CEA Industries Inc.

From time to time, in the normal course of business, the Company is subject to claims and legal proceedings. Litigation is inherently unpredictable, and the Company's assessments may change as matters progress. The Company expenses legal fees as incurred and records a liability for contingent losses when it is both probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount can be reasonable estimated. An unfavorable outcome to any matter, if material, could adversely affect the Company's financial condition, liquidity or results of operations.

On February 24, 2026, Abraham Gomez, an individual, filed a civil complaint in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Tulare, captioned Abraham Gomez v. CEA Industries, Inc., et al., (Case No. VCU331863), against the Company and Hans Thomas, a former director of the Company. The complaint asserts various claims against the defendants, including claims for fraud, promissory estoppel, quantum meruit and unjust enrichment, arising from alleged investment-related discussions and alleged services purportedly performed for the benefit of the Company. The plaintiff seeks damages, including compensatory damages according to proof (which the complaint alleges exceed approximately $2.75 million), together with interest, attorneys' fees, costs and other relief. On March 27, 2026, the Company filed a Notice of Removal to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. On April 3, 2026, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Company’s motion to dismiss is fully briefed before the court and scheduled for oral argument on June 24, 2026. The Company intends to defend the action vigorously. At this preliminary stage of the matter, the Company cannot reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any, that may result from the proceeding.

On or about April 17, 2024, Optima Consulting Services, LLC ("Optima"), a client of the Company under an equipment and engineering contract, notified the Company of a potential claim and demanded mediation. On or about October 28, 2024, Optima asserted claims for negligent/defective design and breach of warranty, alleging damages exceeding $2.0 million. The Company denied the claims, believing it satisfied all contractual obligations and that any issues were attributable to Claimant and/or third parties. The matter was mediated under the AAA process. Effective May 9, 2025, the parties entered into a settlement agreement under which all claims were resolved for a payment of $0.3 million by the Company. This settlement payment was funded by the Company's insurance coverage, except for $35,000 representing the deductibles, which was paid by the Company.

On October 20, 2023, Sweet Cut Grow, LLC and Green Ice, LLC, clients of the Company under an equipment contract and engineering contract, filed a demand for arbitration asserting claims for breach of contract, breach of warranty, and unjust enrichment, and seeking $1.0 million in damages, plus interest. The Company denied the claims and asserted a counterclaim. The Company believes it fulfilled all its contractual obligations and that any alleged issues related to the negligence of a third-party supplier. In April 2026, the Company settled the matter for $2.3 million. Our insurance covered $1.8 million, the equipment supplier paid $.2 million and the Company paid $.3 million. The settlement did not have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition or results of operations.

On May 22, 2026, the Company filed a complaint against the Asset Manager, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, regarding the Asset Management Agreement. The complaint seeks a declaration that the Asset Management Agreement is void from inception as unconscionable and orders all fees paid by the Company to 10X under the Asset Management Agreement since inception be returned to the Company. Alternatively, the complaint seeks a declaration that a liquidated damages clause in the Asset Management Agreement, which would accelerate nearly 20 years of future fees upon termination, is an unenforceable penalty.