UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
 
FORM 10-Q
 
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
For the Quarterly Period Ended September 30, 2019
 
or
 
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
For the Transition Period from _________ to _________
 
Commission file number: 000-26361
 
 
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 
New Jersey
 
22-3392051
(State or other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)
 
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
 
777 South Flagler Drive,
Suite 800 West Tower,
West Palm Beach, FL
 
33401
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
 
(Zip Code)
 
(561) 515-6163
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
 
N/A
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes No
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes No
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a small reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” a “smaller reporting company” and an “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
 
Large accelerated filer
Accelerated filer
Non-accelerated filer
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Smaller reporting company
 
 
Emerging Growth company
 
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act:
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes No
 
As of November 21, 2019, there were 637,675,079 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding.

 
 
 
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
FORM 10-Q
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2019
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
 
 
Page
 
 
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
 
 
 
 
3
 
 
 
 
3
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5
 
 
 
 
6
 
 
 
 
7
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION
 
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 
 
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
 
 
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
 
 
(Unaudited)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
September 30,
 
 
December 31,
 
 
 
2019
 
 
2018
 
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
 
Current Assets
 
 
 
 
 
 
           Cash
 $50,625 
 $8,100 
            Prepaid Expense
  6,000 
  - 
Total current assets
  56,625 
  8,100 
 
    
    
           Equipment, net of accumulated Depreciation of $0
  26,282 
  - 
Total Assets
 $82,907 
 $8,100 
 
    
    
Liabilities and Stockholders' Deficit
    
    
Current Liabilities
    
    
         Accounts payable
 $568,869 
 $672,284 
         Accrued expenses
  706,280 
  917,633 
         Financed insurance policy
  11,187 
  11,187 
         Notes payable , net of discount of $0 and
    
    
$74,324, respectively
  2,724,000 
  1,999,676 
         Convertible notes payable, net of discount of $179,605 and
    
    
$96,750 respectively
  577,956 
  140,624 
         Derivative Liability
  541,200 
  562,175 
Total Current Liabilities
  5,129,492 
  4,303,579 
          Commitments and Contingencies (Note 7)
    
    
 
    
    
Stockholders'Deficit
    
    
         Preferred stock, $0.001 par value 35,000,000 shares
    
    
                      authorized, 1,000,000 shares issued and outstanding at
    
    
 March 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018
  1,000 
  1,000 
         Common stock, $0.001 par value 2,000,000,000 shares
    
    
 
 authorized, 637,675,079 shares and 579,900,814 issued and outstanding at
 
    
September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018
  637,675 
  579,901 
         Additional paid in capital
  31,825,130 
  30,785,442 
         Accumulated deficit
  (37,510,390)
  (35,661,822)
                Total Stockholders' Deficit
  (5,046,585)
  (4,295,479)
                Total Liabilities and Stockholders' Deficit
 $82,907 
 $8,100 
 
The accompanying footnotes are in integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. 
 
 
3
 
 
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
 
 
 
For the Three months ended  
 
 
For the Nine months ended
 
 
 
September 30, 2019
 
 
September 30, 2018
 
 
September 30, 2019
 
 
September 30, 2018
 
Revenues
 $- 
 $- 
 $- 
 $- 
 
    
    
    
    
 
    
    
    
    
Operating Expenses
    
    
    
    
       Selling, general and administrative expenses
  (587,394)
  (145,942)
  (1,031,750)
  (1,175,214)
              Impairment Loss
  (62,000)
  - 
  (62,000)
  - 
Total operating expenses
  649,394 
  145,942 
  1,093,750 
  1,175,214 
 
    
    
    
    
Loss from operations
  (649,394)
  (145,942)
  (1,093,750)
  (1,175,214)
 
    
    
    
    
Other( income) expense
    
    
    
    
              Change in fair value of derivative liability
  7,800 
  (47,294)
  (311,575)
  (133,411)
              Amortization of debt discount
  68,162 
  44,595 
  290,406 
  71,460 
              Interest expense
  346,419 
  53,564 
  703,651 
  120,274 
              Finance Costs
  - 
  - 
  - 
  22,000 
              Loss (Gain) on settlement of debt
  - 
  - 
  72,336 
  (17,266)
Total other expense
  422,381 
  50,865 
  754,818 
  63,057 
 
