U.S. District Court Dismisses AIMs Baseless Section 13(d) Claim
Court Rules that Allowing Claim to Proceed Would be Inconsistent with Statutory Purpose of Investor Protection
AIMs Stock Price Continues Dramatic Decline, Closing at New 52-Week Low of $0.479 on
October 12, 2022, Down More Than 35% Since July 18, 2022 When AIM Filed The Now Dismissed Lawsuit Against ASFV Committee
Worried AIM Board Selectively Discloses Incomplete Information Regarding Pending Delaware Action in Attempt to Distract from Failures
New York, NY, October 13, 2022: Jonathan Jorgl, an AIM ImmunoTech Inc. (NYSE American: AIM) (AIM) stockholder, together with his
nominees, Robert L. Chioini and Michael Rice (collectively, the AIM Stockholder Full Value Committee or the ASFV Committee), today announced that the U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, dismissed in its entirety,
without prejudice, the action brought by AIM (the Florida Action) against the members of the ASFV Committee and other individuals baselessly alleging that the members of the ASFV Committee were acting as a group with certain stockholders
of AIM in violation of Section 13(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The court ruled that AIM lacked standing to bring the claim based on
long-standing binding precedent. Citing that precedent and the purpose of Section 13(d) in protecting investors and potential investors rather than the corporation and incumbent management, the court noted that ... outsiders who
challenge incumbent management, help protect the small shareholders interest in monitoringby possibly challengingincumbent management. Further, [t]he threat of this sort of litigation might remove from the field a
player whose self-interest is to monitor management.
We are pleased with the Judges ruling, confirming that consistent with its pattern
over the last six years AIMs incumbent board is wasting corporate resources as part of a desperate attempt to entrench and enrich themselves and avoid accountability to stockholders, in this case attempting to use frivolous litigation,
stated the ASFV Committee. The incumbent board had no factual basis or evidence to their allegations against the ASFV Committee in the Florida Action and ignored clear binding precedent in a blatant attempt to bully us and outspend us into
submission. Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Applerouth and Mr. Equels are continuing to waste corporate assets, which belong to stockholders not the incumbent directors, solely to deny those same
stockholders a meaningful choice in who represents them on the Board. For the incumbent board to waste $2.5 million of company money just to protect their excessive compensation while the companys stock price has plummeted
99%, instead of deploying that money towards clinical development of a potential therapy that could possibly help cancer patients, is truly unfathomable, and clearly demonstrates the current board is incapable of fulfilling their fiduciary
duties.
The ASFV Committee continued:
In another desperate effort by the incumbent directors to mislead stockholders and distract from the serious issues facing
AIM, yesterday, just one day after the dismissal of the Florida Action, AIM made a filing with the SEC selectively disclosing certain elements in the pending Delaware action. Shockingly, this filing included cherry-picked, incomplete and
misleading information disseminated by the incumbent AIM board and made no mention whatsoever of the dismissal of the Florida Action, which AIM had previously touted in press releases and SEC filings.
What has become evident is that the incumbent directors are now panicking that they may lose their board seats (and excessive
compensation) in a fair election and are desperately trying to change the narrative yet again, and its transparently pathetic. The preliminary injunction hearing in Delaware was held on October 5th, and the parties are currently awaiting a
ruling. The ASFV Committee remains confident that Mr. Jorgls nomination was valid. Until the court rules, stockholders should not be distracted by cherry-picked, incomplete and misleading information disseminated by the
incumbent board.