Company: SONM
Filing Date: 2025-04-30
Form Type: PRRN14A
Source: 0001213900-25-037151
Chunk: 32

Company: SONIM TECHNOLOGIES INC
Filing Date: 2025-04-30
Form: PRRN14A
Chunk 32
---
 to vote for the AJP/Orbic Nominees on a universal proxy card, Sonim has chosen to not include the AJP/Orbic Nominees on its proxy card. Whether Sonim may lawfully disregard the AJP/Orbic Nominees is an issue that the AJP/Orbic Parties expect will be resolved by the Delaware Action. If you vote on Sonim’s proxy card, you will not be able to vote for the AJP/Orbic Nominees. If the AJP/Orbic Parties prevail in the Delaware Action, then Sonim’s proxy card may be determined to be deficient. If you vote for directors on the AJP/Orbic Parties’ universal proxy card, and Sonim prevails in the Delaware Action, then your votes will not be counted. BY VOTING ON THE AJP/ORBIC PARTIES’ BLUE UNIVERSAL PROXY CARD OR BLUE VOTING INSTRUCTION FORM , YOU CAN SEND A MESSAGE TO SONIM THAT YOU DO NOT SUPPORT THEIR ACTIONS IN RELATION TO THE ANNUAL MEETING AND ATTEMPT TO BLOCK THE RECOGNITION OF THE AJP/ORBIC’S NOMINEES. Why is Sonim contesting the nomination of the AJP/Orbic Nominees, and how does that impact proxies that stockholders provide to the AJP/Orbic Parties? On March20, 2025, AJP and Orbic submitted to the Sonim a formal Notice to nominate the AJP/Orbic Nominees pursuant to the advance notification requirements set forth in Article III of the By -Laws. On April7, 2025, the Sonim Board of Directors issued a letter to AJP and Orbic rejecting its stockholder nominations, alleging that the Notice was deficient for failure to provide information regarding the experience, qualifications, attributes or skills of the AJP/Orbic Nominees pursuant to Item 401(e) SEC Regulation S -K. On April24, 2025, AJP and Orbic commenced litigation in the Court of Chancery against Sonim and the Director Defendants seeking relief to: (i) permanently enjoin Sonim and its Board of Directors from taking any actions to prevent AJP and Orbic from exercising their rights in accordance with the By -Lawsto nominate directors, and (ii) find that the Director Defendants breached their fiduciary duties. In the Complaint, AJP and Orbic allege that Sonim’s rejection of the Notice was inconsistent with