The Company has purchase commitments that are cancellable of approximately $170,000,000 related to purchase of miners as of December 31, 2021, and the Company has paid approximately $124,300,000 towards these commitments as of the end of this period. As of December 31, 2021, the remaining commitment for future payments was approximately $45,700,000.

The Company has purchase commitments for mining related equipment of approximately $4,272,333 as of December 31, 2021 and the Company has paid $1,769,930 towards these commitments as of end of this period.

The following table sets forth certain information concerning our obligations to make contractual future payments towards our agreements as of December 31, 2021:


	2022		2023		2024		2025		2026		Thereafter		Total
Recorded contractual obligations:
Operating lease obligations	$	238,015	$	324,949	$	333,234	$	341,767	$	299,039	$	50,662	$	238,019
Finance Lease obligations	$	312,303	$	321,887	$	179,572	$	21,728	$	1,853			$	358,855
Mining equipment	$	45,646,618											$	45,646,618
Mining operations related equipment	$	2,502,403											$	2,502,403
Total	$	48,699,339	$	646,836	$	512,806	$	363,495	$	300,892	$	50,662	$	48,745,895

GridFabric: On August 31, 2020, the Company acquired GridFabric, LLC. Pursuant to the terms of the purchase agreement, additional shares of the Company’s common stock valued at up to $750,000 were issuable if GridFabric

achieves certain revenue and product release milestones. On September 30, 2021, the contingent consideration was re-measured to $500,000.

During the three months ended December 31, 2021, the Company settled all contingent consideration due to GridFabric resulting in a payment of 8,404 shares of common stock valued at $150,000.

Solar Watt Solutions: On February 24, 2021, the Company acquired Solar Watt Solutions, Inc. Pursuant to the terms of the purchase agreement, additional cash consideration of up to $2,500,000 (fair valued at $155,000 at acquisition date) in cash held back by the Company and only payable pro rata to Sellers upon meeting certain future milestones and subject to satisfaction of any amounts owing from SWS to the Company resulting from damages required to be indemnified under the SWS Merger Agreement. The contingent cash consideration was re-measured to $615,249 at December 31, 2021.

On January 31, 2022, the Company settled all contingent consideration due to the SWS sellers, resulting in a payment of $625,000, 77,500 shares of common stock released out of escrow to the SWS sellers, and SWS sellers releasing 232,518 shares of common stock back the Company.

From time to time we may be subject to litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company accrues a liability when a loss is considered probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. When a material loss contingency is reasonably possible but not probable, the Company does not record a liability, but instead discloses the nature and the amount of the claim, and an estimate of the loss or range of loss, if such an estimate can be made. Legal fees are expensed as incurred. Based on the opinion of legal counsel and other factors, management believes that the final disposition of these existing matters will not have a material adverse effect on the business, results of operations, financial condition, or cash flows of the Company. The Company has identified certain claims as a result of which a loss may be incurred, but in the aggregate the loss is expected to be insignificant. This assessment is based on our current understanding of relevant facts and circumstances. As such, our view of these matters is subject to inherent uncertainties and may change in the future. Significant judgment is required in both the determination of probability and the determination as to whether an exposure is reasonably estimable. Actual outcomes of these legal and regulatory proceedings may materially differ from our current estimates. For other claims regarding proceedings that are in an initial phase, the Company is unable to estimate the range of possible loss, if any, but at this time believes that any loss related to such claims will not be material. Risks associated with legal liability are difficult to assess and quantify, and their existence and magnitude can remain unknown for significant periods of time. We maintain liability insurance to reduce such risk exposure to the Company. Despite the measures taken, such policies may not cover future litigation, or the damages claimed may exceed our coverage which could result in contingent liabilities.

On January 20, 2021, Scott Bishins (“Bishins”), individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated (together, the “Class”), filed a class action complaint (the “Class Complaint”) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Company, its Chief Executive Officer, Zachary Bradford (“Bradford”), and its Chief Financial Officer, Lori Love (“Love”) (the “Class Action”). The Class Complaint alleges that, between December 31, 2020 and January 14, 2021, the Company, Bradford, and Love “failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company had overstated its customer and contract figures; (2) that several of the Company’s recent acquisitions involved undisclosed related party transactions; and (3) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.” (the “Class Allegations”). The Class Complaint seeks: (a) certification of the Class, (b) an award of compensatory damages to the Class, and (c) an award of reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the Class in the litigation. To date, no class has been certified in the Class Action. On December 2, 2021, the Court appointed Darshan Hasthantra as lead Plaintiff, and Glancy, Prongay and Murray LLP as class counsel. Hasthantra now has until February 14, 2022, to file an amended complaint, and the Company is permitted to file its Motion to Dismiss by April 14, 2022.

Although the ultimate outcome of the Class Action cannot be determined with certainty, the Company stands behind all of its prior statements and disclosures and believes that the claims raised in the Class Complaint are entirely without

merit. The Company intends to both defend itself vigorously against these claims and to vigorously prosecute any counterclaims.

Notwithstanding the Class Allegations’ lack of merit, however, the Class Action may distract the Company and cost the Company’s management time, effort and expense to defend against the claims made in the Class Complaint. Notwithstanding the Company’s belief that the Company and its management have complied with all of their obligations under applicable securities regulations, no assurance can be given as to the outcome of the Class Action, and in the event the Company does not prevail in such action, the Company, its business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Ciceri, derivatively on behalf of CleanSpark, Inc., v. Bradford, Love, Schultz, Beynon, McNeill, and Wood (consolidated with Perna, derivatively on behalf of CleanSpark, Inc., v. Bradford, Love, Schultz, Beynon, McNeill, and Wood)

On May 26, 2021, Andrea Ciceri (“Ciceri”), derivatively on behalf of CleanSpark, Inc., filed a verified shareholder derivative action (the “Ciceri Derivative Action”) in the United States District Court in the District of Nevada against Chief Executive Officer, Zachary Bradford (“Bradford”), Chief Financial Officer, Lori Love (“Love”) and Directors Matthew Schultz, Roger Beynon, Larry McNeill and Tom Wood (Bradford, Love and Directors collectively referred to as “Defendants.”) On June 22, 2021, Mark Perna (“Perna”) (Ciceri, Perna, and Defendants collectively referred to as the “Parties”) filed a verified shareholder derivative action (the “Perna Derivative Action”) in the same Court against the same Defendants making substantially similar allegations. On June 29, 2021, the court consolidated the Ciceri Derivative Action with the Perna Derivative Action in accordance with a stipulation among the parties (the consolidated case referred to as the “Derivative Action”). The Derivative Action alleges that Defendants: (1) made materially false and misleading public statements about the Company’s business and prospects; (2) did not maintain adequate internal controls; and (3) did not disclose several related party transactions benefitting insiders, questionable uses of corporate assets, and excessive compensation. The claims asserted against all Defendants include breach of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets. A claim for contribution under Sections 10(b) and 21D of the Securities and Exchange Act is asserted against only Bradford and Love. The Derivative Action seeks declaratory relief, monetary damages, and imposition of adequate corporate governance and internal controls. Plaintiffs were given the opportunity to submit an Amended Complaint by November 25, 2021, but elected not to. In January 2022, the Parties agreed to stay the entirety of the case pending the outcome of the Motion to Dismiss in the Class Action. Any of the Parties may also terminate the stay on 20 days’ notice.

Although the ultimate outcome of the Derivative Action cannot be determined with certainty, the Company stands behind all of its prior statements and disclosures, and believes that the claims raised in that case are entirely without merit. The Company intends to both defend itself vigorously against these claims and to vigorously prosecute any counterclaims.