ALPHA MODUS HOLDINGS, INC.

Current report

We are a smaller reporting company as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and are not required to provide the information under this item. We reserve the right not to provide risk factors in our future filings.

Current report

An investment in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Before deciding to purchase, hold, or sell our common stock, you should consider carefully the risks described below in addition to the cautionary statements and risks described elsewhere in this Annual Report and in our other filings with the SEC, including our registration statements and reports on Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our business operations. If any of these known or unknown risks or uncertainties actually occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows could be seriously harmed. This could cause the trading price of our common stock to decline, resulting in a loss of all or part of your investment.

Current report

Risks Related to Alpha Modus’ Business and Industry

Current report

The Company had operating losses and negative cash flows from operating activities in the past, and it may not achieve or sustain profitability.

Current report

The Company had an operating loss of $834,895 and net cash used in operating activities of $1,676,499 in 2024. The Company cannot assure you that it will be able to generate net profit or positive cash flows from operating activities in the future. Its future revenue growth and profitability will depend on a variety of factors, many of which are beyond its control. These factors include effectiveness of its monetization strategy, its ability to control costs and expenses and to manage its growth effectively, market competition, and the macroeconomic and regulatory environment. The Company may fail to develop and improve its operational, financial and managerial controls, enhance its financial reporting systems and procedures, recruit, train and retain skilled professional personnel, or maintain customer satisfaction to effectively support and manage its future growth. If the Company invests substantial time and resources to expand its patent family but fails to manage the growth of its business and capitalize on its growth opportunities effectively, it may not be able to achieve profitability, and its business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects would be materially and adversely affected.

Current report

If Alpha Modus is unable to continue as a going concern, its securities will have little or no value.

Current report

Although the Company’s audited financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, were prepared under the assumption that it would continue our operations as a going concern, the reports of its independent registered public accounting firm that accompanies its financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, contain a going concern qualification in which such firm expressed substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern, based on its financial statements and results at that time, including its lack of current revenues, recurring losses from operations and net capital deficiency.

Current report

The Company expects to continue to incur significant expenses in 2025. The Company’s prior losses and potential expected future losses have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on its financial condition. In addition, continued operations and the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern may be dependent on its ability to obtain additional financing in the near future and thereafter, and there are no assurances that such financing will be available to it at all or will be available in sufficient amounts or on reasonable terms. The Company’s financial statements do not include any adjustments that may result from the outcome of this uncertainty. If the Company is unable to generate sufficient additional funds in the future through operations, financings or from other sources or transactions, it will exhaust its resources and will be unable to continue operations. If it cannot continue as a going concern, its shareholders would likely lose most or all of their investment in it.

Current report

The artificial intelligence (AI) technology market in which Alpha Modus participates is competitive, and if it does not compete effectively, its business, operating results and financial condition could be harmed.

Current report

The AI market is competitive and rapidly evolving. The principal competitive factors in Alpha Modus’ market include research and development capabilities, industry know-how, continuous capital investment, product portfolio, among others. Many of Alpha Modus’ competitors have substantial competitive advantages, including larger scale, longer operating history, greater brand recognition, more established relationships with customers, suppliers and partners, and greater financial, research and development, marketing and other resources. As a result, Alpha Modus’ competitors may be able to respond more quickly and effectively than Alpha Modus can to new or changing opportunities, technologies, standards or customer requirements. In addition, some competitors may offer products, solutions and services that address one or more number of functions with greater depth, application, or functionality greater than Alpha Modus’ solutions and technologies. Alpha Modus’ existing and potential competitors may develop and market new products, solutions and services with functionality comparable to it. If Alpha Modus is unable to compete successfully against its current or potential competitors, its business, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially and adversely impacted.

Current report

If Alpha Modus fails to adapt and respond effectively to rapidly changing technology, evolving industry standards, changing regulations, and changing customer needs, requirements or preferences, its business may be materially and adversely affected.

Current report

The AI industry market is subject to rapid technological changes, evolving industry standards, regulations and customer needs, requirements and preferences. The success of Alpha Modus’ business will depend, in part, on its ability to adapt and respond to these changes on an effective and timely basis. If it fails to improve its technologies in a way that satisfies potential users or customers of intellectual property that keep pace with rapid technological and industry changes, its business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected. If new technologies emerge that are able to deliver competitive products, solutions and services at lower prices, more efficiently, more conveniently or more securely, such technologies could adversely impact Alpha Modus’ ability to compete effectively.

Current report

Issues arising in connection with the use of AI in the market generally may result in reputational harm or liability to Alpha Modus.

Current report

As with many disruptive innovations, AI presents risks and challenges that could affect its adoption, and therefore Alpha Modus’ business. AI algorithms may be flawed. Datasets may be insufficient or contain biased information. Inappropriate or controversial data practices could impair the acceptance of AI solutions. These deficiencies could undermine the decisions, predictions, or analysis AI applications produce, subjecting the providers of AI technologies generally, including Alpha Modus, to competitive harm, legal liability, and brand or reputational harm. Some AI scenarios present ethical or data privacy issues. If Alpha Modus enables or offers AI solutions that are controversial because of their impact on human rights, privacy, employment, or other social issues, it may experience brand or reputational harm.

Current report

Risks Related to Alpha Modus’ Intellectual Property

Current report

Alpha Modus may fail to obtain, maintain, and protect its intellectual property rights and proprietary information or prevent third parties from any unauthorized use of its technologies.

