings.

Ct., Dallas Cty., Tex.—April 15, 2025)— Plaintiffs

allege fraud, fraudulent liens, fraudulent inducement, conversion, money had and received, and seek a declaratory judgment relating to

claims of Defendants for payment on a receivables factoring contract claiming damages in excess of $5 million.

The case is in initial

Plaintiffs intend to vigorously pursue the case.

1 unchanged sentence

AE Systems, LLC v.

VivaVentures Remediation Corporation , ( In re AE Systems, LLC) Ch.

Remediation Corporation, (In re AE Systems, LLC) Ch.

25-30186, Adv.

1 unchanged sentence

Tex., filed Aug.

8, 2025)—Debtor claims breach of contract and damages of $156,356.00 for goods provided and services performed at Defendant’s site in Harris County, Texas.

2025)— Debtor claims breach of contract and damages of $156,356.00 for goods provided and services performed at Defendant’s

site in Harris County, Texas.

Defendant has contested the amount due on grounds that Debtor materially breached with their contract.

5 unchanged sentences

Ct., Blaine Cty., Okla.—Feb.

14, 2025)—Plaintiff Echo Contracting asserted claims of breach of contract, quantum meriut, and foreclosure of mechanics and materialmen’s lien filed in Blaine County against properties of Defendants.

14, 2025)— Plaintiff Echo

Contracting asserted claims of breach of contract, quantum meriut, and foreclosure of mechanics and materialmen’s lien

filed in Blaine County against properties of Defendants.

Defendants CPE Gathering Midcon, LLC and Vivakor, Inc.

settled such claims pursuant to confidential agreement on March 28, 2025.

Co-Defendant Validus Energy II Midcon, LLC prevailed upon a motion to consolidate Case No.

settled such claims pursuant

to confidential agreement on March 28, 2025.

Co-Defendant Validus Energy II Midcon, LLC prevailed upon a motion to consolidate Case

CJ-2025-7 with the proceeding involving YellowJacket Services, LLC.

Defendant and Cross-Plaintiff Validus Energy II Midcon, LLC has levied claims for breach of contract, declaratory judgment, indemnification, contribution, and unjust enrichment against Defendants CPE Gathering Midcon, LLC and Vivakor, Inc.

and seeks damages of more than $500,000.00, plus attorneys fees and costs of court.

Defendants CPE Gathering Midcon, LLC, Vivakor, Inc., and Validus Energy II Midcon, LLC prevailed on motions against consolidated Plaintiff YellowJacket Services, LLC to remove liens against property of Validus Energy II Midcon, LLC and to compel arbitration against Defendants CPE Gathering Midcon, LLC and Vivakor, Inc.

Claims of Plaintiff YellowJacket Services, LLC against Defendants CPE Gathering Midcon, LLC and Vivakor, Inc.

Defendant and Cross-Plaintiff Validus Energy II

Midcon, LLC has levied claims for breach of contract, declaratory judgment, indemnification, contribution, and unjust enrichment against Defendants

CPE Gathering Midcon, LLC and Vivakor, Inc.

and seeks damages of more than $500,000.00, plus attorney’s fees and costs of court.

Defendants CPE Gathering Midcon, LLC, Vivakor, Inc., and Validus Energy II Midcon, LLC prevailed on motions against consolidated Plaintiff

YellowJacket Services, LLC to remove liens against property of Validus Energy II Midcon, LLC and to compel arbitration against Defendants

CPE Gathering Midcon, LLC and Vivakor, Inc.

Claims of Plaintiff YellowJacket Services, LLC against Defendants CPE Gathering Midcon, LLC

and Vivakor, Inc.

are stayed pending arbitration, while claims of Defendant and Cross-Plaintiff Validus Energy II Midcon, LLC are proceeding.

Kush Properties, LLC d/b/a Motel 6 – Floresville d/b/a Eagle Ford Inn, et al., v.

Cross-Plaintiff Validus Energy II Midcon, LLC subsequently filed a motion to appoint a receiver pending resolution of the underlying

case, which was ultimately granted.

The Company is vigorously defending and pursuing a settlement of the matter.

Kush Properties, LLC d/b/a

Motel 6 – Floresville d/b/a Eagle Ford Inn, et al., v.

