# EDGAR Filing Document

**Accession Number:** 0001779020
**File Stem:** 0000950170-23-006478
**Filing Date:** 2023-3
**Character Count:** 70050
**Document Hash:** e13d062c4a1d7243b114a8413fc46d2e
**Contains OCR:** False
**Source Format:** 

## Filing Content

## Filing Summary
**0000950170-23-006478.hdr.sgml**: 20230307

**ACCESSION NUMBER**: 0000950170-23-006478

**CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE**: 8-K

**PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT**: 14

**CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT**: 20230307

**ITEM INFORMATION**: Other Events

**ITEM INFORMATION**: Financial Statements and Exhibits

**FILED AS OF DATE**: 20230307

**DATE AS OF CHANGE**: 20230307

**FILER**: 

**COMPANY DATA:**
- **COMPANY CONFORMED NAME:** Danimer Scientific, Inc.
- **CENTRAL INDEX KEY:** 0001779020
- **STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION:** PLASTICS, MATERIALS, SYNTH RESINS & NONVULCAN ELASTOMERS [2821]
- **IRS NUMBER:** 841924518
- **STATE OF INCORPORATION:** DE
- **FISCAL YEAR END:** 1231

**FILING VALUES:**
- **FORM TYPE:** 8-K
- **SEC ACT:** 1934 Act
- **SEC FILE NUMBER:** 001-39280
- **FILM NUMBER:** 23713286

**BUSINESS ADDRESS:**
- **STREET 1:** 140 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD
- **CITY:** BAINBRIDGE
- **STATE:** GA
- **ZIP:** 39817
- **BUSINESS PHONE:** 229-243-7075

**MAIL ADDRESS:**
- **STREET 1:** 140 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD
- **CITY:** BAINBRIDGE
- **STATE:** GA
- **ZIP:** 39817

**FORMER COMPANY:**
- **FORMER CONFORMED NAME:** Danimer Scientific, Inc
- **DATE OF NAME CHANGE:** 20201229

**FORMER COMPANY:**
- **FORMER CONFORMED NAME:** Live Oak Acquisition Corp
- **DATE OF NAME CHANGE:** 20200106

**FORMER COMPANY:**
- **FORMER CONFORMED NAME:** Foxhound Merger Partners, Inc.
- **DATE OF NAME CHANGE:** 20190605

?xml version="1.0" encoding="ASCII"? 8-K

**UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549**

------

**FORM** 8-K

------

**CURRENT REPORT**

**Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934**

**Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported):** March 07, 2023<br>

------

DANIMER SCIENTIFIC, INC.

**(Exact name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)**

------

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| Delaware | 001-39280 | 84-1924518 |
| **(State or Other Jurisdiction<br>of Incorporation)** | **(Commission File Number)** | **(IRS Employer<br>Identification No.)** |
| 140 Industrial Boulevard |  |  |
| Bainbridge**,** Georgia |  | 39817 |
| **(Address of Principal Executive Offices)** |  | **(Zip Code)** |

---

**Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code:** 229 243-7075 <br>

**(Former Name or Former Address, if Changed Since Last Report)**

------

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:

☐Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)

☐Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)

☐Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))

☐Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))

**Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:**

---

| | | |
|:---|:---|:---|
| **<br>Title of each class** | **Trading<br>Symbol(s)** | **<br>Name of each exchange on which registered** |
| Class A Common stock, $0.0001 par value per share | DNMR | The New York Stock Exchange |

---

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 (§ 230.405 of this chapter) or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (§ 240.12b-2 of this chapter).

Emerging growth company ☐

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

------

**Item 8.01 Other Events**

Out of an abundance of caution, the Company has elected to pursue the remedial actions described below. Concurrently with the filing of the petition, the Company filed a motion to expedite the hearing of the Section 205 Petition, which was subsequently granted on March 3, 2023.

Background

At a special meeting of stockholders of Live Oak, held on December 28, 2020 (the "Live Oak Special Meeting"), a majority of the then-outstanding shares of Live Oak's Class A common stock and Class B common stock, voting together as a single class, voted to approve the Company's Fourth Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, which, among other things, increased the authorized shares of the Company's common stock from 110,000,000 shares to 200,000,000 shares (converting all of its Class B common stock into the same number of shares of its Class A common stock) (the "Authorized Share Charter Amendment").

The aforementioned Boxed decision has created uncertainty as to whether Section 242(b)(2) of the DGCL would have required the Authorized Share Charter Amendment to be approved by a separate vote of the majority of the then-outstanding shares of Live Oak's Class A common stock.

The Company continues to believe that a separate vote of the Live Oak's Class A common stock was not required to approve the Authorized Share Charter Amendment. Further, an analysis of the votes from the Live Oak Special Meeting confirm that the Authorized Share Charter Amendment was approved by a majority of each of the outstanding shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock, when viewed separately. However, to remove uncertainty created in light of the Boxed decision, the Company filed a petition in the Court of Chancery pursuant to Section 205 of the DGCL seeking validation of the Authorized Share Charter Amendment and the shares issued pursuant thereto to resolve any uncertainty with respect to those matters. Section 205 of the DGCL permits the Court of Chancery, in its discretion, to validate potentially defective corporate acts and stock after considering a variety of factors.

Since the Boxed decision was issued, the Company is informed that, through March 6, 2023, the Court of Chancery has heard twenty-three Section 205 petitions brought by companies facing similar uncertainty arising out of the Boxed decision and has approved each such petition.

If the Company is not successful in its Section 205 Petition, the uncertainty with respect to the Company's authorized capitalization could have a material adverse impact on the Company, including without limitation on the Company's ability to timely file its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022 and the potential adverse consequences resulting therefrom.

Hearing Date

On March 3, 2023, the Court of Chancery granted the motion to expedite and set a hearing date for the Section 205 Petition to be heard at 11:00 a.m. on March 17, 2023, at the Leonard L. Williams Justice Center, 500 North King Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801. As required by the Court of Chancery, a copy of the Company's Section 205 Petition in the form filed with the Court of Chancery is attached hereto as Exhibit 99.1. If any stockholder of the Company wishes to express a position on the Section 205 Petition, such stockholder of the Company may (i) appear at the Section 205 hearing or (ii) file a written submission with the Register in Chancery, Leonard L. Williams Justice Center, 500 North King Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801, referring to the case captioned, In re Danimer Scientific, Inc., Case Number 2023-0267-LWW in advance of the hearing, and any such written submission should be emailed to the Company's counsel, Kevin Gallagher, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. at gallagher@rlf.com.