    
    
    
    
Net Loss
 $(1,071,775)
 $(196,807)
  (1,848,568)
  (1,238,271)
 
    
    
    
    
 Loss per common share, basic
 $- 
 $- 
 $- 
 $- 
 
    
    
    
    
Weighted average common shares outstanding, basic
  624,362,190 
  559,459,905 
  608,341,145 
  554,990,572 
 
 
The accompanying footnotes are in integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
 
 
4
 
 
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS of Changes in STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT
(Unaudited)
 
For the nine months ended September 30, 2019
 
 
Preferred Stock
 
 
Common Stock
 
 
Paid-In
 
 
Accumulated
 
 
 
 
 
 
Shares
 
 
Amount
 
 
Shares
 
 
Amount
 
 
Capital
 
 
Deficit
 
 
Total
 
Balances at December 31, 2018
  1,000,000 
 $1,000 
  579,901,814 
 $579,901 
 $30,785,442 
 $(35,661,822)
 $(4,295,479)
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Common Stock shares issued for Cash
    
    
  28,613,888 
  28,614 
  257,524 
    
  286,138 
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Common Stock shares issued for Services
    
    
 24,160,377 
 24,160
  265,764
    
 289,924
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
  - 
    Common Stock shares issued for Acquisition
    
    
 5,000,000 
 5,000 
 57,000
    
 62,000
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
 Reduction in Derivative Liability
    
    
    
    
  459,400 
    
  459,400 
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
Net loss for the nine months
    
    
    
    
    
    
  - 
          ended September 30,2019
    
    
    
    
    
  (1,848,568)
  (1,848,568)
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
Balances at September 30, 2019
  1,000,000 
 $1,000 
  637,676,079 
 $637,675 
 $31,825,130 
 $(37,510,390)
 $(5,046,585)
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
 
For the nine months ended September 30, 2018
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
Balances at December 31, 2017
  1,000,000 
 $1,000 
  530,806,571 
 $530,806 
 $30,282,937 
 $(33,827,464)
 $(3,012,720)
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
Shares sold
  - 
  - 
  4,320,000 
 7,650
 21,096
  - 
 28,746
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
  - 
Shares issued for conversion of debt
  - 
  - 
  - 
    
    
  - 
  - 
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
  - 
Shares issued for financing fees
  - 
  - 
  10,000,000 
  10,000 
  107,500 
  - 
  117,500 
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
Shares issued for services
  - 
  - 
  14,333,334 
  14,333 
  157,667 
  - 
  172,000 
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
Reduction in derivative liability
  - 
  - 
  - 
    
  168,232 
  - 
  168,232 
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
Debt discounts related to warrants
  - 
  - 
  - 
    
    
  - 
    
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
Net loss for the nine months
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
          ended September 30, 2018
  - 
  - 
  - 
    
  - 
  (1,238,271)
  (1,238,271)
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
Balances at September 30, 2018
  1,000,000 
 $1,000 
  559,459,905 
 $562,789
 $30,737,432
 $(35,065,735)
 $(3,764,514)
 
The accompanying footnotes are in integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
 
 
 
5
 
 
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOW
(unaudited)
 
 
 
For the nine months ended
 
 
 
September 30,
2019
 
 
September 30,
2018
 
Cash flows from operating activities
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Net Loss
 $(1,848,568)
 $(1,238,271)
Adjustments to reconcile net losss to net cash used in operating activities
    
    
    Stock- based compenstion
  269,924 
  289,500 
    Change in fair value of derivative liability
  (311,575)
  (133,411)
    Amortization of debt discount
  290,406 
  71,460 
    Finance costs
  - 
  22,000 
    Impairment expense
  62,000 
  - 
    Loss (Gain) on Settlement
  72,336 
  (17,266)
    Interest expense from Derivative liability
  536,525 
  - 
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
    
    
    Prepaid Expenses
  (6,000)
  20,000 
    Accounts payable
  (103,415)
  110,539 
    Accrued expenses
  (211,353)
  471,648 
    Due to Officer
  - 
  (43,349)
Net cash used in operating activities
  (1,249,720)
  (447,150)
 
