Company: REVB
Filing Date: 2025-05-29
Form Type: PRE 14A
Source: 0000950170-25-078948
Chunk: 31

Company: REVELATION BIOSCIENCES, INC.
Filing Date: 2025-05-29
Form: PRE 14A
Chunk 31
---
-on-pay vote is advisory, and therefore not binding on the Company, the Compensation Committee, or the Board and may not be construed as overruling a decision by the Board or the Compensation Committee, or create or imply any additional fiduciary duty on the Board or our Directors. It will also not affect any compensation previously paid or awarded to any executive. The Board and the Compensation Committee value the opinions of our stockholders, however, and will review and consider the outcome of this advisory vote when making future compensation decisions for our named executive officers and will evaluate whether any actions are necessary in this regard.

<div align='center'>THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” PROPOSAL 3.

18

PROPSAL 4: ADVISORY VOTE ON FREQUENCY OF VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION</div>

Section 14A of the Securities Exchange Act requires us to submit a non-binding, advisory resolution to stockholders at least once every six years to determine whether advisory votes on executive officer compensation should be held every one, two or three years. In satisfaction of this requirement, stockholders are being asked to vote on the following advisory resolution:

RESOLVED, that the stockholders of the Company advise that an advisory vote with respect to executive officer compensation should be presented every one, two or three years as reflected by their votes for each of these alternatives in connection with this resolution.

In voting on this resolution, you should mark your proxy for one, two or three years based on your preference as to the frequency with which an advisory vote on executive officer compensation should be held. If you have no preference, you should abstain.

The optimal frequency of vote necessarily turns on a judgment about the relative benefits and burdens of each of the options. There have been diverging views expressed on this question, and the Board believes there is a reasonable basis for each of the options.

Some have argued that an annual vote is needed to give stockholders the opportunity to react promptly to emerging trends in compensation, provide feedback before those trends become pronounced over time, and give the Board and the Compensation Committee the opportunity to evaluate individual compensation decisions each year in light of the ongoing feedback from stockholders.

Others believe in less frequency. They point out that a less frequent vote would allow stockholders to focus on overall design issues rather than details of individual decisions, would align with the goal of compensation programs which are designed to reward performance that promotes long term stockholder value, and would avoid the