**Forward-Looking Statements**

This current report on Form 8-K (this "Current Report") includes "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as "may," "should," "could," "would," "expect," "plan," "anticipate," "intend," "believe," "estimate," "continue," "project" or the negative of such terms and other similar expressions that predict or indicate future events or trends or that are not statements of present or historical matters. These forward-looking statements are not intended to serve as, and must not be relied on by an investor or any other person as, a guarantee, an assurance, or a definitive statement of fact or probability. Actual events and circumstances are difficult or impossible to predict and may differ from these forward-looking statements.

------

In particular, no assurances can be made regarding the outcome or timing of the Company's Section 205 Petition. If the Company is unsuccessful in the Section 205 Petition, the uncertainty with respect to the Company's capitalization could limit its ability to complete equity financing transaction or issue stock-based compensation to its employees, directors and officers until the underlying issues are definitively resolved. As described above, this uncertainty could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

**Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.**

d) Exhibits.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| Exhibit No. | Description |
| 99.1 | Verified Petition for Relief Pursuant to 8 Del. C. § 205 |
| 104 | Cover Page Interactive Data File (embedded within the Inline XBRL document) |

---

------

**SIGNATURES**

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

---

| | | | |
|:---|:---|:---|:---|
|  |  |  | Danimer Scientific, Inc |
| Date: | March 7, 2023 | By:  | /s/ Stephen A. Martin |
|  |  |  | Stephen A. Martin<br>Chief Legal Officer |

---

------

## Ex-99

**IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE**

IN RE DANIMER SCIENTIFIC, INC.)) c.a. no. 2023-____-___

**<u>verified petition for relief pursuant to 8</u> <u>del. c.</u> <u>§ 205</u>**

Petitioner Danimer Scientific, Inc. ("Danimer" or the "Company"), by and through its undersigned counsel, brings this petition pursuant to 8 Del. C. § 205, seeking to have this Court validate a potentially defective corporate act as follows:

**<u>nature of the action</u>**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;1.The Company petitions this Court seeking relief similar to that several other public entities have recently sought from this Court. In particular, the Company seeks to validate its Fourth Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Company (Exhibit A, "New Certificate of Incorporation") adopted in connection with its business combination with Live Oak Acquisition Corp. in December 2020, which, among other things, increased the aggregate number of authorized shares of Common Stock of the Company. While a majority of the then-outstanding shares of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock each voted in favor of the adoption of the New Certificate of Incorporation, separate votes of holders of Class A Common Stock and holders of Class B Common Stock were not expressly sought in connection with the adoption of the New Certificate of Incorporation, and this Court's decision in Garfield v. Boxed, Inc., 2022 WL 17959766 (Del. Ch. Dec. 27,

------

2022), creates uncertainty as to the validity of the adoption of the New Certificate of Incorporation, threatening the Company with irreparable harm as described more fully herein.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2.Under 8 Del. C. § 242 and the Company's Third Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, dated May 5, 2020 (Exhibit B, the "Old Certificate of Incorporation"), the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Common Stock of the Company were required to approve an amendment to the Old Certificate of Incorporation to increase the aggregate number of authorized shares of Common Stock.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;3.Pursuant to its proxy statement dated December 16, 2020 (Exhibit C, the "2020 Proxy Statement"), the Company solicited stockholder approval to adopt the New Certificate of Incorporation, which would, among other things, (i) have the effect of reclassifying all Class A Common Stock shares and Class B Common Stock shares into a single class of Class A Common Stock (such reclassification, the "Reclassification") and (ii) increase the number of authorized shares of Common Stock of the Company from 110 million to 200 million (the "Common Stock Increase Amendment"). The 2020 Proxy Statement stated that approval of the New Certificate of Incorporation required "the affirmative vote of holders of a majority of [the Company's] outstanding shares of [the Company's] Class A Common Stock and [the Company's] Class B Common Stock, voting as a single class."

------

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;4.On December 29, 2020, the New Certificate of Incorporation, which changed the Company's name to "Danimer Scientific, Inc." and implemented the amendments approved at the special meeting of stockholders held on December 28, 2020 (the "Special Meeting"), including the Common Stock Increase Amendment, was filed with the Delaware Secretary of State. On the same day, the business combination with Live Oak Acquisition Corp. closed. Since that time, the Company's Common Stock has traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol "DNMR."

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5.At the time of the filing of the New Certificate of Incorporation, the Company held the view that the amendments were legally and validly adopted under the terms of the Old Certificate of Incorporation and Section 242(b)(2) of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware ("DGCL"). Section 242(b)(2) provides in relevant part:

The holders of the outstanding shares of a class shall be entitled to vote as a class upon a proposed amendment, whether or not entitled to vote thereon by the certificate of incorporation, if the amendment would increase or decrease the aggregate number of authorized shares of such class . . . . The number of authorized shares of any such class or classes of stock may be increased or decreased . . . by the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the stock of the corporation entitled to vote irrespective of this subsection, if so provided in the . . . certificate of incorporation . . . .

Section 242(b)(2) thus provides that an amendment to change the number of authorized shares of a class of stock requires a separate vote of such class unless the

------

certificate of incorporation contains a so-called "Section 242(b)(2) opt-out" provision. Despite not having a "Section 242(b)(2) opt-out" provision, the Company and the board of directors believed that the Common Stock Increase Amendment was effective because under the unambiguous language of the Old Certificate of Incorporation, the Class A Common Stock was not a separate class of Common Stock, but was a series of the class of Common Stock.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6.On December 27, 2022, this Court issued an opinion in Garfield v. Boxed, Inc. that calls into question whether the Class A Common Stock was a series of the class of Common Stock or a separate class of stock, and thus the vote required to adopt the Common Stock Increase Amendment. Like this case, the defendant company in Boxed had sought stockholder approval to amend its certificate of incorporation to increase the number of authorized shares of Common Stock in connection with a de-SPAC transaction. 2022 WL 17959766, at \*1. Before the stockholder vote, the plaintiff wrote a letter to the company board asserting the proposed voting structure for the amendment violated the Class A common stockholders' voting rights under Section 242(b). Id. The company amended its merger agreement and supplemented its proxy statement to require the separate vote of the holders of its Class A common stock for approval of the amendment. Id. The plaintiff filed an action in this Court seeking attorneys' fees and expenses for the benefits he allegedly conferred on the company and its stockholders by facilitating

------

this change. Id. In determining whether the plaintiff had conferred a corporate benefit worthy of fees and expenses, the Court considered whether the plaintiff's demand was meritorious – i.e., whether a combined vote of both Class A and Class B common stock would have violated Section 242(b)(2). Id. at \*4. The Court held, in the context of a fee application, that the plaintiff's claim that Section 242(b)(2) required a separate Class A vote for the amendment was meritorious when made. Id.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.While the Court's merits discussion in Boxed is not a final ruling on the merits, the decision suggests that the Court would view the Company's Class A Common Stock as a separate class of capital stock and not as a series of Common Stock.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;8.As a result of Boxed, the validity of the New Certificate of Incorporation and the shares of Common Stock issued or to be issued, in reliance on the effectiveness of the New Certificate of Incorporation has become and will remain uncertain absent relief from this Court.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;9.The Company therefore brings this action pursuant to 8 Del. C. § 205, seeking this Court's assistance in validating the New Certificate of Incorporation and any shares of Common Stock issued in reliance on the effectiveness of the New Certificate of Incorporation.

