Company: UP
Filing Date: 2025-05-05
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001819516-25-000028
Chunk: 170

Company: Wheels Up Experience Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-05-05
Form: 10-Q
Item: Item 8
Chunk 170
---
 State of New York in New York County (“NY State Court”) on August 23, 2023. We instituted the action to enforce our rights and remedies for wrongful termination by FE of that certain Fleet Guaranteed Revenue Program Agreement, dated November 1, 2021, between WUP and FE (the “GRP Agreement”). On June 30, 2023, FE notified us in writing of its immediate termination of the GRP Agreement. We believe that FE wrongfully terminated such agreement in breach thereof. We are seeking compensatory damages, including the return of material deposits held by FE under the GRP Agreement that were recorded in Other non-current assets on the condensed consolidated balance sheets as of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. 

On September 19, 2023, FE removed the NY State Court lawsuit to the NY Federal Court. On September 19, 2023, FE filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction or, in the alternative, motion to transfer the lawsuit to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. On October 9, 2023, the Company filed a motion to remand the lawsuit back to the NY State Court due to the NY Federal Court’s lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On March 28, 2025, the Company prevailed on the jurisdictional motion and the NY Federal Court remanded the lawsuit back to the NY State Court. On April 9, 2025, FE filed in the NY State Court an answer and its defenses to the Company’s claims, as well as counterclaims for unpaid amounts it claims it is owed under the GRP Agreement. On April 22, 2025, the Company answered FE’s counterclaims and also filed a motion to amend and proposed amended complaint against FE in NY State Court, which included, among other things, additional breach of contract claims and added Thomas James Segrave Jr., FE’s founder and Chief Executive Officer, as a defendant with respect to a claim based on piercing the corporate veil.

We intend to vigorously pursue the action to recover the outstanding deposits and other damages from FE and defend against any related counterclaims, but there can be no assurance as to the outcome of the dispute with FE. Our success in recovering the amounts from FE will depend on several factors, including the availability of funds by FE for the recoverable amounts, in light of the following:

•In its Annual Report on