    
    
Cash flows from investing activities
    
    
Purchase of Equipment
  (26,282)
  - 
Net cash (used in) investing activities
  (26,282)
  - 
 
    
    
Cash flows from financing activities
    
    
Proceeds from notes payable
  900,000 
  454,000 
Payments on notes payable
  (275,000)
  (24,000)
Proceeds from convertible notes payable
  696,975 
  - 
Payments of convertible notes payable
  (289,586)
  (31,500)
Payments to factor
  - 
  (60,000)
Proceeds from sale of common shares
  286,138 
  16,650 
Net cash provided by (used in ) financing activities
  1,318,527
 
  355,150 
 
    
    
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
  42,525 
  (92,000)
 
    
    
 Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
  8,100 
  93,000 
 
    
    
 Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
 $50,625 
 $1,000 
  
Supplementary disclosure of cash flow information
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cash paid during the year for:
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest
 $28,812
 $120,274 
Taxes
 $- 
 $- 
 
    
    
Supplementary disclosure of non-cash investing and financing activities
    
    
Accrued interest settled with convertible notes payable
 $- 
 $43,633 
Debt discount from warrants
 $- 
 $50,378 
Discount on convertible notes payable
 $51,775 
 $162,000 
Reduction in derivative liabilitry from payments on convertible notes
 $459,400 
 $117,854 
Discount from derivative on convertible notes payable
 $213,475 
    
Discount from warrants issued with convertible notes payable
 $20,000 
    
Shared issued for acquisition
 $62,000 
    

The accompanying footnotes are in integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
 
 
6
 
 
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NINE MONTHS ENDED September 30, 2019
(Unaudited)
 
 
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 
NOTE 1 – DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS
 
We were incorporated in New Jersey as Creative Beauty Supply, Inc. (“Creative”) in August 1995. In March 2004, Creative acquired Global Digital Solutions, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Global”). The merger was treated as a recapitalization of Global, and Creative changed its name to Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“the Company”, “we”), Global provided structured cabling design, installation and maintenance for leading information technology companies, federal, state and local government, major businesses, educational institutions, and telecommunication companies. On May 1, 2012, we made the decision to wind down our operations in the telecommunications area and to refocus our efforts in the area of cyber arms technology and complementary security and technology solutions. From August 2012 through November 2013 we were actively involved in managing Airtronic USA, Inc., and effective as of June 16, 2014 we acquired North American Custom Specialty Vehicles (“NACSV”). In July 2014, we announced the formation of GDSI International (f/k/a Global Digital Solutions, LLC) to spearhead our efforts overseas. The Company has been dormant since December 31, 2015. The Company had limited operations from the NACSV subsidiary from December 31, 2015 until May 13, 2016. During the interim, the Company was pursuing acquisition opportunities and responding to the litigation with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Subsequent to May 13, 2016, the Company has been seeking acquisitions and additional financing.
 
NOTE 2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
 
Going Concern
 
The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming we will continue as a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and the liquidation of liabilities in the normal course of business. We have sustained losses and experienced negative cash flows from operations since inception, and for the Nine Months ended, September 30, 2019, incurred a net loss of $ 1,848,568 and used net cash of $ 1,249,720 to fund operating activities. At September 30, 2019 we had a working deficit of $ 5,072,867, and stockholders’ deficit of $5,046,585.
Our cash position is critically deficient, and payments essential to our ability to operate are not being made in the ordinary course. Failure to raise capital in the coming days to fund our operations and failure to generate positive cash flow to fund such operations in the future will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. These factors raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.
 
We need to raise additional funds immediately and continue to raise funds until we begin to generate sufficient cash from operations, and we may not be able to obtain the necessary financing on acceptable terms, or at all.
 
We will continue to require substantial funds to continue development of our core business. Management’s plans in order to meet our operating cash flow requirements include financing activities such as private placements of common stock, and issuances of debt and convertible debt instruments, and the establishment of strategic relationships which we expect will lead to the generation of additional revenue or acquisition opportunities.
 
While we believe that we will be successful in obtaining the necessary financing to fund our operations, there are no assurances that such additional funding will be achieved or that we will succeed in our future operations. 
 