------

**<u>FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS</u>**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;10.The Company is a Delaware corporation originally formed as a SPAC under the name Foxhound Merger Corp. on May 24, 2019. On January 15, 2020, the Company changed its name to Live Oak Acquisition Corp. ("Live Oak"). On October 3, 2020, the Company entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (as amended by Amendment No. 1 thereto, dated as of October 8, 2020, and Amendment No. 2 thereto, dated as of December 11, 2020, the "Merger Agreement"), pursuant to which Live Oak's wholly-owned subsidiary, Green Merger Corp., would merge with and into Meredian Holdings Group, Inc., with Meredian Holdings Group, Inc. surviving the merger (the "Merger").

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;11.Since the Merger, the Company, now named Danimer Scientific, Inc., has been a publicly traded biotechnology company that manufactures environmentally friendly biopolymer plastics.

**A.** **The Proxy Statement**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;12.On December 16, 2020, the Company filed the 2020 Proxy Statement identifying seven proposals to be voted on at the Special Meeting, including Proposal No. 2 to adopt the New Certificate of Incorporation. The 2020 Proxy Statement did not specifically require or solicit a separate vote of the holders of Class A Common Stock.

------

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;13.In the 2020 Proxy Statement, the Company noted that the purpose of the increase in the number of authorized shares was:

[T]o have sufficient shares to complete the Business Combination and have additional authorized shares to support is growth and to provide flexibility for future corporate needs.

Ex. C at 106.

**B.** **The Special Meeting**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;14.There were 25,000,000 shares of Common Stock outstanding and entitled to vote at the Special Meeting. See Ex. C at 65. Of the outstanding Common Stock, there were 20,000,000 shares of Class A Common Stock and 5,000,000 shares of Class B Common Stock. Id. As disclosed in the Company's December 28, 2020 Form 8-K (Exhibit D, the "Voting Results Form 8-K"), the New Certificate of Incorporation received the affirmative vote of 16,923,911 shares, a majority of the 25 million shares entitled to vote. Ex. D at 2. As a result of this affirmative vote, the Company believed that the New Certificate of Incorporation had received the requisite stockholder approval.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;15.Moreover, even if every share of Class B Common Stock outstanding on the record date was present and voted in favor of the proposal, Proposal No. 2, approving the New Certificate of Incorporation, received approval from a majority of the shares of Class A Common Stock outstanding on the record date. At the Special Meeting, 16,954,778 shares of Common Stock were present and a total of

------

16,923,911 shares of Common Stock voted in favor of Proposal No. 2. Assuming all the holders of Class B Common Stock were present and voted in favor, at least 11,923,911 of the 20,000,000 shares of Class A Common Stock (that is, a majority of the shares of Class A Common Stock outstanding on the record date), voted in favor of the New Certificate of Incorporation.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;16.As disclosed in a Form 8-K dated December 29, 2020 (Exhibit E, the "Merger Closing Form 8-K"), the Company proceeded to file the New Certificate of Incorporation with the Delaware Secretary of State and to consummate the Merger on December 29, 2020. As a result of the Reclassification, each of the then issued and outstanding shares of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock of Live Oak automatically converted on a one-for-one basis into a share of Class A Common Stock of the combined company. As of February 24, 2023, 101,889,600 shares of Class A Common Stock were issued and outstanding, 3,914,525 shares of Common Stock were reserved for issuance upon exercise of outstanding private warrants, 15,846,393 shares were reserved for issuance under equity incentive plans, 2,403,392 shares were reserved for issuance under employee stock purchase plans, and 22,050,040 shares were reserved for issuance upon conversion of the Company's outstanding 3.250% Convertible Notes due 2026 at the original conversion rate. While the current number of shares of Class A Common Stock issued and outstanding does not necessarily exceed the combined approved amount

------

of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock prior to the Reclassification, accounting for shares reserved for issuance exceeds the 110 million authorized shares of Common Stock provided for in the Old Certificate of Incorporation.

**C.** **The Court's Authority Under Section 205(a)** 

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;17.Under Section 205(a)(3) of the DGCL, this Court has the authority to "[d]etermine the validity and effectiveness of any defective corporate act not ratified . . . pursuant to § 204." 8 Del. C. § 205(a)(3). Further, under Section 205(a)(4), this Court may "[d]etermine the validity of any corporate act or transaction and any stock, rights or options to acquire stock." 8 Del. C. § 205(a)(4). A defective corporate act includes any act or transaction purportedly taken by or on behalf of the corporation that is within the power of a corporation, but is void or voidable due to a failure of authorization. A failure of authorization includes, among other things, the failure to authorize or effect an act or transaction in compliance with the DGCL, the company's certificate of incorporation, or any disclosure set forth in any proxy or consent solicitation statement, if and to the extent such failure would render such act or transaction void or voidable.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;18.Relevant here, if a separate vote of the shares of Class A Common Stock was required to approve the Common Stock Increase Amendment under Section 242(b)(2), the 2020 Proxy Statement did not state that such vote was required and the potentially deficient disclosures regarding the required vote could

------

be considered a failure of authorization. As a result, the filing of the New Certificate of Incorporation (which effected the Common Stock Increase Amendment), and any shares of the Company's Common Stock in excess of the number of shares authorized under the Old Certificate of Incorporation issued in reliance on the effectiveness thereof, would potentially be considered defective corporate acts under Sections 204 and 205.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;19.As such, the Court has the power to validate the Common Stock Increase Amendment, the New Certificate of Incorporation and all of the shares of Common Stock issued by the Company in reliance on the validity and effectiveness of the Common Stock Increase Amendment and the New Certificate of Incorporation under Section 205.

**D.** **Consideration of Statutory Validation Factors under Section 205(d)**

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;20.Section 205(d) sets forth certain factors that the Court may consider when determining whether to ratify and validate a defective corporate act:

In connection with the resolution of matters pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of this section, the Court of Chancery may consider the following:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(1) Whether the defective corporate act was originally approved or effectuated with the belief that the approval or effectuation was in compliance with the provisions of this title, the certificate of incorporation or bylaws of the corporation;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(2) Whether the corporation and board of directors has treated the defective corporate act as a valid act or transaction and whether any

------

person has acted in reliance on the public record that such defective corporate act was valid;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(3) Whether any person will be or was harmed by the ratification or validation of the defective corporate act, excluding any harm that would have resulted if the defective corporate act had been valid when approved or effectuated;

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(4) Whether any person will be harmed by the failure to ratify or validate the defective corporate act; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;(5) Any other factors or considerations the Court deems just and equitable.

