Litigation

On April 24, 2018, EMA Financial, LLC (“EMA”), commenced an action against the Company, styled as EMA Financial, LLC, a New York limited liability company, Plaintiff, against nFUSZ, Inc., Defendant, United States District Court, Southern District of New York, case number 1:18-cv-03634-NRB. The complaint sets forth four causes of action and seeks money damages, injunctive relief, liquidated damages, and declaratory relief related to the Company’s refusal to agree to EMA’s interpretation of a cashless exercise provision in a common stock warrant we granted to EMA in December 2017. The Company interposed several counterclaims, including a claim for reformation of the underlying agreements to reflect the Company’s interpretation of the cashless exercise provision. Both parties moved for summary judgment. On March 16, 2020, the United States District Court entered a decision agreeing with the Company’s position, denying EMA’s motion for declaratory judgement on its interpretation of the cashless exercise formula, and stating, inter alia, that “the Agreements read in their entirety reveal that nFUSZ, Inc.’s position regarding the proper cashless exercise formula is the only sensible one and that the cashless exercise formula must be enforced accordingly.” The court went on to order that in light of this finding, the parties should submit a proposal for future proceedings. Accordingly, the Company has instructed its counsel to prosecute the Company’s claims for reimbursement of all of the costs it incurred in connection with this action, including all attorneys’ fees as well as all damages it incurred as a result of EMA’s conduct.

The Company is currently in a dispute with a former employee of its predecessor bBooth, Inc. who has interposed a breach of contract claim in which he alleges that he is entitled to approximately $300,000 in unpaid bonus compensation from 2015. The Company does not believe his claims have any merit as they are contradicted by documentary evidence, and barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and barred by a release executed by the former employee when the Company purchased all of his shares of stock more than 4 years ago in January 2016. The Company intends to seek dismissal of the former employee’s claims through arbitration.

On July 9, 2019, a purported class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California, styled SCOTT C. HARTMANN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. VERB TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, INC., and RORY J. CUTAIA, Defendant, Case Number 2:19-CV-05896. The complaint purports to be brought on behalf of a class of persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s Common Stock between January 3, 2018 and May 2, 2018, and alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, arising out of the January 3, 2018, announcement by the Company of its agreement with Oracle America, Inc. The complaint seeks unspecified costs and damages. The Company believes the complaint is without merit and the Company intends to vigorously defend the action.

On May 15, 2020, we executed a binding Memorandum of Understanding with the lead plaintiff in the Class Action lawsuit to settle that action and release the claims asserted therein.  The terms of the settlement are confidential pending submission to the court, and subject to several contingencies, including but not limited to court approval.  The Company has established an appropriate reserve to account for the settlement.

On September 27, 2019, a derivative action was filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California, styled Richard Moore, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. Verb Technology Company, Inc., and Rory J. Cutaia, James P. Geiskopf, and Jeff Clayborne, Defendants, Case Number 2:19-CV-08393-AB-SS. The derivative action also arises out of the January 3, 2018, announcement by the Company of its agreement with Oracle America, Inc. The derivative action alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and waste of corporate assets due to the costs associated with the defense of the above referenced class action complaint. The derivative complaint seeks a declaration that the individual defendants have breached their duties, unspecified damages, and certain purportedly remedial measures. The Company contends that the class action is without merit and as such, this derivative action, upon which it relies, is likewise without merit and the Company intends to vigorously defend this suit.

The Company knows of no other material pending legal proceedings to which the Company or any of its subsidiaries is a party or to which any of its assets or properties, or the assets or properties of any of its subsidiaries, are subject and, to the best of its knowledge, no adverse legal activity is anticipated or threatened. In addition, the Company does not know of any such proceedings contemplated by any governmental authorities.

The Company knows of no material proceedings in which any of its directors, officers, or affiliates, or any registered or beneficial stockholder 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.

The Company believes it has adequately reserved for all litigation within its financials.

Board of Directors

The Company has committed an aggregate of $450,000 in board fees to its five board members over the term of their appointment for services to be rendered. Board fees are accrued and paid monthly. The members will serve on the board until the annual meeting for the year in which their term expires or until their successors has been elected and qualified.

Total board fees expensed during the period ended March 31, 2020 was $105,000. As of March 31, 2020, total board fees to be recognized in future period amounted to $322,000 and will be recognized once the service has been rendered.

The recent outbreak of COVID-19 may have a significant negative impact on our business, sales, results of operations and financial condition.