Current report

Alpha Modus’ trade secrets, trademarks, patents, and other intellectual property rights are critical to its success. Alpha Modus expects to rely on confidentiality agreements and non-compete agreements with third parties to protect its intellectual properties. However, events beyond its control may pose threats to its intellectual property rights and the integrity of its technologies and brand. Effective protection of Alpha Modus’ intellectual property rights is expensive and challenging. While Alpha Modus has taken measures to protect its intellectual property rights by filing patent applications, pursuing patent prosecution, and obtaining patents in the United States, such efforts are inadequate to guard against and prohibit potential infringement and misappropriation. In addition, Alpha Modus’ intellectual property rights may be declared invalid or unenforceable by the courts. Furthermore, Alpha Modus cannot assure you that any of its pending patent or other intellectual property rights applications will ultimately proceed to registration or will result in registration with adequate scope for its business. Some of Alpha Modus’ applications or registrations may be successfully challenged or invalidated by others. If Alpha Modus’ intellectual property rights applications are not successful, it may have to use different intellectual property rights for its affected technologies, or seek to enter into arrangements with any third parties who may have prior registrations, applications or rights, which might not be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. If Alpha Modus fails to protect or enforce its intellectual property rights, its competitors may use its technologies without authorization. As a result, future customers and partners could then devalue Alpha Modus’ technologies, and Alpha Modus’ ability to compete effectively may be impaired, which could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current report

Alpha Modus will likely become subject to intellectual property disputes, which are typically costly and may subject us to significant liability and increased costs of business.

Current report

Alpha Modus competes in markets where there are a large number of patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and other intellectual and proprietary rights, as well as disputes regarding infringement of these rights. Alpha Modus intends to enforce its patent rights by bringing legal claims against other parties, and its competitors and other third parties may, whether rightly or falsely, bring legal claims against it for infringing on their intellectual property rights. The intellectual property laws in the United States, which cover the validity, enforceability and scope of protection of intellectual property rights, are evolving, and litigation is a popular means to resolve commercial disputes. Any intellectual property lawsuits against Alpha Modus, whether successful or not, may harm our brand and reputation.

Current report

Prosecuting and defending intellectual property claims is costly and can impose a significant burden on our management and resources. Any intellectual property litigation to which Alpha Modus becomes a party may require it to do one or more of the following:

Current report

Further, there is no guarantee that Alpha Modus can obtain favorable judgment in its legal cases, in which case it may need to pay damages or be forced to cease using certain intellectual property that is critical to our technology or service offerings. Any resulting liabilities or expenses or required changes to technologies may have a material adverse effect on Alpha Modus’ business, results of operations, and prospects.

Current report

Alpha Modus’ intellectual property business is reliant on the strength of is patent portfolios and is subject to evolving legislation, regulations, and rules associated with patent law, which may adversely affect its business.

Current report

The success of Alpha Modus’ intellectual property business is heavily dependent on obtaining and enforcing patents. Patent acquisition and enforcement is costly, time-consuming, and inherently uncertain. Obtaining and enforcing patents across various industries, including the artificial intelligence industry, involves a high degree of technological and legal complexity. Alpha Modus’ patent rights may be affected by developments or uncertainty in U.S. or foreign patent statutes, patent case law, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) rules and regulations and the rules and regulations of foreign patent offices. In addition, the United States may, at any time, enact changes to U.S. patent law and regulations, including by legislation, by regulatory rulemaking, or by judicial precedent, that adversely affect the scope of patent protection available and weaken the rights of patent owners to obtain patents, enforce against patent infringement and obtain injunctions and/or damages. For example, over the past several years, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court issued various opinions, and the USPTO modified its guidance for practitioners on multiple occasions, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. Other countries may likewise enact changes to their patent laws in ways that adversely diminish the scope of patent protection and weaken the rights of patent owners to obtain patents, enforce against patent infringement, and obtain injunctions and/or damages. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to Alpha Modus’ ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Alpha Modus cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in its patents or in third-party patents, and whether Congress or other foreign legislative bodies may pass patent reform legislation that is unfavorable to it, which may, in turn, affect the value of its patent assets.

Current report

Further, the United States and other governments may, at any time, enact changes to law and regulation that create new avenues for challenging the validity of issued patents. For example, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (described in more detail in the following risk factor) created new administrative post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter-partes review, and derivation proceedings that allow third parties to challenge the validity of issued patents. This applies to all of Alpha Modus’ patents. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in U.S. federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to Alpha Modus’ ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could weaken Alpha Modus’ ability to obtain new patents or to enforce its existing patents and patents that it might obtain in the future.

Current report

Additionally, new rules regarding the burden of proof in patent enforcement actions could significantly increase the cost of Alpha Modus’ enforcement actions, and new standards or limitations on liability for patent infringement could negatively impact Alpha Modus’ revenue derived from such enforcement actions. In addition, recent federal court decisions have lowered the threshold for obtaining attorneys’ fees in patent infringement cases and increased the level of deference given to a district court’s fee-shifting determination. These decisions may make it easier for district courts to shift a prevailing party’s attorneys’ fees to a non-prevailing party if the district court believes that the case was weak or conducted in an abusive manner. As a result, defendants in patent infringement actions brought by non-practicing entities may elect not to settle because these decisions make it much easier for defendants to get attorneys’ fees.

Current report

Finally, it is difficult to predict the outcome of patent enforcement litigation at the trial level and outcomes can be unfavorable. It can be difficult to understand complex patented technologies, and as a result, this may lead to a higher rate of unfavorable litigation outcomes. Moreover, in the event of a favorable outcome, there is often a higher rate of successful appeals in patent enforcement litigation than more standard business litigation. Such appeals are expensive and time consuming, resulting in increased costs and a potential for delayed or foregone revenue opportunities in the event of modification or reversal of favorable outcomes. Although Alpha Modus plans to diligently pursue enforcement litigation, it cannot predict with reliability the decisions that may made by juries and trial courts.

Current report

Changes to patent laws in the United States and other jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing Alpha Modus’ ability to protect its product or its current or future product candidates.