8 Del. C. § 205(d).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;21.**Belief in the Amendment's Validity**. With respect to the factor set forth in Section 205(d)(1), the Company demonstrated its good faith belief that the New Certificate of Incorporation had been properly approved through its actions taken in connection with the closing of the Merger. In the Voting Results Form 8-K, the Company disclosed that the New Certificate of Incorporation had been approved by the stockholders, and as disclosed in the Merger Closing Form 8-K, the Merger closed on December 29, 2020 in reliance on that approval. On the same day, the New Certificate of Incorporation was filed with the Delaware Secretary of State based on the belief that it had been validly approved. The Company thereafter issued shares of Common Stock in reliance on the belief that the Reclassification effected by the New Certificate of Incorporation was valid. No stockholder has challenged the validity of the New Certificate of Incorporation and, until the Boxed decision, there was no uncertainty about the Company's capital structure.

------

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;22.**Treatment of the Amendment as Valid**. With respect to the factor set forth in Section 205(d)(2), the Company has represented to its stockholders in the Voting Results Form 8-K that the New Certificate of Incorporation was validly approved and in the Merger Closing Form 8-K that the shares of Common Stock had been issued to the Company's stockholders in connection with the Reclassification and the closing of the Merger. In numerous public filings since the closing of the Merger, the Company has disclosed to its stockholders that there are 200 million shares of Common Stock authorized and over 100 million shares of Common Stock outstanding. See, e.g., Company's Form 10-Q, filed with the SEC on May 10, 2022; the Company's Form 10-Q, filed with the SEC on August 9, 2022; Company's Form 10-Q, filed with the SEC on November 8, 2022.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;23.**Harm Arising from Validation.** With respect to the factor set forth in Section 205(d)(3), the Company does not believe that any person would be harmed by the ratification and validation of the Company's capital structure if this Petition is granted. In fact, such a validation would only transform the market's pre-Boxed understanding into reality.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;24.**Harm Arising from Failure to Validate.** Indeed, with respect to the factor set forth in Section 205(d)(4), there are many parties that would be harmed if the Company's capital structure is not ratified and validated by this Court.

------

March 31, 2023. Because the Boxed decision has created uncertainty regarding the validity of the Company's capital structure, there is likewise uncertainty as to the statements and representations the Company is required to make in its Form 10-K, which could in turn impact the ability of the Company's auditors to issue an unqualified audit opinion and to provide comfort letters for capital raising activities. The Company also has an upcoming annual meeting and needs confirmation of the validity of the Common Stock Increase Amendment to determine which proposals need to be presented to the Company's stockholders at the meeting, how many shares it has outstanding and which can vote; otherwise, its stockholders may be disenfranchised by this uncertainty. Absent clarity and the ability to take these necessary actions, the Company's ability to remain in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the New York Stock Exchange could be at risk, and the Company's share price and ultimately its ability to raise capital could be adversely impacted.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;27.The Company also recently entered into an at-the-market ("ATM") financing arrangement with a sales agent, which is also subject to closing conditions including the accuracy of the Company's representations on capitalization. The financing transactions pursuant to the ATM facility provide an accessible source of financing to the Company should it need it, but the inability of the Company or its auditors to provide required opinions or comfort letters to the sales agent may

------

preclude accessing the markets until the requested relief is granted. The uncertainty regarding the validity of the Company's stock could also prevent the Company from raising additional capital through other sales of securities and could raise concerns about its continuing as a going concern. The Company also relies on using its available shares for stock-based compensation for its employees, directors and officers as a means of attracting and retaining talent and as a tool to align the interests of award recipients with those of its stockholders. Employees, directors and officers that have received stock-based compensation likely made business decisions based, in part, on such equity awards, and employees that purchased shares in good faith under the Company's employee stock purchase plan could see their investment in jeopardy.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;28.**Other Factors**. With respect to the factor set forth in Section 205(d)(5), several "other factors" support granting the relief requested in this Petition.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;29.<u>First</u>, "self-help" ratification by the Company's stockholders under Section 204 may not be an effective alternative available to the Company. To the extent that the vote on the Common Stock Increase Amendment required the approval of the holders of the Class A Common Stock voting as a separate class, it is no longer feasible for the Company to obtain that vote through a Section 204 ratification. As detailed above, as a result of the Reclassification, the Company

------

reclassified its shares of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common stock into a single class of Class A Common Stock, but if the New Certificate of Incorporation is not valid, it is not clear which shares of Class A Common Stock issued in the Reclassification are not valid and it may be difficult or impossible to determine which stockholders would be entitled to vote on a ratification under Section 204. This uncertainty regarding which if any of the Company's current stockholders would be entitled to vote on a ratification would likely require the Company to file a petition under Section 205 to confirm the validity of any Section 204 ratification, which otherwise could be subject to challenge for up to 120 days. In addition, under the self-help method of Section 204, the Company would be required to file a certificate of validation with the Delaware Secretary of State to effectively ratify the New Certificate of Incorporation. 8 Del. C. § 204(e)(3) (requiring the filing of a certificate of validation in circumstances where the defective act ratified relates to a certificate previously filed with the Delaware Secretary of State). The Company understands that processing times for certificates of validation can take as long as 3-4 months, and that while a certificate of validation is being processed by the Delaware Secretary of State, the Company would not be able to obtain certificates of good standing, pay its annual franchise taxes or make any other filings with the Delaware Secretary of State. All in, pursuing the self-help process under Section 204, if it could be pursued at all, would take a minimum of 6-8 months, with the

------

possibility of having to file a Section 205 petition to confirm the effectiveness of ratification. The additional months of uncertainty regarding the Company's capital structure if forced to pursue a "self-help" ratification could be devastating to the Company and can be avoided if the Court grants the current relief requested by the Petitioner.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;30.<u>Second</u>, the Court has recently provided direction as to whether stockholders can rely on a SPAC's capital structure. Numerous publicly traded Delaware corporations who accessed public markets via de-SPAC transactions in the past several years faced the same post-Boxed cloud of uncertainty over their capital structures. By granting these petitions, the Court has offered other SPACs a solution to a widespread problem. Continuing to craft sensible, equitable, and prompt solutions would be in keeping with both this Court's and the State of Delaware's reputations as the United States' preeminent caretakers of corporate law and governance.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;31.The Company respectfully seeks this Court's assistance to validate the New Certificate of Incorporation and all shares of Class A Common Stock issued in reliance on the validity and effectiveness of the New Certificate of Incorporation to prevent ongoing and significant harm to the Company, its business prospects, and its stockholders.

