Company: ZCARW
Filing Date: 2025-03-04
Form Type: S-1
Source: 0001213900-25-020176
Chunk: 17

Company: Zoomcar Holdings, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-03-04
Form: S-1
Chunk 17
---
 matters may change in the future, as new events and circumstances arise and the matters continue to develop. 3 On August 4, 2023, a former consultant to Zoomcar filed a complaint against Zoomcar in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint contains breach and anticipatory breach of contract claims arising from a letter agreement, effective as of May 2020, between Zoomcar and the former consultant, which engagement letter was terminated by Zoomcar in January 2022. The plaintiff alleged that the terms of the engagement letter entitled him to cash and warrants to purchase Zoomcar shares in relation to prior Zoomcar transactions and upon consummation of the proposed Business Combination. The complaint sought declaratory relief affirming the plaintiff’s alleged continuing right to receive compensation from Zoomcar under the engagement letter, together with attorneys’ fees, costs, and interest, as well as punitive damages. Zoomcar and former consultant executed a Settlement Agreement in February 2025, settling the disputes between them. In connection with this settlement, affiliates of the former consultant were issued, in the January/February Offering, shares of Common Stock, January/February Pre-Funded Warrants, January/February Series A Warrants and January/February Series B Warrants with an aggregate value of $1,482,000 (the “Former Consultant Settlement”). The action was terminated on February 19, 2025. On January 30, 2024, Zoomcar received a statement of arbitration claim (the “Claim”) before Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. (“JAMS”), with Aegis Capital Corp. (“Aegis”), Adam Stern, and the Robert J. Eide Pension Plan being the claimants therein. The Claim alleges breaches of certain agreements between (a) Aegis and Zoomcar, and (b) Adam Stern and the Robert J. Eide Pension Plan as warrant holders, on the one hand, and Zoomcar on the other; it seeks damages “preliminarily believed to be” at least $10,000,000 purportedly arising from the alleged breaches, though the Claim does not set forth any basis for that preliminary belief, additional amounts for attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as an order of rescission with respect to the issuance of certain allegedly wrongfully dilutive shares of Zoomcar stock issued in connection with the business combination between Zoomcar and Innovative International Acquisition Corp. or, alternatively, an order mandating a purportedly anti-dilutive issuance of additional shares of