XML 35 R24.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.24.1.1.u2
Contingencies
12 Months Ended
Feb. 29, 2024
Contingencies [Abstract]  
CONTINGENCIES

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, CFO and Secretary) brought suit against the Company alleging approximately $150,000 being owed to him pursuant to an April 2014 promissory note. The Company denies that any amount is owed to Mr. Gagerman and has filed a cross-complaint against Mr. Gagerman in that action alleging, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty, conversion and violations of various California Business and Professions Codes. Trial in this case is currently scheduled for October 2024. In March 2023, Mr. Gagerman offered to settle the matter for $120,000 but the Company has rejected that offer (See Note 9).

 

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.