The global outbreak of COVID-19 has led to severe disruptions in general economic activities, as businesses and federal, state, and local governments take increasingly broad actions to mitigate this public health crisis. We have experienced disruption to our business, both in terms of disruption of our operations and the adverse effect on overall economic conditions. These conditions will significantly negatively impact all aspects of our business. Our business is dependent on the continued health and productivity of our employees, including our software engineers, sales staff and corporate management team. Individually and collectively, the consequences of the COVID-19 outbreak could have a material adverse effect on our business, sales, results of operations and financial condition.

Additionally, our liquidity could be negatively impacted if these conditions continue for a significant period of time and we may be required to pursue additional sources of financing to obtain working capital, maintain appropriate inventory levels, and meet our financial obligations. Currently, capital and credit markets have been disrupted by the crisis and our ability to obtain any required financing is not guaranteed and largely dependent upon evolving market conditions and other factors. Depending on the continued impact of the crisis, further actions may be required to improve our cash position and capital structure.

The extent to which the COVID-19 outbreak ultimately impacts our business, sales, results of operations and financial condition will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including, but not limited to, the duration and spread of the outbreak, its severity, the actions to contain the virus or treat its impact, and how quickly and to what extent normal economic and operating conditions can resume. Even after the COVID-19 outbreak has subsided, we may continue to experience significant impacts to our business as a result of its global economic impact, including any economic downturn or recession that has occurred or may occur in the future.

Employment Agreements

On December 20, 2019, we entered into an Executive Employment Agreement with Mr. Cutaia (the “Employment Agreement”), which terminates and replaces his original employment agreement dated November 1, 2014, as subsequently amended by an amendment dated October 30, 2019. The Employment Agreement sets forth the terms and conditions of Mr. Cutaia’s employment. The Employment Agreement is for a four-year term, and can be extended for additional one-year periods. In addition to certain payments due to Mr. Cutaia upon termination of employment, the Employment Agreement contains customary non-competition, non-solicitation, and confidentiality provisions. Mr. Cutaia is entitled to an annual base salary of $430,000, which shall not be subject to reduction during the initial term, but will be subject to annual reviews and increases, if and as approved in the sole discretion of our Board, after it has received and reviewed advice from the Compensation Committee (who may or may not utilize the services of its outside compensation consultants, as it shall determine under the circumstances). In addition, Mr. Cutaia is eligible to receive performance-based cash and/or stock bonuses upon attainment of performance targets established by our Board in its sole discretion, after it has received and reviewed advice from the Compensation Committee (who may or may not utilize the services of its outside compensation consultants, as it shall determine under the circumstances). The Company shall make annual equity grants to Mr. Cutaia as determined by our Board in its sole discretion, after it has received and reviewed advice from the Compensation Committee (who may or may not utilize the services of its outside compensation consultants, as it shall determine under the circumstances). Finally, Mr. Cutaia is eligible for certain other benefits, such as health, vision, and dental insurance, life insurance, and 401(k) matching.

The Employment Agreement provides that Mr. Cutaia is entitled to the following severance package in the event he is “terminated without cause,” “terminated for good reason,” or “terminated upon permanent disability”: (i) monthly payments of $35,833 or such sum equal to his monthly base compensation at the time of the termination, whichever is higher, for a period of 36 months from the date of such termination and (ii) reimbursement for COBRA health insurance costs for 18 months from the date of such termination and, thereafter, reimbursement for health insurance costs for Mr. Cutaia and his family during the immediately subsequent 18-month period. In addition, all of Mr. Cutaia’s then-unvested RSAs or other awards will immediately vest, without restriction, and any unearned and unpaid bonus compensation, expense reimbursement, and all accrued vacation, personal, and sick days, and related items shall be deemed earned, vested, and paid immediately. For purposes of the Employment Agreement, “terminated without cause” means if Mr. Cutaia were to be terminated for any reason other than a discharge for cause or due to Mr. Cutaia’s death or permanent disability. For purposes of the Employment Agreement, “terminated for good reason” means the voluntary termination of the Employment Agreement by Mr. Cutaia if any of the following were to occur without his prior written consent, which consent cannot be unreasonably withheld considering our then-current financial condition, and, in each case, which continues uncured for 30 days following receipt by us of Mr. Cutaia’s written notice: (i) there is a material reduction by us in (A) Mr. Cutaia’s annual base salary then in effect or (B) the annual target bonus, as set forth in the Employment Agreement, or the maximum additional amount up to which Mr. Cutaia is eligible pursuant to the Employment Agreement; (ii) we reduce Mr. Cutaia’s job title and position such that Mr. Cutaia (A) is no longer our Chief Executive Officer; (B) is no longer our Chairman of the Board; or (C) is involuntarily removed from our Board; or (iii) Mr. Cutaia is required to relocate to an office location outside of Orange County, California, or outside of a 30-mile radius of Newport Beach, California. For purposes of the Employment Agreement, “terminated upon permanent disability” means if Mr. Cutaia were to be terminated because he is then unable to perform his duties due to a physical or mental condition for (i) a period of 120 consecutive days or (ii) an aggregate of 180 days in any 12-month period.