 
7
 
 
Our ability to achieve and maintain profitability and positive cash flow is dependent upon our ability to successfully execute the plans to pursue acquisitions and raise the funds necessary to complete such acquisitions. The outcome of these matters cannot be predicted at this time. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or the amounts and classification of liabilities that might be necessary should we be unable to continue as a going concern.
 
Basis of Presentation
 
The accompanying unaudited financial information as of and for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018 has been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. for interim financial information and with the instructions to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. In the opinion of management, such financial information includes all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, unless otherwise indicated) considered necessary for a fair presentation of our financial position at such date and the operating results and cash flows for such periods. Operating results for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the entire year or for any other subsequent interim period.
 
Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles have been omitted pursuant to the rules of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. These unaudited financial statements and related notes should be read in conjunction with our audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2018 included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on June 18, 2019.
 
The condensed consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2018 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date but does not include all the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. for complete financial statements.
 
Principles of Consolidation
 
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and our wholly owned subsidiaries, NACSV, GDSI Florida, LLC and Global Digital Solutions, LLC, dba GDSI International, and Harm Alarm. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
 
Use of Estimates
 
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, equity-based transactions and disclosure of contingent liabilities at the date of the financial statements and revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
 
The Company believes the following critical accounting policies affect its more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of the financial statements. Significant estimates include the derivative liability valuation, deferred tax asset and valuation allowance, and assumptions used in Black-Scholes-Merton, or BSM, or other valuation methods, such as expected volatility, risk-free interest rate, and expected dividend rate.
 
Income Taxes
 
Income taxes are accounted for based upon an asset and liability approach. Accordingly, deferred tax assets and liabilities arise from the difference between the tax basis of an asset or liability and its reported amount in the financial statements. Deferred tax amounts are determined using the tax rates expected to be in effect when the taxes will be paid or refunds received, as provided under currently enacted tax law. Valuation allowances are established when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized. Income tax expense or benefit is the tax payable or refundable, respectively, for the period plus or minus the change in deferred tax assets and liabilities during the period.
 
 
8
 
 
Accounting guidance requires the recognition of a financial statement benefit of a tax position only after determining that the relevant tax authority would more likely than not sustain the position following an audit. For tax positions meeting the more-likely-than-not threshold, the amount recognized in the financial statements is the largest benefit that has a greater than fifty percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement with the relevant tax authority. The Company believes its income tax filing positions and deductions will be sustained upon examination and accordingly, no reserves, or related accruals for interest and penalties have been recorded at September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018. The Company recognizes interest and penalties on unrecognized tax benefits as well as interest received from favorable tax settlements within income tax expense.
 
Cash and Cash Equivalents
 
We consider all highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents. We maintain our cash in high-quality financial institutions. The balances, at times, may exceed federally insured limits.
 
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
 
The carrying value of cash, accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate their fair values based on the short-term maturity of these instruments. The carrying amounts of debt were also estimated to approximate fair value. The Company utilizes market data or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, including assumptions about risk and the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. These inputs can be readily observable, market corroborated, or generally unobservable. ASC 820 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (level 3 measurement). This fair value measurement framework applies at both initial and subsequent measurement.
 
The three levels of the fair value hierarchy defined by ASC 820 are as follows:
 
Level 1 – Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities
 
Level 2 – Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable, either directly or indirectly
 
Level 3 – Significant unobservable inputs that cannot be corroborated by market data.
 
Derivative Financial Instruments
 
We account for conversion options embedded in convertible notes payable in accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standard Codification (“ASC’) 815, “Derivatives and Hedging”. Subtopic ASC 815-15, Embedded Derivatives generally requires companies to bifurcate conversion options embedded in the convertible notes from their host instruments and to account for them as free standing derivative financial instruments. Derivative liabilities are recognized in the consolidated balance sheet at fair value as Derivative Liabilities and based on the criteria specified in FASB ASC 815-40, Derivatives and Hedging – Contracts in Entity’s own Equity. The estimated fair value of the derivative liabilities is calculated using various assumptions and such estimates are revalued at each balance sheet date, with changes recorded to other income or expense as Change in fair value of derivative liability in the condensed consolidated statement of operations. The classification of derivative instruments, including whether such instruments should be recorded as liabilities or equity, is evaluated at the instrument origination date and reviewed at the end of each event date (i.e. conversions, payments, etc.) and the measurement period end date for financial reporting, as applicable.
 
