Company: XTIA
Filing Date: 2025-11-19
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001213900-25-112615
Chunk: 201

Company: XTI Aerospace, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-11-19
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part I, Item 8
Chunk 201
---
2024, asserting that the Company and/or Legacy XTI may have assumed Xeriant’s obligations under a Senior Secured
Promissory Note (the “Note”) issued by Xeriant to Auctus in the original principal amount of $6,050,000, pursuant to a letter
agreement dated May 17, 2022, between Xeriant and Legacy XTI (the “May 17 letter”). Auctus claimed that the outstanding amount
due under the Note, including accrued interest, was $8,435,008.81 as of April 3, 2024.

In July 2024, Legacy XTI responded to Auctus’s
claims, asserting that the May 17 letter is invalid and unenforceable on multiple grounds. Legacy XTI further stated that, even if the
May 17 letter were enforceable, it did not create or trigger any obligation for Legacy XTI to assume Xeriant’s debt under the Note
or otherwise. On May 13, 2025, Auctus filed a lawsuit against Legacy XTI in the District Court of Arapahoe County, Colorado, asserting
a single claim for breach of contract based on its prior allegations. Auctus contends that Legacy XTI is contractually obligated to repay
nearly $9 million in principal and accrued interest, based on Legacy XTI’s entry into a loan agreement with Legacy Inpixon in March
2023 and its subsequent merger with Legacy Inpixon in March 2024.

On June 25, 2025, Legacy XTI filed a motion to
dismiss or, in the alternative, to stay the proceedings pending resolution of the Xeriant litigation. Legacy XTI’s motion asserts
that Auctus’ complaint should be dismissed: (i) for lack of standing, because Auctus is neither a party to, nor a third-party beneficiary
of, the May 17 letter; (ii) for failure of a condition precedent, because no obligation ever arose in that the alleged triggering condition—a
business combination involving Legacy XTI and Legacy Inpixon did not occur within the required one-year time frame; (iii) for lack of
valid assignment, because Xeriant’s unilateral assignment of debt to Legacy XTI is void because the underlying Note prohibits assignment
without Auctus’s prior written consent, which is not alleged. On August 5, 2025, Auctus filed a response arguing that it was