Litigation – Update former employee and Class Action

On April 24, 2018, EMA Financial, LLC (“EMA”) commenced an action against the Company, styled as EMA Financial, LLC, a New York limited liability company, Plaintiff, against nFUSZ, Inc., Defendant, United States District Court, Southern District of New York, case number 1:18-cv-03634-NRB. The complaint sets forth four causes of action and seeks money damages, injunctive relief, liquidated damages, and declaratory relief related to the Company’s refusal to agree to EMA’s interpretation of a cashless exercise provision in a common stock warrant we granted to EMA in December 2017. The Company interposed several counterclaims, including a claim for reformation of the underlying agreements to reflect the Company’s interpretation of the cashless exercise provision. Both parties moved for summary judgment. On March 16, 2020, the United States District Court entered a decision agreeing with the Company’s position, denying EMA’s motion for declaratory judgement on its interpretation of the cashless exercise formula, and stating, inter alia, that “the Agreements read in their entirety reveal that nFUSZ, Inc.’s position regarding the proper cashless exercise formula is the only sensible one and that the cashless exercise formula must be enforced accordingly.” The court went on to order that in light of this finding, the parties should submit a proposal for future proceedings. Accordingly, the Company has instructed its counsel to prosecute the Company’s claims for reimbursement of all of the costs it incurred in connection with this action, including all attorneys’ fees as well as all damages it incurred as a result of EMA’s conduct.

The Company is currently in a dispute with a former employee of its predecessor bBooth, Inc. who has interposed a breach of contract claim in which he alleges that he is entitled to approximately $300,000 in unpaid bonus compensation from 2015. The Company does not believe his claims have any merit as they are contradicted by documentary evidence, and barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and barred by a release executed by the former employee when the Company purchased all of his shares of stock more than 4 years ago in January 2016. The Company intends to seek dismissal of the former employee’s claims through arbitration.

On July 9, 2019, a purported class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California, styled SCOTT C. HARTMANN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. VERB TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, INC., and RORY J. CUTAIA, Defendant, Case Number 2:19-CV-05896. The complaint purports to be brought on behalf of a class of persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s Common Stock between January 3, 2018 and May 2, 2018, and alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, arising out of the January 3, 2018, announcement by the Company of its agreement with Oracle America, Inc. The complaint seeks unspecified costs and damages. The Company believes the complaint is without merit and the Company intends to vigorously defend the action.

On September 27, 2019, a derivative action was filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California, styled Richard Moore, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. Verb Technology Company, Inc., and Rory J. Cutaia, James P. Geiskopf, and Jeff Clayborne, Defendants, Case Number 2:19-CV-08393-AB-SS. The derivative action also arises out of the January 3, 2018, announcement by the Company of its agreement with Oracle America, Inc. The derivative action alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and waste of corporate assets due to the costs associated with the defense of the above referenced class action complaint. The derivative complaint seeks a declaration that the individual defendants have breached their duties, unspecified damages, and certain purportedly remedial measures. The Company contends that the class action is without merit and as such, this derivative action, upon which it relies, is likewise without merit and the Company intends to vigorously defend this suit.

The Company knows of no other material pending legal proceedings to which the Company or any of its subsidiaries is a party or to which any of its assets or properties, or the assets or properties of any of its subsidiaries, are subject and, to the best of its knowledge, no adverse legal activity is anticipated or threatened. In addition, the Company does not know of any such proceedings contemplated by any governmental authorities.

The Company knows of no material proceedings in which any of its directors, officers, or affiliates, or any registered or beneficial stockholder 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.

The Company believes it has adequately reserved for all litigation within its financials.

Board of Directors

The Company has committed an aggregate of $450,000 in board fees to its five board members over the term of their appointment for services to be rendered. Board fees are accrued and paid monthly. The members will serve on the board until the annual meeting for the year in which their term expires or until their successors has been elected and qualified.

Total board fees expensed in 2019 totaled $175,000. Total board fees paid in 2019 totaled $183,000. As of December 31, 2019, total board fees to be recognized in future period amounted to $450,000 and will be recognized once the service has been rendered.