Current report

Alpha Modus’ success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents is costly, time consuming and inherently uncertain. Patent reform legislation in the United States and other countries, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”), contributes to those uncertainties and costs. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that have affected the way patent applications are prosecuted and have redefined prior art and provided more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. In addition, the Leahy-Smith Act has transformed the U.S. patent system into a first-to-file system in which, assuming that other requirements of patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent regardless of whether a third party was first to invent the claimed invention. A third party that has filed a patent application in the USPTO after March 2013 but before Alpha Modus could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of Alpha Modus even if Alpha Modus had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This requires Alpha Modus or its licensees to be cognizant of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Furthermore, Alpha Modus’ ability to obtain and maintain valid and enforceable patents depends on whether the differences between its technology and the prior art allow its technology to be patentable over the prior art. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, Alpha Modus cannot be certain that it was the first to either (i) file any patent application related to its product or product candidates, or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in its patents or patent applications. Even where Alpha Modus has a valid and enforceable patent, Alpha Modus or its licensees may not be able to exclude others from practicing the claimed invention where the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before our filing date or the other party benefits from a compulsory license.

Current report

Among some of the other changes introduced by the Leahy-Smith Act are changes that (i) affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, (ii) redefine prior art, and (iii) provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include changes that limit where a patentee may file a patent infringement suit and provide new opportunities for third parties to challenge issued patents in the USPTO. Alpha Modus or its licensees may be subject to the risk of third-party prior art submissions on pending applications or become a party to opposition, derivation, reexamination,inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings challenging our patents. There is a lower standard of evidence necessary to invalidate a patent claim in a USPTO proceeding relative to the standard in U.S. district or federal court. This could lead third parties to challenge and successfully invalidate Alpha Modus or its licensees’ patents that would not otherwise be invalidated if challenged through the court system. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate Alpha Modus or its licensees’ patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Thus, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of Alpha Modus or its future licensees’ patent applications and the enforcement or defense of Alpha Modus’ issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Current report

Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition, there have been recent proposals for additional changes to the patent laws of the United States and other countries that, if adopted, could impact Alpha Modus or its licensees’ ability to obtain or maintain patent protection for Alpha Modus or its out-licensed proprietary technology or Alpha Modus’ or its licensees’ ability to enforce Alpha Modus or its out-licensed proprietary technology, respectively. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. courts, the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken Alpha Modus’ ability to obtain new patents; enforce or shorten the term of Alpha Modus or its licensees’ existing patents and patents that might be obtained in the future; shorten the term that has been lengthened by patent term adjustment of existing patents or patents that Alpha Modus might obtain in the future; or challenge the validity or enforceability of Alpha Modus patents that may be asserted against Alpha Modus by competitors or other third parties. Any of these outcomes could have a material adverse effect on Alpha Modus’ business. For example, with respect to patent term adjustment, the Federal Circuit’s recent holding inIn re Cellect, LLC, 81 F.4 th 1216 (Fed. Cir. 2023), that obviousness-type double patent analysis for a patent that has received patent term adjustment must be based on the expiration date of the patent after the patent term adjustment has been added, may negatively impact the term of Alpha Modus’ patents.

Current report

Finally, Europe’s new Unitary Patent system and Unified Patent Court (the “UPC”) may present uncertainties for Alpha Modus’ ability to protect and enforce patent rights against competitors in Europe. In 2012, the European Patent Package (the “EU Patent Package”), regulations were passed with the goal of providing a single pan-European Unitary Patent system and a new UPC for litigation involving European patents. Implementation of the EU Patent Package occurred in June 2023. Under the UPC, all European patents, including those issued prior to ratification of the European Patent Package, will by default automatically fall under the jurisdiction of the UPC. The UPC will provide Alpha Modus’ competitors with a new forum to centrally revoke European patents and allow for the possibility of a competitor to obtain pan-European injunctions. It will be several years before Alpha Modus will understand the scope of patent rights that will be recognized and the strength of patent remedies that will be provided by the UPC. Under the EU Patent Package, Alpha Modus will have the right to opt patents out of the UPC over the first seven years of the court’s existence, but doing so may preclude Alpha Modus from realizing the benefits of the new unified court.

Current report

Patent litigation is inherently risky because courts may find Alpha Modus’ patents invalid, not infringed, or unenforceable, and the USPTO, or other relevant patent office, may either invalidate Alpha Modus’ patents or materially narrow the scope of their claims during the course of a reexamination, opposition or other such proceeding.

Current report

Patent litigation is inherently risky and may result in the invalidation of Alpha Modus’ patents, even if it is the plaintiff in an underlying action. It is difficult to predict the outcome of patent enforcement litigation at any level. Although Alpha Modus intends to diligently pursue enforcement litigation, it cannot predict with significant reliability the decisions made by juries and trial courts. At the trial level, it is often difficult for juries and trial judges to understand complex, patented technologies, and as a result, there is a higher rate of successful appeals in patent enforcement litigation than more standard business litigation.

Current report

The defendant to any case Alpha Modus brings may file as many appeals as allowed by right, including to District Court, the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court. Such appeals are expensive and time-consuming, and the outcomes of such appeals are sometimes unpredictable, resulting in increased costs and reduced or delayed revenue which could have a material adverse effect on Alpha Modus’ results of operations and financial condition. These appeals may also result in the invalidation of Alpha Modus’ patents, which may have an adverse impact on Alpha Modus’ operations and financial performance.

Current report

The enforcement of Alpha Modus’ intellectual property rights depends in part upon its ability to retain the best legal counsel in order to achieve favorable outcomes from litigation, and Alpha Modus’ desired legal counsel may become conflicted out of such representation.

Current report

The success of Alpha Modus’ intellectual property enforcement efforts will depend in part upon its ability to retain the best legal counsel to coordinate its patent infringement litigation matters. As Alpha Modus’ intellectual property business evolves, Alpha Modus expects that it will become more difficult to find the best legal counsel to handle all of its patent enforcement matters due in part to potential conflicts of interest. This is because, from time to time, the counterparties to litigation matters have previously engaged world class law firms that are specialized in connection with the industries of the patents at issue in such matters. These previous engagements may have, or may in the future, result in these firms being conflicted out of representing us.

Current report

In addition, counterparties in Alpha Modus’ patent litigation matters may devote a substantial amount of resources to avoid or limit a finding that they are liable for infringing on Alpha Modus’ patents or, in the event liability is found, to avoid or limit the amount of associated damages. There is a risk these counterparties may file inter-partes reviews, reexaminations or other proceedings with the USPTO or other government agencies in the United States or abroad in an attempt to invalidate, narrow the scope or render unenforceable the patents Alpha Modus owns or controls. If this were to occur, it may have a significant negative impact on Alpha Modus’ intellectual property.