**COUNT ONE<br><u>(Validation of Corporate Acts and Putative Stock Under 8</u> <u>Del</u><u>.</u> <u>C</u><u>. § 205)</u>**

------

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;32.The Company repeats and reiterates the allegations above as if fully set forth herein.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;33.The Company is authorized to bring this petition under 8 Del. C. § 205(a).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;34.Under 8 Del. C. § 205(a), this Court may determine the validity and effectiveness of any defective corporate act, any putative stock, any corporate act or transaction and any stock, rights or options to acquire stock. A defective corporate act includes any act or transaction purportedly taken by or on behalf of the corporation that is within the power of a corporation but is void or voidable due to a failure of authorization. A failure of authorization includes, among other things, the failure to authorize or effect an act or transaction in compliance with "(A) the provisions of [the DGCL], (B) the certificate of incorporation or bylaws of the corporation . . . if and to the extent such failure would render such act or transaction void or voidable." 8 Del. C. § 204(h)(2).

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;35.The Company filed the New Certificate of Incorporation with the good faith belief that it was adopted in compliance with Delaware law.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;36.The Company has treated the New Certificate of Incorporation as valid and treated all acts in reliance on the New Certificate of Incorporation as valid.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;37.Third parties, including financing sources, key business partners, stockholders, employees, officers and directors, have relied on the validity of the

------

New Certificate of Incorporation and treated all acts in reliance on the New Certificate of Incorporation as valid.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;38.On information and belief, no persons would be harmed by the validation of the New Certificate of Incorporation and the shares of Class A Common Stock issued in reliance on the validity and effectiveness of the New Certificate of Incorporation. The results of the Special Meeting and the filing of the New Certificate of Incorporation, including the Common Stock Increase Amendment, were all disclosed publicly, and actions have been taken in reliance thereon. The company has not received any complaints or questions regarding the results of the Special Meeting in the two-plus years that have passed since the results were announced.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;39.As previously noted, the Company, its prospects and its stockholders may be irreparably and significantly harmed absent relief from this Court.

**<u>PRAYER FOR RELIEF</u>**

WHEREFORE, the Company respectfully requests that this Court enter an order as follows:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;A.Validating and declaring effective the New Certificate of Incorporation, including the filing and effectiveness thereof, as of the date and time that the New Certificate of Incorporation was originally filed with the Delaware Secretary of State;

------

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;B.Validating and declaring effective any and all shares of Class A Common Stock issued in reliance on the validity and effectiveness of the Common Stock Increase Amendment and the New Certificate of Incorporation in each case, as of the date and time of the original issuance of such shares, taking of such corporate actions or effectuation of such transactions; and

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;C.Granting such other and further relief as this Court deems proper.

---

| | |
|:---|:---|
| &nbsp;&nbsp; <br>Dated: March 2, 2023 | <u>/s/ Kevin M. Gallagher</u><br>Kevin M. Gallagher (#5337)<br>Spencer V. Crawford (#7035) Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A.<br>One Rodney Square<br>920 North King Street<br>Wilmington, Delaware 19801<br>(302) 651-7700<br>Attorneys for Petitioner Danimer Scientific, Inc.<br>|

---

------

### Attached PDF Documents

**Attachment 1:** `dnmr-ex99_1.pdf`

EFiled: Mar 02 2023 06:08PM EST  
Transaction ID 69261136  
Case No. 2023-0267-

![img-0.jpeg](img-0.jpeg)

# **IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE**

IN RE DANIMER SCIENTIFIC, INC. ) C.A. No. 2023-___-___

# **VERIFIED PETITION FOR RELIEF PURSUANT TO 8 DEL. C. § 205**

Petitioner Danimer Scientific, Inc. (“Danimer” or the “Company”), by and through its undersigned counsel, brings this petition pursuant to 8 *Del. C.* § 205, seeking to have this Court validate a potentially defective corporate act as follows:

# **NATURE OF THE ACTION**

1. The Company petitions this Court seeking relief similar to that several other public entities have recently sought from this Court. In particular, the Company seeks to validate its Fourth Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Company (Exhibit A, “New Certificate of Incorporation”) adopted in connection with its business combination with Live Oak Acquisition Corp. in December 2020, which, among other things, increased the aggregate number of authorized shares of Common Stock of the Company. While a majority of the then-outstanding shares of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock each voted in favor of the adoption of the New Certificate of Incorporation, separate votes of holders of Class A Common Stock and holders of Class B Common Stock were not expressly sought in connection with the adoption of the New Certificate of Incorporation, and this Court’s decision in *Garfield v. Boxed, Inc.*,

2022 WL 17959766 (Del. Ch. Dec. 27, 2022), creates uncertainty as to the validity of the adoption of the New Certificate of Incorporation, threatening the Company with irreparable harm as described more fully herein.

2. Under 8 *Del. C.* § 242 and the Company’s Third Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, dated May 5, 2020 (Exhibit B, the “Old Certificate of Incorporation”), the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Common Stock of the Company were required to approve an amendment to the Old Certificate of Incorporation to increase the aggregate number of authorized shares of Common Stock.

3. Pursuant to its proxy statement dated December 16, 2020 (Exhibit C, the “2020 Proxy Statement”), the Company solicited stockholder approval to adopt the New Certificate of Incorporation, which would, among other things, (i) have the effect of reclassifying all Class A Common Stock shares and Class B Common Stock shares into a single class of Class A Common Stock (such reclassification, the “Reclassification”) and (ii) increase the number of authorized shares of Common Stock of the Company from 110 million to 200 million (the “Common Stock Increase Amendment”). The 2020 Proxy Statement stated that approval of the New Certificate of Incorporation required “the affirmative vote of holders of a majority of [the Company’s] outstanding shares of [the Company’s] Class A Common Stock and [the Company’s] Class B Common Stock, voting as a single class.”

2

4. On December 29, 2020, the New Certificate of Incorporation, which changed the Company’s name to “Danimer Scientific, Inc.” and implemented the amendments approved at the special meeting of stockholders held on December 28, 2020 (the “Special Meeting”), including the Common Stock Increase Amendment, was filed with the Delaware Secretary of State. On the same day, the business combination with Live Oak Acquisition Corp. closed. Since that time, the Company’s Common Stock has traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol “DNMR.”

5. At the time of the filing of the New Certificate of Incorporation, the Company held the view that the amendments were legally and validly adopted under the terms of the Old Certificate of Incorporation and Section 242(b)(2) of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (“DGCL”). Section 242(b)(2) provides in relevant part:

The holders of the outstanding shares of a class shall be entitled to vote as a class upon a proposed amendment, whether or not entitled to vote thereon by the certificate of incorporation, if the amendment would increase or decrease the aggregate number of authorized shares of such class . . . . The number of authorized shares of any such class or classes of stock may be increased or decreased . . . by the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the stock of the corporation entitled to vote irrespective of this subsection, if so provided in the . . . certificate of incorporation . . . .