 
9
 
 
Earnings (Loss) Per Share (“EPS”)
 
Basic EPS is computed by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding. Diluted EPS includes the effect from potential issuance of common stock, such as stock issuable pursuant to the exercise of stock options and warrants and the assumed conversion of convertible notes.
 
The following table summarizes the securities that were excluded from the diluted per share calculation because the effect of including these potential shares was antidilutive:
 
 
 
 Nine Months Ended
 
 
 
September 30,
 
 
September 30,
 
 
 
2019
 
 
2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Convertible notes and accrued interest
  55,661,577 
  31,057,446 
Preferred Stock
  214,560,000 
  208,371,015 
Stock options
  13,650,002 
  13,650,002 
Warrants
  1,500,000 
  8,000,000 
Potentially dilutive securities
  285,371,579 
  261,078,463 
 
Stock Based Compensation
 
In accordance with ASC 718, "Compensation – Stock Compensation” the Company measures the cost of employee services received in exchange for share-based compensation measured at the grant date fair value of the award.
 
The Company’s accounting policy for equity instruments issued to advisors, consultants and vendors in exchange for goods and services follows the provisions of FASB ASC 505-50. The measurement date for the fair value of the equity instruments issued is determined at the earlier of (i) the date at which a commitment for performance by the advisor, consultant or vendor is reached or (ii) the date at which the advisor, consultant or vendor’s performance is complete. In the case of equity instruments issued to advisors and consultants, the fair value of the equity instrument is recognized over the term of the advisor or consulting agreement. Stock-based compensation related to non-employees is accounted for based on the fair value of the related stock or options or the fair value of the services, whichever is more readily determinable.
 
Convertible Instruments
 
The Company evaluates and accounts for conversion options embedded in its convertible instruments in accordance with accounting standards for “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.”
 
Accounting standards generally provides three criteria that, if met, require companies to bifurcate conversion options from their host instruments and account for them as free standing derivative financial instruments. These three criteria include circumstances in which (a) the economic characteristics and risks of the embedded derivative instrument are not clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics and risks of the host contract, (b) the hybrid instrument that embodies both the embedded derivative instrument and the host contract is not re-measured at fair value under otherwise applicable generally accepted accounting principles with changes in fair value reported in earnings as they occur, and (c) a separate instrument with the same terms as the embedded derivative instrument would be considered a derivative instrument. accounting standards also provide an exception to this rule when the host instrument is deemed to be conventional as defined under professional standards as “The Meaning of Conventional Convertible Debt Instrument.”
 
 
10
 
 
 
The Company accounts for convertible instruments (when it has determined that the embedded conversion options should not be bifurcated from their host instruments) in accordance with professional standards when “Accounting for Convertible Securities with Beneficial Conversion Features,” as those professional standards pertain to “Certain Convertible Instruments.” Accordingly, the Company records, when necessary, discounts to convertible notes for the intrinsic value of conversion options embedded in debt instruments based upon the differences between the fair value of the underlying common stock at the commitment date of the note transaction and the effective conversion price embedded in the note. Original issue discounts (“OID”) under these arrangements are amortized over the term of the related debt to their earliest date of redemption. The Company also records when necessary deemed dividends for the intrinsic value of conversion options embedded in preferred shares based upon the differences between the fair value of the underlying common stock at the commitment date of the note transaction and the effective conversion price embedded in the note.
 
ASC 815-40 provides that, among other things, generally, if an event is not within the entity’s control could or require net cash settlement, then the contract shall be classified as an asset or a liability.
 
Convertible Securities
 
Based upon ASC 815-15, we have adopted a sequencing approach regarding the application of ASC 815-40 to convertible securities. We will evaluate our contracts based upon the earliest issuance date. In the event partial reclassification of contracts subject to ASC 815-40-25 is necessary, due to our inability to demonstrate we have sufficient shares authorized and unissued, shares will be allocated on the basis of issuance date, with the earliest issuance date receiving first allocation of shares. If a reclassification of an instrument were required, it would result in the instrument issued latest being reclassified first.
 