Current report

The inability to retain the best legal counsel to represent Alpha Modus in infringement actions may result in unfavorable or adverse outcomes, which may result in losses, exhaustion of financial resources or other adverse effects which could encumber Alpha Modus’ ability to effectively operate its business or execute its business strategy. Alpha Modus cannot provide any assurance that any prospective patent prosecution or litigation matters will result in a favorable outcome.

Current report

Alpha Modus may experience delays in successful prosecution, enforcement, and licensing of its patent portfolio.

Current report

The value of Alpha Modus’ patent portfolios is dependent upon the issuance of patents in a timely manner. More patent applications are filed each year. Alpha Modus believes this increase in patent applications has resulted in longer delays in obtaining approval of pending patent applications. If the USPTO experiences reductions in funding, it could have an adverse impact on the cost of processing pending patent applications and the value of those pending patent applications, negatively impacting the value of Alpha Modus’ patent applications. Further, reductions in funding from Congress could result in higher patent application filing and maintenance fees charged by the USPTO, causing an increase in Alpha Modus’ expenses. Application delays could cause delays in recognizing revenue from these patents and could cause Alpha Modus to miss opportunities to license patents before other competing technologies are developed or introduced into the market.

Previous report

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Previous report

An investment in our securities involves a high degree of risk. In connection with any actual or proposed investment in our securities, you should consider carefully all of the risks described below, together with the other information contained in this Report. If any of the following risks occur, our business, financial condition or results may be materially and adversely affected. In that event, the trading price of our securities could decline, and you could lose all or part of your investment. The risk factors described below are not necessarily exhaustive and you are encouraged to perform your own investigation with respect to us and our business.

Previous report

Summary Risk Factors

Previous report

We are a blank check company with no operating revenues, and you have no basis on which to evaluate our ability to achieve our business objective.

Previous report

We are a blank check company incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware with no operating revenues. Because we lack an operating history, you have no basis upon which to evaluate our ability to achieve our business objective of completing our initial business combination. We have no plans, arrangements or understandings with any prospective target business concerning a business combination and may be unable to complete our initial business combination. If we fail to complete our initial business combination, we will never generate any operating revenues.

Previous report

We may choose not to hold a stockholder vote to approve our initial business combination if the business combination would not require stockholder approval under applicable law or stock exchange listing requirement. Except for as required by applicable law or stock exchange requirement, the decision as to whether we will seek stockholder approval of a proposed business combination or will allow stockholders to sell their shares to us in a tender offer will be made by us, solely in our discretion, and will be based on a variety of factors, such as the timing of the transaction and whether the terms of the transaction would otherwise require us to seek stockholder approval. Even if we seek stockholder approval, the holders of our founder shares will participate in the vote on such approval. Accordingly, we may complete our initial business combination even if a majority of our public stockholders do not approve of the business combination we complete. Please see the section entitled “Item 1. Business — Stockholders May Not Have the Ability to Approve Our Initial Business Combination” for additional information.

Previous report

Our management concluded that there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a “going concern.”

Previous report

As of December 31, 2023, we had approximately $314,500 in our operating bank account, $10.7 million in cash and marketable securities held in the Trust Account to be used for a Business Combination or to repurchase or redeem its common stock in connection therewith and a working capital deficit of approximately $3,571,000. If we are unable to raise additional capital, we may be required to take additional measures to conserve liquidity, which could include, but not necessarily be limited to, suspending the pursuit of a Business Combination. We cannot provide any assurance that new financing will be available to us on commercially acceptable terms, if at all. Further, our plans to raise capital and to consummate our initial Business Combination may not be successful. These factors, among others, raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern through our liquidation date. The financial statements contained elsewhere in this quarterly report do not include any adjustments that might result from our inability to consummate a Business Combination or our inability to continue as a going concern.

Previous report

At the time of your investment in us, you have not be provided with an opportunity to evaluate the specific merits or risks of our initial business combination. Since our board of directors may complete a business combination without seeking stockholder approval, public stockholders may not have the right or opportunity to vote on the business combination, unless we seek such stockholder vote. Accordingly, your only opportunity to affect the investment decision regarding our initial business combination may be limited to exercising your redemption rights within the period of time (which will be at least 20 business days) set forth in our tender offer documents mailed to our public stockholders in which we describe our initial business combination.

Previous report

If we seek stockholder approval of our initial business combination, our initial stockholders, management team and the anchor investors have agreed to vote their founder shares in favor of such initial business combination, regardless of how our public stockholders vote.**

Previous report

Our sponsor, officers and directors have agreed to vote their founder shares, as well as any public shares purchased (including in open market and privately negotiated transactions), and our anchor investors have agreed to vote any founder shares held by them, in favor of our initial business combination. As a result of the recent redemptions by our public shareholders, our initial stockholders hold a sufficient number of shares to vote in favor of an initial business combination in order to have our initial business combination approved. Accordingly, if we seek stockholder approval of our initial business combination, the agreement by our initial stockholders to vote in favor of our initial business combination, and the agreement by the anchor investors to vote any founder shares held by them, will increase the likelihood that we will receive the requisite stockholder approval for such initial business combination. The anchor investors are not required to vote any of their public shares in favor of our initial business combination or for or against any other matter presented for a stockholder vote.

Previous report

We may seek to enter into a business combination transaction agreement with minimum cash requirement for (i) cash consideration to be paid to the target or its owners, (ii) cash for working capital or other general corporate purposes or (iii) the retention of cash to satisfy other conditions. If too many public stockholders exercise their redemption rights, we would not be able to meet such closing condition and, as a result, would not be able to proceed with the business combination. Consequently, if accepting all properly submitted redemption requests would make us unable to satisfy a minimum cash condition as described above, we would not proceed with such redemption and the related business combination and may instead search for an alternate business combination. Prospective targets will be aware of these risks and, thus, may be reluctant to enter into a business combination transaction with us.

