Company: PFSA
Filing Date: 2025-08-25
Form Type: 424B3
Source: 0001213900-25-080387
Chunk: 119

Company: Profusa, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-08-25
Form: 424B3
Chunk 119
---
uciary duty; •any action asserting a claim against Profusa arising under the DGCL, its amended and restated certificate of incorporation or its amended and restated bylaws; and •any action asserting a claim against Profusa that is governed by the internal -affairsdoctrine or otherwise related to Profusa’s internal affairs. To prevent having to litigate claims in multiple jurisdictions and the threat of inconsistent or contrary rulings by different courts, among other considerations, Profusa’s amended and restated certificate of incorporation further provides that the federal district courts of the United States of America will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. This provision would not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act. Furthermore, Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all such Securities Act actions. Accordingly, both state and federal courts have jurisdiction to entertain such claims. While the Delaware courts have determined that such choice of forum provisions are facially valid, a stockholder may nevertheless seek to bring a claim in a venue other than those designated in the exclusive forum provisions. In such instance, Profusa would expect to vigorously assert the validity and enforceability of the exclusive forum provisions of its amended and restated certificate of incorporation. This may require significant additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions and there can be no assurance that the provisions will be enforced by a court in those other jurisdictions. 70 These exclusive forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with Profusa or its directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits against Profusa and its directors, officers and other employees. If a court were to find either exclusive -forumprovision in its amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, Profusa may incur further significant additional costs associated with resolving the dispute in other jurisdictions, all of which could harm its business. We may be subject to securities litigation, which is expensive and could divert management attention. The market price of our securities may be volatile and, in the past, companies that have experienced volatility in the market price of their securities have been subject to securities class action litigation. We may be the target of this type of litigation in the future. Securities litigation against us could result in substantial costs and divert management’s attention from other business concerns, which could seriously harm its business. Profusa does not intend to