Company: RVRC
Filing Date: 2025-08-13
Form Type: S-1/A
Source: 0001213900-25-075747
Chunk: 50

Company: Revium Rx.
Filing Date: 2025-08-13
Form: S-1/A
Chunk 50
---
laws provide that, to the fullest extent permitted by law, and unless we consent to the selection of an alternative forum, the State
or federal court in Nevada shall be the sole and exclusive forum for (a) any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of the
Company, (b) any action or proceeding asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director or officer of the Company
to the Company or the Company’s shareholders, (c) any action or proceeding asserting a claim against the Company arising pursuant
to any provision of the Nevada Revised Statutes or the Company’s amended and restated articles of incorporation or Second Amended
and Restated Bylaws (as either might be amended from time to time), or (d) any action or proceeding asserting a claim against the Company
governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This exclusive forum provision is not be applicable to any action brought under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended or The Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended

We believe the choice-of-forum
provision in our Second and Restated Articles of Incorporation provide for the orderly, efficient, and cost-effective resolution of Nevada-law
issues affecting us by designating courts located in the State of Nevada (our state of incorporation) as the exclusive forum for cases
involving such issues. However, this provision may limit a shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it believes
to be favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, employees, or agents, which may discourage such actions against us and
our directors, officers, employees, and agents. While there is no Nevada case law addressing the enforceability of this type of provision,
Nevada courts have on prior occasion found persuasive authority in Delaware case law in the absence of Nevada statutory or case law specifically
addressing an issue of corporate law. The Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware ruled in June 2013 that choice-of-forum provisions
of a type similar to those included in our Second Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation provide are not facially invalid under
corporate law and constitute valid and enforceable contractual forum selection clauses. However, if a court were to find the choice-of-forum
provision in our Second Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation provide inapplicable to, or unenforceable in respect of, one or
more of the specified types of actions or proceedings, we may incur