Section 242(b)(2) thus provides that an amendment to change the number of authorized shares of a class of stock requires a separate vote of such class unless the

3

certificate of incorporation contains a so-called “Section 242(b)(2) opt-out” provision. Despite not having a “Section 242(b)(2) opt-out” provision, the Company and the board of directors believed that the Common Stock Increase Amendment was effective because under the unambiguous language of the Old Certificate of Incorporation, the Class A Common Stock was not a separate class of Common Stock, but was a series of the class of Common Stock.

6. On December 27, 2022, this Court issued an opinion in *Garfield v. Boxed, Inc.* that calls into question whether the Class A Common Stock was a series of the class of Common Stock or a separate class of stock, and thus the vote required to adopt the Common Stock Increase Amendment. Like this case, the defendant company in *Boxed* had sought stockholder approval to amend its certificate of incorporation to increase the number of authorized shares of Common Stock in connection with a de-SPAC transaction. 2022 WL 17959766, at *1. Before the stockholder vote, the plaintiff wrote a letter to the company board asserting the proposed voting structure for the amendment violated the Class A common stockholders’ voting rights under Section 242(b). *Id.* The company amended its merger agreement and supplemented its proxy statement to require the separate vote of the holders of its Class A common stock for approval of the amendment. *Id.* The plaintiff filed an action in this Court seeking attorneys’ fees and expenses for the benefits he allegedly conferred on the company and its stockholders by facilitating

4

this change. *Id.* In determining whether the plaintiff had conferred a corporate benefit worthy of fees and expenses, the Court considered whether the plaintiff’s demand was meritorious - *i.e.*, whether a combined vote of both Class A and Class B common stock would have violated Section 242(b)(2). *Id.* at *4. The Court held, in the context of a fee application, that the plaintiff’s claim that Section 242(b)(2) required a separate Class A vote for the amendment was meritorious when made. *Id.*

7. While the Court’s merits discussion in *Boxed* is not a final ruling on the merits, the decision suggests that the Court would view the Company’s Class A Common Stock as a separate class of capital stock and not as a series of Common Stock.

8. As a result of *Boxed*, the validity of the New Certificate of Incorporation and the shares of Common Stock issued or to be issued, in reliance on the effectiveness of the New Certificate of Incorporation has become and will remain uncertain absent relief from this Court.

9. The Company therefore brings this action pursuant to 8 *Del. C.* § 205, seeking this Court’s assistance in validating the New Certificate of Incorporation and any shares of Common Stock issued in reliance on the effectiveness of the New Certificate of Incorporation.

5

# FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

10. The Company is a Delaware corporation originally formed as a SPAC under the name Foxhound Merger Corp. on May 24, 2019. On January 15, 2020, the Company changed its name to Live Oak Acquisition Corp. (“Live Oak”). On October 3, 2020, the Company entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (as amended by Amendment No. 1 thereto, dated as of October 8, 2020, and Amendment No. 2 thereto, dated as of December 11, 2020, the “Merger Agreement”), pursuant to which Live Oak’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Green Merger Corp., would merge with and into Meredian Holdings Group, Inc., with Meredian Holdings Group, Inc. surviving the merger (the “Merger”).

11. Since the Merger, the Company, now named Danimer Scientific, Inc., has been a publicly traded biotechnology company that manufactures environmentally friendly biopolymer plastics.

## A. The Proxy Statement

12. On December 16, 2020, the Company filed the 2020 Proxy Statement identifying seven proposals to be voted on at the Special Meeting, including Proposal No. 2 to adopt the New Certificate of Incorporation. The 2020 Proxy Statement did not specifically require or solicit a separate vote of the holders of Class A Common Stock.

6

13. In the 2020 Proxy Statement, the Company noted that the purpose of the increase in the number of authorized shares was:

[T]o have sufficient shares to complete the Business Combination and have additional authorized shares to support is growth and to provide flexibility for future corporate needs.

Ex. C at 106.

### **B. The Special Meeting**

14. There were 25,000,000 shares of Common Stock outstanding and entitled to vote at the Special Meeting. *See* Ex. C at 65. Of the outstanding Common Stock, there were 20,000,000 shares of Class A Common Stock and 5,000,000 shares of Class B Common Stock. *Id.* As disclosed in the Company’s December 28, 2020 Form 8-K (Exhibit D, the “Voting Results Form 8-K”), the New Certificate of Incorporation received the affirmative vote of 16,923,911 shares, a majority of the 25 million shares entitled to vote. Ex. D at 2. As a result of this affirmative vote, the Company believed that the New Certificate of Incorporation had received the requisite stockholder approval.

15. Moreover, even if every share of Class B Common Stock outstanding on the record date was present and voted in favor of the proposal, Proposal No. 2, approving the New Certificate of Incorporation, received approval from a majority of the shares of Class A Common Stock outstanding on the record date. At the Special Meeting, 16,954,778 shares of Common Stock were present and a total of

7

16,923,911 shares of Common Stock voted in favor of Proposal No. 2. Assuming all the holders of Class B Common Stock were present and voted in favor, at least 11,923,911 of the 20,000,000 shares of Class A Common Stock (that is, a majority of the shares of Class A Common Stock outstanding on the record date), voted in favor of the New Certificate of Incorporation.

16. As disclosed in a Form 8-K dated December 29, 2020 (Exhibit E, the “Merger Closing Form 8-K”), the Company proceeded to file the New Certificate of Incorporation with the Delaware Secretary of State and to consummate the Merger on December 29, 2020. As a result of the Reclassification, each of the then issued and outstanding shares of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock of Live Oak automatically converted on a one-for-one basis into a share of Class A Common Stock of the combined company. As of February 24, 2023, 101,889,600 shares of Class A Common Stock were issued and outstanding, 3,914,525 shares of Common Stock were reserved for issuance upon exercise of outstanding private warrants, 15,846,393 shares were reserved for issuance under equity incentive plans, 2,403,392 shares were reserved for issuance under employee stock purchase plans, and 22,050,040 shares were reserved for issuance upon conversion of the Company’s outstanding 3.250% Convertible Notes due 2026 at the original conversion rate. While the current number of shares of Class A Common Stock issued and outstanding does not necessarily exceed the combined approved amount

8

of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock prior to the Reclassification, accounting for shares reserved for issuance exceeds the 110 million authorized shares of Common Stock$^{1}$ provided for in the Old Certificate of Incorporation.