Previous report

At the time we enter into an agreement for our initial business combination, we will not know how many stockholders may exercise their redemption rights, and therefore will need to structure the transaction based on our expectations as to the number of shares that will be submitted for redemption. If our initial business combination agreement requires us to use a portion of the cash in the trust account to pay the purchase price, or requires us to have a minimum amount of cash at closing, we will need to reserve a portion of the cash in the trust account to meet such requirements, or arrange for third party financing. In addition, if a larger number of shares is submitted for redemption than we initially expected, we may need to restructure the transaction to reserve a greater portion of the cash in the trust account or arrange for third party financing. Raising additional third party financing may involve dilutive equity issuances or the incurrence of indebtedness at higher than desirable levels. Furthermore, this dilution would increase to the extent that the anti-dilution provision of the Class B common stock results in the issuance of shares of Class A common stock on a greater than one-to-one basis upon conversion of the shares of Class B common stock at the time of our initial business combination. In addition, the amount of the deferred underwriting commissions payable to the underwriters will not be adjusted for any shares that are redeemed in connection with an initial business combination. The per share amount we will distribute to stockholders who properly exercise their redemption rights will not be reduced by the deferred underwriting commission and after such redemptions, the amount held in trust will continue to reflect our obligation to pay the entire deferred underwriting commissions. The above considerations may limit our ability to complete the most desirable business combination available to us or optimize our capital structure.

Previous report

The requirement that we complete our initial business combination by June 7, 2024, which may be extended only by the vote of our stockholders to approve an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation may give potential target businesses leverage over us in negotiating a business combination and may limit the time we have in which to conduct due diligence on potential business combination targets, in particular as we approach our dissolution deadline, which could undermine our ability to complete our initial business combination on terms that would produce value for our stockholders.**

Previous report

Any potential target business with which we enter into negotiations concerning a business combination will be aware that we must complete our initial business combination by June 7, 2024, which may be extended only by the vote of our stockholders to approve an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation. Consequently, such target business may obtain leverage over us in negotiating a business combination, knowing that if we do not complete our initial business combination with that particular target business, we may be unable to complete our initial business combination with any target business. This risk will increase as we get closer to the timeframe described above. In addition, we may have limited time to conduct due diligence and may enter into our initial business combination on terms that we would have rejected upon a more comprehensive investigation.

Previous report

Our search for a business combination, and any target business with which we ultimately consummate a business combination, may be materially adversely affected by the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak and other events and the status of debt and equity markets.**

Previous report

Since it was first reported to have emerged in December 2019, a novel strain of coronavirus, which causes COVID-19, has spread across the world, including the United States. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern.” On January 31, 2020, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Alex M. Azar II declared a public health emergency for the United States to aid the U.S. healthcare community in responding to COVID-19, and on March 11, 2020 the World Health Organization characterized the outbreak as a “pandemic.” The COVID-19 outbreak has adversely affected, and other events (such as terrorist attacks, natural disasters or a significant outbreak of other infectious diseases) could adversely affect, the economies and financial markets worldwide, potentially including the business of any potential target business with which we intend to consummate a business combination. Furthermore, we may be unable to complete a business combination at all if concerns relating to COVID-19 continue to restrict travel, limit the ability to have meetings with potential investors or make it impossible or impractical to negotiate and consummate a transaction with the target company’s personnel, vendors and services providers in a timely manner, if at all. The extent to which COVID-19 impacts our search for a business combination will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including new information which may emerge concerning the severity of COVID-19 and the actions to contain COVID-19 or treat its impact, among others. If the disruptions posed by COVID-19 or other events (such as terrorist attacks, natural disasters or a significant outbreak of other infectious diseases) continue for an extensive period of time, our ability to consummate a business combination, or the operations of a target business with which we ultimately consummate a business combination, may be materially adversely affected.

Previous report

In addition, our ability to consummate a transaction may be dependent on the ability to raise equity and debt financing which may be impacted by COVID-19 and other events (such as terrorist attacks, natural disasters or a significant outbreak of other infectious diseases), including as a result of increased market volatility, decreased market liquidity in third-party financing being unavailable on terms acceptable to us or at all.

Previous report

Finally, the outbreak of COVID-19 may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described in this “Risk Factors” section, such as those related to the market for our securities and cross-border transactions.

Previous report

We may not be able to complete our initial business combination by June 7, 2024, which may be extended only by the vote of our stockholders to approve an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, in which case we would cease all operations except for the purpose of winding up and we would redeem our public shares and liquidate.*** *

Previous report

We may not be able to find a suitable target business and complete our initial business combination by June 7, 2024, which may be extended only by the vote of our stockholders to approve an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation. Our ability to complete our initial business combination may be negatively impacted by general market conditions, volatility in the capital and debt markets and the other risks described herein. If we have not completed our initial business combination within such time period, we will: (i) cease all operations except for the purpose of winding up, (ii) as promptly as reasonably possible but not more than ten business days thereafter, redeem the public shares, at a per-share price, payable in cash, equal to the aggregate amount then on deposit in the trust account, including interest earned on the funds held in the trust account (which interest shall be net of taxes payable and up to $100,000 of interest to pay dissolution expenses), divided by the number of then outstanding public shares, which redemption will completely extinguish public stockholders’ rights as stockholders (including the right to receive further liquidating distributions, if any), and (iii) as promptly as reasonably possible following such redemption, subject to the approval of our remaining stockholders and our board of directors, liquidate and dissolve, subject in each case, to our obligations under Delaware law to provide for claims of creditors and the requirements of other applicable law.

