Company: AGSS
Filing Date: 2025-11-17
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001213900-25-111597
Chunk: 70

Company: AMERIGUARD SECURITY SERVICES, INC.
Filing Date: 2025-11-17
Form: 10-Q
Item: Item 2
Chunk 70
---
 Mr. Slatic’s appointment to the Board was unlawful, that the purported removal of Mr. Anderson and Mr. Honore
from the Board was unlawful, and the removal of Mr. Anderson as President and Chief Executive Officer and restoration of Mr. Garcia as
President and Chief Executive Officer was unlawful.

On June 26, 2025, Mr. Anderson and Mr. Honore,
on their own behalf and purportedly on behalf of the Company, filed an Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Motion for Preliminary
Injunction against Mr. Garcia, Mr. Cashen, Mr. Slatic, and Mr. Goossen prohibiting the appointment of Mr. Cashen and Mr. Slatic to the
Board of Directors, prohibiting the removal of Mr. Anderson and Mr. Honore from the Board, prohibiting the reinstitution of Mr. Garcia
as Chief Executive Officer, prohibiting Mr. Garcia, Mr. Cashen, and Mr. Slatic from making or publishing any further false statements
regarding their purported positions at and on the Board; prohibiting Mr. Garcia, Mr. Cashen, and Mr. Slatic from taking any further action
on behalf of the Company.

On July 1, 2025, Garcia filed an Opposition to
Counterclaimants’ Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Motion for Preliminary Injunction.

On July 2, 2025, the Court denied Mr. Anderson’s
and Mr. Honore’s Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Motion for Preliminary Injunction against Mr. Garcia, Mr. Cashen,
Mr. Slatic, and Mr. Goossen. At this hearing, counsel for Mr. Anderson and Mr. Honore’ indicated that they had evidence that Mr.
Garcia was in fact not the majority shareholder and his actions since June 10, 2025, were unlawful. The Judge agreed to hear the evidence
at a future hearing scheduled for July 29, 2025.

On July 29, 2025 the hearing began at 1:30 and
the evidence and witness testimony occurred but did not get completed. A second hearing occurred on July 31, 2025, allowing for the completion
of the testimony brought by the counsel of Mr. Anderson’ and Mr. Honore’. Following the conclusion of the testimony, Mr. Garcia’s
counsel petitioned the judge that there was no evidence provided that countered the position that Mr. Garcia was in fact an 80% shareholder
and that the