### **C. The Court’s Authority Under Section 205(a)**

17. Under Section 205(a)(3) of the DGCL, this Court has the authority to “[d]etermine the validity and effectiveness of any defective corporate act not ratified . . . pursuant to § 204.” 8 *Del. C.* § 205(a)(3). Further, under Section 205(a)(4), this Court may “[d]etermine the validity of any corporate act or transaction and any stock, rights or options to acquire stock.” 8 *Del. C.* § 205(a)(4). A defective corporate act includes any act or transaction purportedly taken by or on behalf of the corporation that is within the power of a corporation, but is void or voidable due to a failure of authorization. A failure of authorization includes, among other things, the failure to authorize or effect an act or transaction in compliance with the DGCL, the company’s certificate of incorporation, or any disclosure set forth in any proxy or consent solicitation statement, if and to the extent such failure would render such act or transaction void or voidable.

$^{1}$ The Old Certificate of Incorporation authorized 100 million shares of Class A Common Stock and 10 million shares of Class B Common Stock, bringing the combined approved amount of Common Stock prior to the Reclassification to 110 million shares.

9

18. Relevant here, if a separate vote of the shares of Class A Common Stock was required to approve the Common Stock Increase Amendment under Section 242(b)(2), the 2020 Proxy Statement did not state that such vote was required and the potentially deficient disclosures regarding the required vote could be considered a failure of authorization. As a result, the filing of the New Certificate of Incorporation (which effected the Common Stock Increase Amendment), and any shares of the Company’s Common Stock in excess of the number of shares authorized under the Old Certificate of Incorporation issued in reliance on the effectiveness thereof, would potentially be considered defective corporate acts under Sections 204 and 205.

19. As such, the Court has the power to validate the Common Stock Increase Amendment, the New Certificate of Incorporation and all of the shares of Common Stock issued by the Company in reliance on the validity and effectiveness of the Common Stock Increase Amendment and the New Certificate of Incorporation under Section 205.

#### **D. Consideration of Statutory Validation Factors under Section 205(d)**

20. Section 205(d) sets forth certain factors that the Court may consider when determining whether to ratify and validate a defective corporate act:

In connection with the resolution of matters pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of this section, the Court of Chancery may consider the following:

10

(1) Whether the defective corporate act was originally approved or effectuated with the belief that the approval or effectuation was in compliance with the provisions of this title, the certificate of incorporation or bylaws of the corporation;

(2) Whether the corporation and board of directors has treated the defective corporate act as a valid act or transaction and whether any person has acted in reliance on the public record that such defective corporate act was valid;

(3) Whether any person will be or was harmed by the ratification or validation of the defective corporate act, excluding any harm that would have resulted if the defective corporate act had been valid when approved or effectuated;

(4) Whether any person will be harmed by the failure to ratify or validate the defective corporate act; and

(5) Any other factors or considerations the Court deems just and equitable.

8 *Del. C.* § 205(d).

21. **Belief in the Amendment’s Validity.** With respect to the factor set forth in Section 205(d)(1), the Company demonstrated its good faith belief that the New Certificate of Incorporation had been properly approved through its actions taken in connection with the closing of the Merger. In the Voting Results Form 8-K, the Company disclosed that the New Certificate of Incorporation had been approved by the stockholders, and as disclosed in the Merger Closing Form 8-K, the Merger closed on December 29, 2020 in reliance on that approval. On the same day, the New Certificate of Incorporation was filed with the Delaware Secretary of State based on the belief that it had been validly approved. The Company thereafter issued

11

shares of Common Stock in reliance on the belief that the Reclassification effected by the New Certificate of Incorporation was valid. No stockholder has challenged the validity of the New Certificate of Incorporation and, until the *Boxed* decision, there was no uncertainty about the Company’s capital structure.

22. **Treatment of the Amendment as Valid.** With respect to the factor set forth in Section 205(d)(2), the Company has represented to its stockholders in the Voting Results Form 8-K that the New Certificate of Incorporation was validly approved and in the Merger Closing Form 8-K that the shares of Common Stock had been issued to the Company’s stockholders in connection with the Reclassification and the closing of the Merger. In numerous public filings since the closing of the Merger, the Company has disclosed to its stockholders that there are 200 million shares of Common Stock authorized and over 100 million shares of Common Stock outstanding. *See, e.g.*, Company’s Form 10-Q, filed with the SEC on May 10, 2022; the Company’s Form 10-Q, filed with the SEC on August 9, 2022; Company’s Form 10-Q, filed with the SEC on November 8, 2022.

23. **Harm Arising from Validation.** With respect to the factor set forth in Section 205(d)(3), the Company does not believe that any person would be harmed by the ratification and validation of the Company’s capital structure if this Petition is granted. In fact, such a validation would only transform the market’s pre-*Boxed* understanding into reality.

12

24. **Harm Arising from Failure to Validate.** Indeed, with respect to the factor set forth in Section 205(d)(4), there are many parties that would be harmed if the Company’s capital structure is not ratified and validated by this Court.

25. The uncertainty regarding the Company’s capital structure and the validity of its stock created by the *Boxed* decision is causing (and will continue to cause) the Company harm. The Company proposed the Common Stock Increase Amendment in anticipation of issuing additional shares of Common Stock. But, as a result of the uncertainty with respect to the validity of the New Certificate of Incorporation, it is not clear how many shares the Company is currently authorized to issue and the Company’s stockholders may not hold valid shares, which has caused and will continue to cause harm to the Company and its stockholders. The continued uncertainty as to the validity of the Company’s capital structure will potentially cause market disruption, disturb the Company’s corporate relationships, result in claims from holders of such shares, and could lead to consequent loss of value for the Company’s stockholders and loss of eligibility to remain listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

26. The uncertainty regarding the validity of the Company’s capitalization may prevent the Company from raising additional debt and equity financing and could impact stock incentive programs. Financing sources will typically require the Company to be able to certify its outstanding capitalization without qualification,

13

and therefore the uncertainty created by the *Boxed* decision could threaten the availability of the financing necessary to implement the Company’s business plans. Moreover, the Company is required to file its Annual Report on Form 10-K by March 31, 2023. Because the *Boxed* decision has created uncertainty regarding the validity of the Company’s capital structure, there is likewise uncertainty as to the statements and representations the Company is required to make in its Form 10-K, which could in turn impact the ability of the Company’s auditors to issue an unqualified audit opinion and to provide comfort letters for capital raising activities. The Company also has an upcoming annual meeting and needs confirmation of the validity of the Common Stock Increase Amendment to determine which proposals need to be presented to the Company’s stockholders at the meeting, how many shares it has outstanding and which can vote; otherwise, its stockholders may be disenfranchised by this uncertainty. Absent clarity and the ability to take these necessary actions, the Company’s ability to remain in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the New York Stock Exchange could be at risk, and the Company’s share price and ultimately its ability to raise capital could be adversely impacted.