Endeavor Crude, LLC, et al Case No.

CVW2505285 (81st Dist.

Wilson Cty., Tex.—May 8, 2025)—Plaintiff alleges breach of contract, unjust enrichment, suit on sworn account, fraud, fraudulent inducement, and negligent misrepresentation relating to lodging charges for truck drivers, seeking $256,070.00, plus attorneys fees, costs of court, and pre- and post-judgment interest.

Wilson Cty., Tex.—May 8, 2025)— Plaintiff alleges breach of contract, unjust enrichment, suit on sworn account, fraud,

fraudulent inducement, and negligent misrepresentation relating to lodging charges for truck drivers, seeking $256,070.00, plus attorneys

fees, costs of court, and pre- and post-judgment interest.

Defendants’ are vigorously contesting the claims.

The parties are in the process of settling this litigation.

Misty Kitson, Blaine County Assessor v.

The parties are in

the process of settling this litigation.

Misty Kitson, Blaine County

Meridian Equipment Leasing, LLC, Case No.

1 unchanged sentence

of Tax Review, Okla.—Aug.

2, 2023)—Plaintiff governmental taxing authority seeks appeal of Defendant’s fair cash value valuation of certain personal property in Blaine County, Oklahoma.

Plaintiff seeks a property tax valuation of $27,463,542.00 in contrast to Defendant’s valuation of $4,000,000.00, and overdue taxes in excess of $1,126,005.22, plus statutory interest, penalties, and fees.

2, 2023)— Plaintiff

governmental taxing authority seeks appeal of Defendant’s fair cash value valuation of certain personal property in Blaine County,

Plaintiff seeks a property tax valuation of $27,463,542.00 in contrast to Defendant’s valuation of $4,000,000.00, and

overdue taxes in excess of $1,126,005.22, plus statutory interest, penalties, and fees.

The case is in discovery.

MV Purchasing, LLC et al., v.

MV Purchasing, LLC et al.,

Endeavor Crude, LLC, et al., v.

Unique Funding Solutions, LLC, et al.

Unique Funding Solutions, LLC, et al., No.

3:25-cv-01112-K (U.S.

Tex.)—Plaintiffs Endeavor Crude, LLC, et al ., assert claims for fraud, fraudulent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and declaratory relief for more than $1.5 million relating to an accounts receivable factoring contract.

Cross-plaintiffs MV Purchasing, LLC and Echo Canyon Energy Products Supply, LLC assert claims for declaratory relief.

Cross-plaintiffs and Defendants Unique Funding Solutions, LLC, Rocket Capital NY LLC, and Regain Group LLC assert claims of breach of contract against Defendants Endeavor Crude, LLC, et al ., seek declaratory relief against Cross-plaintiffs MV Purchasing, LLC and Echo Canyon Energy Products Supply, LLC, and collectively seek damages in excess of $3,000,000.

Tex.)— Plaintiffs

Endeavor Crude, LLC, et al., assert claims for fraud, fraudulent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and declaratory relief for

more than $1.5 million relating to an accounts receivable factoring contract.

Cross-plaintiffs MV Purchasing, LLC and Echo Canyon Energy

Products Supply, LLC assert claims for declaratory relief.

Cross-plaintiffs and Defendants Unique Funding Solutions, LLC, Rocket Capital

NY LLC, and Regain Group LLC assert claims of breach of contract against Defendants Endeavor Crude, LLC, et al., seek declaratory

relief against Cross-plaintiffs MV Purchasing, LLC and Echo Canyon Energy Products Supply, LLC, and collectively seek damages in excess

of $3,000,000.

Defendants Endeavor Crude, LLC, et al., are vigorously defending the case.

Novella Strmiska v.

Endeavor Crude, LLC, et al ., Case No.

Crude, LLC, et al., Case No.

25-01-00013-CVK (81st Dist.

Ct., Karnes Cty., Tex.—Jan.

27, 2025)—Plaintiff obtained a default judgment for breach of contract, trespass to land, trespass to chattels, negligence, and unjust enrichment, for $256,717.00 USD, plus post-judgment interest, attorneys fees, and costs of court.

Texas Premier Resources, LLC et al., v.