Previous report

If we seek stockholder approval of our initial business combination, our sponsor, initial stockholders, directors, executive officers, advisors and their affiliates may elect to purchase shares or public warrants from public stockholders, which may influence a vote on a proposed business combination and reduce the public “float” of our Class A common stock.**

Previous report

If we seek stockholder approval of our initial business combination and we do not conduct redemptions in connection with our initial business combination pursuant to the tender offer rules, our sponsor, initial stockholders, directors, executive officers, advisors or their affiliates may purchase shares or public warrants in privately negotiated transactions or in the open market either prior to or following the completion of our initial business combination, although they are under no obligation to do so. There is no limit on the number of shares our initial stockholders, directors, officers, advisors or their affiliates may purchase in such transactions, subject to compliance with applicable law and the Nasdaq rules. However, other than as expressly stated herein, they have no current commitments, plans or intentions to engage in such transactions and have not formulated any terms or conditions for any such transactions. None of the funds in the trust account will be used to purchase shares or public warrants in such transactions. Such purchases may include a contractual acknowledgment that such stockholder, although still the record holder of our shares, is no longer the beneficial owner thereof and therefore agrees not to exercise its redemption rights.

Previous report

In the event that our sponsor, initial stockholders, directors, executive officers, advisors or their affiliates purchase shares in privately negotiated transactions from public stockholders who have already elected to exercise their redemption rights, such selling stockholders would be required to revoke their prior elections to redeem their shares. The purpose of any such purchases of shares could be to vote such shares in favor of the business combination and thereby increase the likelihood of obtaining stockholder approval of the business combination or to satisfy a closing condition in an agreement with a target that requires us to have a minimum net worth or a certain amount of cash at the closing of our initial business combination, where it appears that such requirement would otherwise not be met. The purpose of any such purchases of public warrants could be to reduce the number of public warrants outstanding or to vote such warrants on any matters submitted to the warrantholders for approval in connection with our initial business combination. Any such purchases of our securities may result in the completion of our initial business combination that may not otherwise have been possible. We expect any such purchases will be reported pursuant to Section 13 and Section 16 of the Exchange Act to the extent such purchasers are subject to such reporting requirements. See “Item 1. Business — Permitted purchases of our securities” for a description of how our sponsor, directors, executive officers, advisors or any of their affiliates will select which stockholders to purchase securities from in any private transaction.

Previous report

In addition, if such purchases are made, the public “float” of our Class A common stock or public warrants and the number of beneficial holders of our securities may be reduced, possibly making it difficult to obtain or maintain the quotation, listing or trading of our securities on a national securities exchange.

Previous report

We will comply with the proxy rules or tender offer rules, as applicable, when conducting redemptions in connection with our initial business combination. Despite our compliance with these rules, if a stockholder fails to receive our proxy materials or tender offer documents, as applicable, such stockholder may not become aware of the opportunity to redeem its shares. In addition, proxy materials or tender offer documents, as applicable, that we will furnish to holders of our public shares in connection with our initial business combination will describe the various procedures that must be complied with in order to validly tender or submit public shares for redemption. For example, we intend to require our public stockholders seeking to exercise their redemption rights, whether they are record holders or hold their shares in “street name,” to, at the holder’s option, either deliver their stock certificates to our transfer agent, or to deliver their shares to our transfer agent electronically prior to the date set forth in the proxy materials or tender offer documents, as applicable. In the case of proxy materials, this date may be up to two business days prior to the vote on the proposal to approve the initial business combination. In addition, if we conduct redemptions in connection with a stockholder vote, we intend to require a public stockholder seeking redemption of its public shares to also submit a written request for redemption to our transfer agent two business days prior to the vote in which the name of the beneficial owner of such shares is included. In the event that a stockholder fails to comply with these or any other procedures disclosed in the proxy or tender offer materials, as applicable, its shares may not be redeemed. See the section of this Report entitled “Item 1. Business — Delivering Stock Certificates in Connection with the Exercise of Redemption Rights.”

Previous report

Since the net proceeds of our IPO and the sale of the private placement warrants are intended to be used to complete an initial business combination with a target business that has not been selected, we may be deemed to be a “blank check” company under the United States securities laws. However, because we have net tangible assets in excess of $5,000,000 and filed a Current Report on Form 8-K, including an audited balance sheet demonstrating this fact, we are exempt from rules promulgated by the SEC to protect investors in blank check companies, such as Rule 419. Accordingly, investors are not afforded the benefits or protections of those rules. Among other things, this means we will have a longer period of time to complete our initial business combination than do companies subject to Rule 419. Moreover, if our IPO was subject to Rule 419, that rule would prohibit the release of any interest earned on funds held in the trust account to us unless and until the funds in the trust account were released to us in connection with our completion of an initial business combination.

Previous report

If we seek stockholder approval of our initial business combination and we do not conduct redemptions pursuant to the tender offer rules, and if you or a “group” of stockholders are deemed to hold in excess of 15% of our Class A common stock, you will lose the ability to redeem all such shares in excess of 15% of our Class A common stock.

Previous report

If we seek stockholder approval of our initial business combination and we do not conduct redemptions in connection with our initial business combination pursuant to the tender offer rules, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that a public stockholder, together with any affiliate of such stockholder or any other person with whom such stockholder is acting in concert or as a “group” (as defined under Section 13 of the Exchange Act), will be restricted from seeking redemption rights with respect to Excess Shares without our prior consent. However, we would not be restricting our stockholders’ ability to vote all of their shares (including Excess Shares) for or against our initial business combination. Your inability to redeem the Excess Shares will reduce your influence over our ability to complete our initial business combination and you could suffer a material loss on your investment in us if you sell Excess Shares in open market transactions. Additionally, you will not receive redemption distributions with respect to the Excess Shares if we complete our initial business combination. And as a result, you will continue to hold that number of shares exceeding 15% and, in order to dispose of such shares, would be required to sell your shares in open market transactions, potentially at a loss.

Previous report

Because of our limited resources and the significant competition for business combination opportunities, it may be more difficult for us to complete our initial business combination. If we are unable to complete our initial business combination, our public stockholders may receive only their pro rata portion of the funds in the trust account that are available for distribution to public stockholders, and our warrants will expire worthless.