27. The Company also recently entered into an at-the-market (“ATM”) financing arrangement with a sales agent, which is also subject to closing conditions including the accuracy of the Company’s representations on capitalization. The

14

financing transactions pursuant to the ATM facility provide an accessible source of financing to the Company should it need it, but the inability of the Company or its auditors to provide required opinions or comfort letters to the sales agent may preclude accessing the markets until the requested relief is granted. The uncertainty regarding the validity of the Company’s stock could also prevent the Company from raising additional capital through other sales of securities and could raise concerns about its continuing as a going concern. The Company also relies on using its available shares for stock-based compensation for its employees, directors and officers as a means of attracting and retaining talent and as a tool to align the interests of award recipients with those of its stockholders. Employees, directors and officers that have received stock-based compensation likely made business decisions based, in part, on such equity awards, and employees that purchased shares in good faith under the Company’s employee stock purchase plan could see their investment in jeopardy.

28. **Other Factors.** With respect to the factor set forth in Section 205(d)(5), several “other factors” support granting the relief requested in this Petition.

29. *First*, “self-help” ratification by the Company’s stockholders under Section 204 may not be an effective alternative available to the Company. To the extent that the vote on the Common Stock Increase Amendment required the

15

approval of the holders of the Class A Common Stock voting as a separate class, it is no longer feasible for the Company to obtain that vote through a Section 204 ratification. As detailed above, as a result of the Reclassification, the Company reclassified its shares of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common stock into a single class of Class A Common Stock, but if the New Certificate of Incorporation is not valid, it is not clear which shares of Class A Common Stock issued in the Reclassification are not valid and it may be difficult or impossible to determine which stockholders would be entitled to vote on a ratification under Section 204. This uncertainty regarding which if any of the Company’s current stockholders would be entitled to vote on a ratification would likely require the Company to file a petition under Section 205 to confirm the validity of any Section 204 ratification, which otherwise could be subject to challenge for up to 120 days. In addition, under the self-help method of Section 204, the Company would be required to file a certificate of validation with the Delaware Secretary of State to effectively ratify the New Certificate of Incorporation. 8 *Del. C.* § 204(e)(3) (requiring the filing of a certificate of validation in circumstances where the defective act ratified relates to a certificate previously filed with the Delaware Secretary of State). The Company understands that processing times for certificates of validation can take as long as 3-4 months, and that while a certificate of validation is being processed by the Delaware Secretary of State, the Company would not be able to obtain certificates

16

of good standing, pay its annual franchise taxes or make any other filings with the Delaware Secretary of State. All in, pursuing the self-help process under Section 204, if it could be pursued at all, would take a minimum of 6-8 months, with the possibility of having to file a Section 205 petition to confirm the effectiveness of ratification. The additional months of uncertainty regarding the Company’s capital structure if forced to pursue a “self-help” ratification could be devastating to the Company and can be avoided if the Court grants the current relief requested by the Petitioner.

30. Second, the Court has recently provided direction as to whether stockholders can rely on a SPAC’s capital structure. Numerous publicly traded Delaware corporations who accessed public markets via de-SPAC transactions in the past several years faced the same post-*Boxed* cloud of uncertainty over their capital structures. By granting these petitions, the Court has offered other SPACs a solution to a widespread problem. Continuing to craft sensible, equitable, and prompt solutions would be in keeping with both this Court’s and the State of Delaware’s reputations as the United States’ preeminent caretakers of corporate law and governance.

31. The Company respectfully seeks this Court’s assistance to validate the New Certificate of Incorporation and all shares of Class A Common Stock issued in reliance on the validity and effectiveness of the New Certificate of Incorporation to

17

prevent ongoing and significant harm to the Company, its business prospects, and its stockholders.

# **COUNT ONE**  
**(Validation of Corporate Acts and Putative Stock Under 8 *Del. C.* § 205)**

32. The Company repeats and reiterates the allegations above as if fully set forth herein.

33. The Company is authorized to bring this petition under 8 *Del. C.* § 205(a).

34. Under 8 *Del. C.* § 205(a), this Court may determine the validity and effectiveness of any defective corporate act, any putative stock, any corporate act or transaction and any stock, rights or options to acquire stock. A defective corporate act includes any act or transaction purportedly taken by or on behalf of the corporation that is within the power of a corporation but is void or voidable due to a failure of authorization. A failure of authorization includes, among other things, the failure to authorize or effect an act or transaction in compliance with “(A) the provisions of [the DGCL], (B) the certificate of incorporation or bylaws of the corporation . . . if and to the extent such failure would render such act or transaction void or voidable.” 8 *Del. C.* § 204(h)(2).

35. The Company filed the New Certificate of Incorporation with the good faith belief that it was adopted in compliance with Delaware law.

18

36. The Company has treated the New Certificate of Incorporation as valid and treated all acts in reliance on the New Certificate of Incorporation as valid.

37. Third parties, including financing sources, key business partners, stockholders, employees, officers and directors, have relied on the validity of the New Certificate of Incorporation and treated all acts in reliance on the New Certificate of Incorporation as valid.

38. On information and belief, no persons would be harmed by the validation of the New Certificate of Incorporation and the shares of Class A Common Stock issued in reliance on the validity and effectiveness of the New Certificate of Incorporation. The results of the Special Meeting and the filing of the New Certificate of Incorporation, including the Common Stock Increase Amendment, were all disclosed publicly, and actions have been taken in reliance thereon. The company has not received any complaints or questions regarding the results of the Special Meeting in the two-plus years that have passed since the results were announced.

39. As previously noted, the Company, its prospects and its stockholders may be irreparably and significantly harmed absent relief from this Court.

### **PRAYER FOR RELIEF**

WHEREFORE, the Company respectfully requests that this Court enter an order as follows:

19

A. Validating and declaring effective the New Certificate of Incorporation, including the filing and effectiveness thereof, as of the date and time that the New Certificate of Incorporation was originally filed with the Delaware Secretary of State;

B. Validating and declaring effective any and all shares of Class A Common Stock issued in reliance on the validity and effectiveness of the Common Stock Increase Amendment and the New Certificate of Incorporation in each case, as of the date and time of the original issuance of such shares, taking of such corporate actions or effectuation of such transactions; and

C. Granting such other and further relief as this Court deems proper.

/s/ Kevin M. Gallagher  
Kevin M. Gallagher (#5337)  
Spencer V. Crawford (#7035)  
RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER, P.A.  
One Rodney Square  
920 North King Street  
Wilmington, Delaware 19801  
(302) 651-7700

*Attorneys for Petitioner Danimer Scientific, Inc.*

Dated: March 2, 2023

20