27, 2025)— Plaintiff obtained

a default judgment for breach of contract, trespass to land, trespass to chattels, negligence, and unjust enrichment, for $256,717.00

USD, plus post-judgment interest, attorneys fees, and costs of court.

Texas Premier Resources,

LLC et al., v.

Vivakor, Inc., et al., Cause No.

1 unchanged sentence

Ct., Harris Cty., Tex.—Jun.

16, 2025)—Plaintiffs have asserted claims for breach of contract, fraud, fraudulent misrepresentation, and alter ego, and seek damages in excess of $5,000,000.00, plus attorneys fees and costs of court, and injunctive relief to compel the purchase of Plaintiff’s business and property.

Defendants are vigorously contesting the case.

Viva Wealth Fund I, LLC v.

16, 2025)— Plaintiffs

have asserted claims for breach of contract, fraud, fraudulent misrepresentation, and alter ego, and seek damages in excess of $5,000,000.00,

plus attorneys fees and costs of court, and injunctive relief to compel the purchase of Plaintiff’s business and property.

are vigorously contesting the case.

Viva Wealth Fund I, LLC

Vivakor, Inc., et al., Case No.

1 unchanged sentence

Ct., Orange Cty., Cal.—Mar.

21, 2025)—Plaintiff alleges fraud, conversion, unfair competition, tortious interference in contractual relations, interference with prospective economic advantage, money had and received, breach of contract, constructive fraudulent transfer, among other counts, and seeks declaratory relief and damages in excess of $50 million relating to equipment purchased by Plaintiff and leased to Defendant VivaVentures Remediation Corporation.

21, 2025)— Plaintiff

alleges fraud, conversion, unfair competition, tortious interference in contractual relations, interference with prospective economic

advantage, money had and received, breach of contract, constructive fraudulent transfer, among other counts, and seeks declaratory relief

and damages in excess of $50 million relating to equipment purchased by Plaintiff and leased to Defendant VivaVentures Remediation Corporation.

Defendants intend to vigorously contest the case.

VivaVentures Remediation Corp.

VivaVentures Remediation

Viva Wealth Fund I, LLC, Case No.

250907053 (Dist.

Ct., Salt Lake City, Utah—August 27, 2025)—Plaintiff, a Vivakor subsidiary, alleges breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, quantum meruit, and unjust enrichment against Defendants, seeking damages exceeding $5.3 million, plus attorney’s fees and costs of court, relating to a lease for RPC equipment.

Ct., Salt Lake City, Utah—August 27, 2025)— Plaintiff,

a Vivakor subsidiary, alleges breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, quantum meruit, and unjust enrichment

against Defendants, seeking damages exceeding $5.3 million, plus attorney’s fees and costs of court, relating to a lease for RPC

Defendant has not yet responded.

Tyler Nelson v.

Vivakor, Inc., et al ., Case No.

Inc., et al., Case No.

30-2025-01503021-CU-OE-CJC (Sup.

Orange Cty., Cal.—Aug.

11, 2025)—Plaintiff, former Chief Financial Officer of the Company, its subsidiary, and certain unnamed defendants for claims of breach of contract, breach of implied covenant in contract, and claims related to failure to pay wages, alleging total damages of $2,154,158.47, plus interest, attorneys fees, and costs of court.

On November 5, 2025, the Company entered into a Settlement Agreement (the “Nelson Settlement Agreement”) with Tyler Nelson (“Nelson”), in order to settle claims made by Nelson that he was not paid for work performed for the Company, which claims formed the basis of a lawsuit entitled Tyler Nelson v.

11, 2025)— Plaintiff, former Chief

Financial Officer of the Company, its subsidiary, and certain unnamed defendants for claims of breach of contract, breach of implied

covenant in contract, and claims related to failure to pay wages, alleging total damages of $2,154,158.47, plus interest, attorneys fees,

and costs of court.

On November 5, 2025, the Company entered into a Settlement Agreement (the “Nelson Settlement Agreement”)

with Tyler Nelson (“Nelson”), in order to settle claims made by Nelson that he was not paid for work performed for the Company,

which claims formed the basis of a lawsuit entitled Tyler Nelson v.

Vivakor, Inc., et al., Case No.

2 unchanged sentences

11, 2025) (the “Nelson Lawsuit”).