Previous report

We expect to encounter competition from other entities having a business objective similar to ours, including private investors (which may be individuals or investment partnerships), other blank check companies and other entities, domestic and international, competing for the types of businesses we intend to acquire. Many of these individuals and entities are well-established and have extensive experience in identifying and effecting, directly or indirectly, acquisitions of companies operating in or providing services to various industries. Many of these competitors possess similar or greater technical, human and other resources to ours or more local industry knowledge than we do and our financial resources will be relatively limited when contrasted with those of many of these competitors. While we believe there are numerous target businesses we could potentially acquire with the net proceeds of our IPO and the sale of the private placement warrants, our ability to compete with respect to the acquisition of certain target businesses that are sizable will be limited by our available financial resources. This inherent competitive limitation gives others an advantage in pursuing the acquisition of certain target businesses. Furthermore, we are obligated to offer holders of our public shares the right to redeem their shares for cash at the time of our initial business combination in conjunction with a stockholder vote or via a tender offer. Target companies will be aware that this may reduce the resources available to us for our initial business combination. Any of these obligations may place us at a competitive disadvantage in successfully negotiating a business combination. If we are unable to complete our initial business combination, our public stockholders may receive only their pro rata portion of the funds in the trust account that are available for distribution to public stockholders, and our warrants will expire worthless.

Previous report

If the net proceeds of our IPO not being held in the trust account are insufficient to allow us to operate for at least until June 7, 2024, which may be extended only by the vote of our stockholders to approve an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, it could limit the amount available to fund our search for a target business or businesses and complete our initial business combination, and we will depend on loans from our sponsor or management team to fund our search and to complete our initial business combination.

Previous report

Of the net proceeds of our IPO, only $2,000,000 was available to us initially outside the trust account to fund our working capital requirements. We believe that the funds available to us outside of the trust account will be sufficient to allow us to operate for at least until June 7, 2024, which may be extended only by the vote of our stockholders to approve an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation; however, we cannot assure you that our estimate is accurate. Of the funds available to us, we could use a portion of the funds available to us to pay fees to consultants to assist us with our search for a target business. We could also use a portion of the funds as a down payment or to fund a “no-shop” provision (a provision in letters of intent or merger agreements designed to keep target businesses from “shopping” around for transactions with other companies or investors on terms more favorable to such target businesses) with respect to a particular proposed business combination, although we do not have any current intention to do so. If we entered into a letter of intent or merger agreement where we paid for the right to receive exclusivity from a target business and were subsequently required to forfeit such funds (whether as a result of our breach or otherwise), we might not have sufficient funds to continue searching for, or conduct due diligence with respect to, a target business.

Previous report

If we are required to seek additional capital, we would need to borrow funds from our sponsor, management team or other third parties to operate or may be forced to liquidate. Neither our sponsor, members of our management team nor any of their affiliates is under any obligation to advance funds to us in such circumstances. Any such advances would be repaid only from funds held outside the trust account or from funds released to us upon completion of our initial business combination. Up to $1,500,000 of such loans may be convertible into warrants of the post-business combination entity at a price of $1.00 per warrant at the option of the lender. The warrants would be identical to the private placement warrants. Prior to the completion of our initial business combination, we do not expect to seek loans from parties other than our sponsor or an affiliate of our sponsor as we do not believe third parties will be willing to loan such funds and provide a waiver against any and all rights to seek access to funds in our trust account. If we are unable to complete our initial business combination because we do not have sufficient funds available to us, we will be forced to cease operations and liquidate the trust account. Consequently, our public stockholders may only receive an estimated $10.05 per share, or possibly less, on our redemption of our public shares, and our warrants will expire worthless.

Previous report

Our placing of funds in the trust account may not protect those funds from third party claims against us. Although we will seek to have all vendors, service providers (other than our independent registered public accounting firm), prospective target businesses and other entities with which we do business execute agreements with us waiving any right, title, interest or claim of any kind in or to any monies held in the trust account for the benefit of our public stockholders, such parties may not execute such agreements, or even if they execute such agreements they may not be prevented from bringing claims against the trust account, including, but not limited to, fraudulent inducement, breach of fiduciary responsibility or other similar claims, as well as claims challenging the enforceability of the waiver, in each case in order to gain advantage with respect to a claim against our assets, including the funds held in the trust account. If any third party refuses to execute an agreement waiving such claims to the monies held in the trust account, our management will consider whether competitive alternatives are reasonably available to us and will only enter into an agreement with such third party if management believes that such third party’s engagement would be in the best interests of the company under the circumstances. The underwriters of our IPO as well as our registered independent public accounting firm have not executed agreements with us waiving such claims to the monies held in the trust account.

Previous report

Examples of possible instances where we may engage a third party that refuses to execute a waiver include the engagement of a third party consultant whose particular expertise or skills are believed by management to be significantly superior to those of other consultants that would agree to execute a waiver or in cases where management is unable to find a service provider willing to execute a waiver. In addition, there is no guarantee that such entities will agree to waive any claims they may have in the future as a result of, or arising out of, any negotiations, contracts or agreements with us and will not seek recourse against the trust account for any reason. Upon redemption of our public shares, if we are unable to complete our initial business combination within the prescribed timeframe, or upon the exercise of a redemption right in connection with our initial business combination, we will be required to provide for payment of claims of creditors that were not waived that may be brought against us within the 10 years following redemption. Accordingly, the per-share redemption amount received by public stockholders could be less than the $10.05 per public share initially held in the trust account, due to claims of such creditors. Pursuant to the letter agreement which is filed as an exhibit to this Report, our sponsor has agreed that it will be liable to us if and to the extent any claims by a third party for services rendered or products sold to us, or a prospective target business with which we have entered into a written letter of intent, confidentiality or other similar agreement or business combination agreement, reduce the amount of funds in the trust account to below the lesser of (i) $10.05 per public share and (ii) the actual amount per public share held in the trust account as of the date of the liquidation of the trust account, if less than $10.05 per public share due to reductions in the value of the trust assets, less taxes payable, provided that such liability will not apply to any claims by a third party or prospective target business who executed a waiver of any and all rights to the monies held in the trust account (whether or not such waiver is enforceable) nor will it apply to any claims under our indemnity of the underwriters of our IPO against certain liabilities, including liabilities under the Securities Act. However, we have not asked our sponsor to reserve for such indemnification obligations, nor have we independently verified whether our sponsor has sufficient funds to satisfy its indemnity obligations and we believe that our sponsor’s only assets are securities of our company. Therefore, we cannot assure you that our sponsor would be able to satisfy those obligations. As a result, if any such claims were successfully made against the trust account, the funds available for our initial business combination and redemptions could be reduced to less than $10.05 per public share. In such event, we may not be able to comp…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous report

