{"url_path":"/sec/amze/10-q/2026/item-1","section_key":"item-1","section_title":"Item 1 Legal Proceedings**","topic":"sec","document":{"doc_type":"10-Q","doc_date":"2026-05-15","source_url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1880343/0001493152-26-023941-index.html","accession_number":"0001493152-26-023941","cik":"0001880343","ticker":"AMZE","issuer_name":"AMAZE HOLDINGS, INC.","edgar_url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1880343/0001493152-26-023941-index.html","primary_entity_key":"0001880343","primary_entity_name":"AMAZE HOLDINGS, INC."},"word_count":1189,"has_tables":true,"body_markdown":"**Item\n1. Legal Proceedings**\n\n \n\n*Timothy\nMichaels Lawsuit*\n\n \n\nOn\nFebruary 24, 2022, Timothy Michaels, the former Chief Operating Officer of the Company, signed a Separation Agreement and Release (the\n“Separation Agreement”) in connection with the termination of his employment with the Company, which occurred on February\n7, 2022.\n\n \n\nOn May 27, 2022, Mr. Michaels\nfiled a complaint against the Company in the Fourth Judicial District Court, Hennepin County, Minnesota, alleging that the Company breached\nthe Separation Agreement by including a restricted “lock-up” legend on shares of the Company’s common stock issued to\nMr. Michaels pursuant to the Separation Agreement. The complaint also included counts alleging breach of the implied covenant of good\nfaith and fair dealing, issuer liability under Minn. Stat. § 336.8-401 for delay in removing or directing the Company’s transfer\nagent to remove the lock-up legend from the shares, conversion and civil theft.\n\n \n\nThe\nCompany made a motion seeking dismissal of the conversion and civil theft counts, which was granted by the Fourth Judicial District Court,\nHennepin County, Minnesota on October 31, 2022. On August 9, 2023, the Company moved for summary judgment on Mr. Michaels’ remaining\nclaims. A jury trial commenced on January 23, 2024. During trial, on January 24, 2024, the Company filed a motion for judgement in favor\nof the Company as a matter of law, which was denied by the Court. On January 25, 2024, the jury in the lawsuit rendered a verdict against\nthe Company awarding damages to Mr. Michaels in the amount of $585,976.25. On February 22, 2024, the Company filed a renewed motion for\npost-verdict judgment in favor of the Company as a matter of law. On February 26, 2024, the Judge in the lawsuit denied the renewed motion\nfor post-verdict judgment. On March 25, 2024, Mr. Michaels filed a Notice and Application for Taxation of Costs and Disbursements. On\nMarch 26, 2024, the Company filed its Notice of Appeal. On March 26, 2024, Mr. Michaels served a motion for Pre-verdict and Prejudgment\nInterest. On March 27, 2024, a Notice of Entry of Judgment was filed and, on March 28, 2024, a Notice of Docketing of Judgment was entered.\nThe Company appealed the verdict and the court of appeals affirmed the judgment in February 2025, which granted approximately $22,000\nin additional damages to Mr. Michaels. On March 12, 2025, the Company petitioned the supreme court for review. On May 13, 2025, the supreme\ncourt denied the petition. On November 21, 2025, the Company tendered full payment of the judgment based on calculations of Mr. Michaels’\nformer counsel, but Mr. Michaels refused to recognize satisfaction of the judgment. On February 2, 2026, the Company filed a motion to\ncompel satisfaction of the judgment and shortly thereafter tendered an additional $25,000 for post-judgment interest. On March 9 and\n10, 2026, the Company filed motions to compel satisfaction of the same judgment docketed in California and to quash subpoenas served\nthere. At March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025, approximately $0 and $27,000, respectively,\nwas accrued as a settlement payable. On April 2, 2026, the Minnesota court ordered the judgment satisfied. Mr. Michaels withdrew the\nsubpoenas and satisfied the judgment in California. On April 17, 2026, the California court entered an order awarding the Company approximately\n$45,000 for its costs and attorneys’ fees incurred compelling satisfaction of the judgment. Mr. Michaels paid the award to the\nCompany’s counsel and the matters in Minnesota and California are now concluded.