Company: LTRYW
Filing Date: 2025-11-26
Form Type: S-3/A
Source: 0001493152-25-025084
Chunk: 26

Company: Lottery.com Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-11-26
Form: S-3/A
Chunk 26
---
 Restraining Order. The request for temporary injunctive relief was denied by the MDF in February 2024, and on June 11, 2024, the MDF also denied Plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss, allowing the litigation to move forward. On June 25, 2024, Plaintiffs filed their answer and affirmative defenses to Defendants’ counterclaims. On December 5, 2024, the parties participated in a court-ordered mediation; however, no resolution was reached.

On February 25, 2025, Plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute, and Defendants immediately moved for default judgment on their counterclaims. On March 14, 2025, the Court entered an order denying without prejudice Defendants’ Motion for various deficiencies in the filing. On March 18, 2025, Defendants filed an Amended Motion for Default Judgment on their Counterclaims, followed by additional support for their purported damages on April 25, 2025. The Company engaged new counsel, who made an appearance on June 5, 2025, and thereafter sought and obtained additional time to respond to Defendants’ filings. On August 6, 2025, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, or in the Alternative, Motion to Set Aside Default and Compel Arbitration, which was renewed on August 14, 2025. At the same time, Plaintiffs also submitted opposition briefing and supporting evidence to contradict Defendants’ filings relating to damages evidence. Defendants’ reply to Plaintiffs filings is due to be filed on August 29, 2025. In the interim, the MDF has stayed all deadlines in the case management order and has cancelled any pretrial proceedings, pending resolution on the parties’ motions.

| 14 |

Woodford Eurasia Assets, Limited

Woodford Eurasia Assets, Limited filed a complaint in the High Court of Justice in London chancery Division. October 16, 2023, The High Court of Justice in London Chancery Division (“the Court”) dismissed an application for injunctive relief initiated by Woodford against the Company. (Case: FL-2023-000023. Woodford Eurasia Assets Limited v Lottery.com Inc.) The Court characterized Woodford’s application as “fundamentally misconceived” and ordered Woodford to pay the Company’s legal costs. Woodford subsequently, on the Judges’ recommendation, withdrew the proceedings.

Woodford filed an additional action in the United