In the event that the proceeds in the trust account are reduced below the lesser of (i) $10.05 per share and (ii) the actual amount per public share held in the trust account as of the date of the liquidation of the trust account if less than $10.05 per public share due to reductions in the value of the trust assets, in each case less taxes payable, and our sponsor asserts that it is unable to satisfy its obligations or that it has no indemnification obligations related to a particular claim, our independent directors would determine whether to take legal action against our sponsor to enforce its indemnification obligations. While we currently expect that our independent directors would take legal action on our behalf against our sponsor to enforce its indemnification obligations to us, it is possible that our independent directors in exercising their business judgment and subject to their fiduciary duties may choose not to do so in any particular instance. If our independent directors choose not to enforce these indemnification obligations, the amount of funds in the trust account available for distribution to our public stockholders may be reduced below $10.05 per share.

Previous report

We do not believe that our anticipated principal activities will subject us to the Investment Company Act. To this end, the proceeds held in the trust account may only be invested in United States “government securities” within the meaning of Section 2(a)(16) of the Investment Company Act having a maturity of 185 days or less or in money market funds meeting certain conditions under Rule 2a-7 promulgated under the Investment Company Act which invest only in direct U.S. government treasury obligations. Pursuant to the trust agreement, the trustee is not permitted to invest in other securities or assets. By restricting the investment of the proceeds to these instruments, and by having a business plan targeted at acquiring and growing businesses for the long term (rather than on buying and selling businesses in the manner of a merchant bank or private equity fund), we intend to avoid being deemed an “investment company” within the meaning of the Investment Company Act. The trust account is intended as a holding place for funds pending the earliest to occur of either: (i) the completion of our initial business combination; (ii) the redemption of any public shares properly tendered in connection with a stockholder vote to amend our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to modify the substance or timing of our obligation to redeem 100% of our public shares if we do not complete our initial business combination by June 7, 2024, which may be extended only by the vote of our stockholders to approve an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation; and (iii) absent an initial business combination by June 7, 2024, which may be extended only by the vote of our stockholders to approve an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or with respect to any other material provisions relating to stockholders’ rights or pre-initial business combination activity, our return of the funds held in the trust account to our public stockholders as part of our redemption of the public shares. If we do not invest the proceeds as discussed above, we may be deemed to be subject to the Investment Company Act. If we were deemed to be subject to the Investment Company Act, compliance with these additional regulatory burdens would require additional expenses for which we have not allotted funds and may hinder our ability to complete a business combination. If we are unable to complete our initial business combination, our public stockholders may only receive their pro rata portion of the funds in the trust account that are available for distribution to public stockholders, and our warrants will expire worthless.

Previous report

Under the DGCL, stockholders may be held liable for claims by third parties against a corporation to the extent of distributions received by them in a dissolution. The pro rata portion of our trust account distributed to our public stockholders upon the redemption of our public shares in the event we do not complete our initial business combination by June 7, 2024, which may be extended only by the vote of our stockholders to approve an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation may be considered a liquidating distribution under Delaware law. If a corporation complies with certain procedures set forth in Section 280 of the DGCL intended to ensure that it makes reasonable provision for all claims against it, including a 60-day notice period during which any third-party claims can be brought against the corporation, a 90-day period during which the corporation may reject any claims brought, and an additional 150-day waiting period before any liquidating distributions are made to stockholders, any liability of stockholders with respect to a liquidating distribution is limited to the lesser of such stockholder’s pro rata share of the claim or the amount distributed to the stockholder, and any liability of the stockholder would be barred after the third anniversary of the dissolution. However, it is our intention to redeem our public shares as soon as reasonably possible following the 18 th month from the closing of our IPO in the event we do not complete our initial business combination and, therefore, we do not intend to comply with the foregoing procedures.

Previous report

Because we will not be complying with Section 280, Section 281(b) of the DGCL requires us to adopt a plan, based on facts known to us at such time that will provide for our payment of all existing and pending claims or claims that may be potentially brought against us within the 10 years following our dissolution. However, because we are a blank check company, rather than an operating company, and our operations are limited to searching for prospective target businesses to acquire, the only likely claims to arise would be from our vendors (such as lawyers, investment bankers, etc.) or prospective target businesses. If our plan of distribution complies with Section 281(b) of the DGCL, any liability of stockholders with respect to a liquidating distribution is limited to the lesser of such stockholder’s pro rata share of the claim or the amount distributed to the stockholder, and any liability of the stockholder would likely be barred after the third anniversary of the dissolution. We cannot assure you that we will properly assess all claims that may be potentially brought against us. As such, our stockholders could potentially be liable for any claims to the extent of distributions received by them (but no more) and any liability of our stockholders may extend beyond the third anniversary of such date. Furthermore, if the pro rata portion of our trust account distributed to our public stockholders upon the redemption of our public shares in the event we do not complete our initial business combination by June 7, 2024, which may be extended only by the vote of our stockholders to approve an amendment to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, is not considered a liquidating distribution under Delaware law and such redemption distribution is deemed to be unlawful (potentially due to the imposition of legal proceedings that a party may bring or due to other circumstances that are currently unknown), then pursuant to Section 174 of the DGCL, the statute of limitations for claims of creditors could then be six years after the unlawful redemption distribution, instead of three years, as in the case of a liquidating distribution.** **

Current report — wording carried from elsewhere

We may be subject to the Excise Tax included in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 in connection with redemptions of our Common Stock after December 31, 2022.