\n\n \n\n*G&I\nIX Aviation LLC v. Teespring, Inc. et al.*\n\n \n\nAmaze\nHolding Company LLC is a defendant in *G&I IX Aviation LLC v. Teespring, Inc. et al.*, Case No. 23-CI-00220 in Boone County\nCircuit Court, Kentucky. When Amaze acquired certain assets of Teespring, Inc., pursuant to an Asset Purchase Agreement in November\n2022, Teespring, Inc. leased commercial property located at 1201 Aviation Boulevard, Hebron, Kentucky, owned by Plaintiff G&I IX\nAviation LLC (“G&I”). During and after APA negotiations, Amaze attempted to assume the lease, but Plaintiff refused\nto consent to the assignment of the lease unless Amaze paid previous obligations the landlord claimed Teespring. Inc. owed.\nUltimately, G&I and Amaze never signed a consent to assignment of the lease. Plaintiff provided a notice of default on December\n15, 2022, and filed its complaint against Teespring, Inc. and Amaze on February 1, 2023. Plaintiff demands approximately $869,000 in\nunpaid rent plus attorneys’ fees On June 12, 2024, the court denied Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against\nAmaze. Plaintiff filed a second motion for summary judgment on August 28, 2025. On February 13, 2026, the Court granted\nPlaintiff’s second motion for summary judgment and awarded liquidated damages in the amount of approximately $1.3 million,\nplus court costs and reasonable attorney fees in an amount to be determined, which shall bear post judgment interest at the 6%\nstatutory rate. On March 20, 2026, Amaze requested that the Court reduce the award by approximately $205,000 in unreasonable fees\nand costs. Amaze plans to appeal the decision when it becomes final. At March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025, approximately $1.3\nmillion was accrued as a settlement payable.\n\n \n\n40\n\n \n\n \n\n*Dubow\nDecorating, Inc. v. Amaze Software, Inc.*\n\n \n\nAmaze Software, Inc. is the Defendant\nand Counter-Plaintiff in Dubow Decorating, Inc. v. Amaze Software Inc., Case No. 05-CV-25-699, in the Benton County District Court, State\nof Minnesota, filed on April 16, 2025.  Dubow Decorating, Inc. (“Dubow”) was a vendor for Amaze and provided printing\nservices. Dubow sued Amaze claiming $394,000 in damages for Amaze’s failure to pay certain invoices, and Amaze asserted several\ndefenses based on quality of services, discrepancies with Dubow’s invoices and its admitted overbilling. Amaze also asserted counterclaims\nagainst Dubow for defamation and tortious interference with Amaze’s other vendor relationships. In November 2025, the Company settled\nthe lawsuit for approximately $185,000 with monthly payments to be made through September 2026.\n\n \n\n*DinoCloud,\nInc. v. Amaze Software, Inc.*\n\n \n\nAmaze\nSoftware, Inc. is the Defendant in *DinoCloud, Inc. v. Amaze Software, Inc.*, Case No. N24C-02-496 PAW, in the Superior Court of\nthe State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, filed on February 25, 2025 and served on the Company on April 28, 2025. Plaintiff\nalleges breach of contract, breach of good faith and fair dealing, detrimental reliance, and unjust enrichment and claims $202,000 in\ndamages. The Company filed its answer and affirmative defenses on July 17, 2025. On May 6, 2026, the Company reached a preliminary agreement to resolve dispute for an estimated $200,000.\n\n \n\n*Baron\nApp, Inc. dba Cameo v. Amaze Holding Company LLC*\n\n \n\nAmaze Holding Company\nLLC is the Defendant in *Baron App, Inc., dba Cameo v. Amaze Holding Company LLC*, Case No. 30-2025-01486631-CU-BC-NJC, in the Superior\nCourt of California, County of Orange. Plaintiff filed the Complaint on May 30, 2025. Plaintiff alleges breach of contract and damages\nin subject to proof in excess of $140,000. Mercer Oak filed the Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses on July 15, 2025. An\ninitial Case Management Conference took place October 28, 2025. As of March 2026, the parties have reached a tentative settlement, which\nthey are working to document. At March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025, approximately $140,000 was accrued as a settlement payable."}