NOTE 16 – CONTINGENCIES

The Company is subject to legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business. Our management evaluates our exposure to these claims and proceedings individually and in the aggregate and evaluates potential losses on such litigation if the amount of the loss is estimable and the loss is probable. However, the outcome of legal proceedings and claims brought against the Company is subject to significant uncertainty. Although management considers the likelihood of such an outcome to be remote, if one or more of these legal matters were resolved against the Company for amounts in excess of management’s expectations, the Company’s financial statements for that reporting period could be materially adversely affected.

In June 2022, Melvin Gagerman, the Company’s former CEO and CFO whose employment with Aura was permanently terminated in July 2019, brought suit against the Company for repayment of an allegedly unsecured demand promissory note in the principal amount of $82 which he claims was entered into in April 2014 and bears interest at a rate of 10% per annum. Despite the fact that, based on Gagerman’s allegations, the note was issued during a period when he was the Company’s CEO, CFO, Corporate Secretary and Chairman of Aura’s Board of Directors, Gagerman has stated that he does not possess a copy of the alleged promissory note. The Company disputes that any amount is presently owed to Gagerman and has filed a cross-complaint against him for, among things, conversion, violation of California Business & Professions Code §17200, and various breaches of fiduciary duty that the Company believes Gagerman committed against Aura, including without limitation, Gagerman’s actions in opposing the valid 2019 stockholder consent action (see Note 9). On October 1, 2024, all litigation with Gagerman was settled with no cost to the Company.

On March 26, 2019, various stockholders of the Company controlling a combined total of more than 27.5 million shares delivered a signed written consent to the Company removing Ronald Buschur as a member of the Company’s Board and electing Cipora Lavut as a director of the Company. On March 27, 2019, those same stockholders delivered a further signed written consent to the Company removing William Anderson and Si Ryong Yu as members of the Company’s Board and electing Robert Lempert and David Mann as directors of the Company. These written consents represented a majority of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock as of March 26, 2019, and March 27, 2019, respectively. Because of Aura’s refusal to recognize the legal effectiveness of the consents, on April 8, 2019, the stockholders filed suit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware pursuant to Section 225 of the Delaware General Corporations Law, seeking an order confirming the validity of the consents and declaring that Aura’s Board consists of Ms. Lavut, Mr. Mann, Dr. Lempert, Mr. Douglas and Mr. Diaz-Versón, Jr. On July 8, 2019 the Court of Chancery entered final judgment in favor of the stockholder plaintiffs, confirming that (a) Ronald Buschur, Si Ryong Yu and William Anderson had been validly removed by the holders of a majority of the Company’s outstanding stock acting by written consent (b) Ms. Lavut, Mr. Mann and Dr. Lempert had been validly elected by the holders of a majority of the Company’s outstanding stock acting by written consent, and (c) the Company’s Board of Directors validly consists of Cipora Lavut, David Mann, Robert Lempert, Gary Douglas and Salvador Diaz- Versón, Jr. As a result of prior management’s unsuccessful opposition to this stockholders’ action filed in the Court of Chancery, such stockholders may be potentially entitled to recoup their litigation costs from the Company under Delaware’s corporate benefit doctrine and/or other legal provisions. To date, no final determination has been made as to the amount of recoupment, if any, to which such stockholders may be entitled.