Under the terms of the Nelson Settlement Agreement the Company was obligated to pay Nelson as full satisfaction of all alleged wage losses and alleged non-wage damages:

(i) $250,000 on or before November 5, 2026, (ii) $100,000 within 30 days from the date of the Nelson Settlement Agreement, (iii) $100,000 within 60 days from the date of the Nelson Settlement Agreement, and (iv) $1,550,000 within 90 days from the date of the Nelson Settlement Agreement.

Under the terms of the Nelson Settlement Agreement

the Company was obligated to pay Nelson as full satisfaction of all alleged wage losses and alleged non-wage damages:

(i) $250,000 on

or before November 5, 2026, (ii) $100,000 within 30 days from the date of the Nelson Settlement Agreement, (iii) $100,000 within

60 days from the date of the Nelson Settlement Agreement, and (iv) $1,550,000 within 90 days from the date of the Nelson Settlement Agreement.

The Company paid Nelson the initial $250,000 payment.

Nelson was formerly the Company’s Chief Financial Officer and a Director.

As a result of the Nelson Settlement Agreement, all dates and deadlines related to the Nelson Lawsuit have been taken off calendar by the Court, which will retain jurisdiction of the Nelson Lawsuit through the final payment of the Nelson Settlement Agreement consideration.

As a result of the Nelson Settlement Agreement, all dates and deadlines related to the Nelson Lawsuit have been taken off calendar by

the Court, which will retain jurisdiction of the Nelson Lawsuit through the final payment of the Nelson Settlement Agreement consideration.

The Company made the first three payments under the Nelson Settlement Agreement but did not make the final $1,550,000 payment.

As a result, the Plaintiff entered the stipulated judgment against the Company and is attempting to collect the remaining amount owed from the Company, its subsidiaries and certain of its executive officers.

Vivakor, Inc., et al.

the Plaintiff entered the stipulated judgment against the Company and is attempting to collect the remaining amount owed from the Company,

its subsidiaries and certain of its executive officers.

Vivakor, Inc.,

et al., Case No.

2023CUB014131 (Sup.

Ventura Cty., Cal.—Sept.

18, 2023)—Plaintiff asserts claims for breach of contract for Defendant’s failure to pay Plaintiff for financial technology services.

Ventura Cty., Cal.)— Plaintiff asserts claims for breach of contract for Defendant’s

failure to pay Plaintiff for financial technology services.

Plaintiff obtained a default judgment.

Defendant has filed a motion to set aside the default judgment, which is pending before the court.

Herminio Adriano, et al v.

Defendant has filed a motion to set

aside the default judgment, which is pending before the court.

Plaintiff subsequently filed a motion to domesticate its judgment in Texas

and appoint a receiver in the following action:

Vivakor, Inc., Cause No.

2023CUBC014131 (Super.

Ventura Cnty., Cal.),

domesticated in the 333rd Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, SRAX, Inc.

Vivakor, Inc., Cause No.

is currently stayed by mutual agreement of the parties.

The parties reached a tentative settlement at a mediation held on August 3,

2026 and are in the process of formalizing the settlement documents.

Herminio Adriano, et al

Vivakor, Inc.

et al, Case No 8:26-cv-00485-DOC (US District Court Central District of California Southern Division)—Plaintiff asserts claims for Securities violations related to Vivakor’s role in fundraising for the construction of certain assets that were to be constructed and leased back to Vivakor.

et al, Case No 8:26-cv-00485-DOC (US District Court Central District of California Southern Division)— Plaintiff

asserts claims for Securities violations related to Vivakor’s role in fundraising for the construction of certain assets that were

to be constructed and leased back to Vivakor.

Vivakor is vigorously defending the case.

From time to time, we may become involved in various legal actions that arise in the normal course of business.

We intend to defend vigorously against any future claims and litigation.

We are not currently involved in any material disputes and do not have any material litigation matters pending.

In the ordinary course of business,

we are from time to time involved in various pending or threatened legal actions.

The litigation process is inherently uncertain, and

it is possible that the resolution of such matters might have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and/or results of

However, in the opinion of our management, other than as set forth herein, matters currently pending or threatened against

us are not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operation.

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.

What changed 10-Q

Item 1. Legal Proceedings