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
 
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases: Topic 842. This standard requires all leases that have a term of over 12 months to be recognized on the balance sheet with the liability for lease payments and the corresponding right-of-use asset initially measured at the present value of amounts expected to be paid over the term. Recognition of the costs of these leases on the income statement will be dependent upon their classification as either an operating or a financing lease. Costs of an operating lease will continue to be recognized as a single operating expense on a straight-line basis over the lease term. Costs for a financing lease will be disaggregated and recognized as both an operating expense (for the amortization of the right-of-use asset) and interest expense (for interest on the lease liability). This standard was adopted for our interim and annual periods beginning January 1, 2019 and applied on a modified retrospective basis to leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements. The Company has evaluated the timing of adoption and the potential impact of this standard on our financial position, and adoption resulted in no material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
 
NOTE 3 – ACCRUED EXPENSES
 
 
 
September 30,
 
 
December 31,
 
 
 
2019
 
 
2018
 
Accrued compensation to executive officers and emoloyees
 $226,442 
 $572,437 
Accrued professional fees and settlements
  274,029 
  196,663 
Accrued interest
  205,809 
  148,533 
 
 $706,280 
 $917,633 
 
 
11
 
 
NOTE 4 – FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
 
We had no Level 1 or Level 2 assets and liabilities at September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018. The Derivative liabilities are Level 3 fair value measurements.
 
The following is a summary of activity of Level 3 liabilities during the nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018:
 
Derivative Liability
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Balance at beginning of period
 $562,175 
 $382,948 
Change in fair value
  (311,575)
  (133,411)
Additions
  750,000 
  0 
Reclassification to equity
  (459,400)
  (117,854)
Balance at end of period
 $541,200 
 $131,683 
 
Embedded Derivative Liabilities of Convertible Notes
 
At September 30, 2019 the fair value of the bifurcated embedded derivative liabilities of convertible notes was estimated using the following weighted-average inputs: risk free interest rate –%; term -1.0 years; volatility –%; dividend rate – 0%. At December 31, 2018, the fair value of the bifurcated embedded derivative liabilities of convertible notes was estimated using the following weighted-average inputs: risk free interest rate- 1.39%%; term - .25 years; volatility – 246.62%; dividend rate – 0%.
 
NOTE 5 – NOTE PAYABLE
 
 On December 22, 2017, the Company entered into a financing agreement with an accredited investor for $1.2 million. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company is to receive milestone payments based on the progress of the Company’s lawsuit for damages against Grupo Rontan Metalurgica, S.A (the “Lawsuit”). Such milestone payments consist of (i) an initial purchase price payment of $300,000, which the Company received on December 22, 2017 (ii) $150,000 within 30 days of the Lawsuit surviving a motion to dismiss on the primary claims; (iii) $100,000 within 30 days of the close of all discovery in the Lawsuit; and (iv) $650,000 within 30 days of the Lawsuit surviving a motion for summary judgment and challenges on the primary claims. As part of the agreement, the Company shall pay the investor an investment return of 100% of the litigation proceeds to recoup all money invested, plus 27.5% of the total litigation proceeds received by the Company. As of September 30, 2019, $1,200,000 has been received.
 
Notes Payable
 
During August 2017, Dragon Acquisitions, a related entity owned by William Delgado, a related party, and an individual lender entered into a Promissory Note agreement for $20,000 as well as $2,000 in interest to accrue through maturity on August 31, 2018 for a total of $22,000 due on August 31, 2018. Dragon Acquisition assumed payment of a payable of the Company and the Company took on the note. The Company defaulted on the note at maturity in August 2018. The $20,000 note remained outstanding at September 30, 2019 and through the date of this report.
 
 
12
 
 
On December 23, 2017 (the “effective date”), the Company entered into a $485,000, 7% interest rate, demand promissory note with Vox Business Trust, LLC (VOX). The note was in settlement of the amounts accrued under a consulting agreement (Note 6), consisting of $200,000 owed for retainer payments through December 2017, as well as $285,000 owed to VOX when the Resolution Progress Funding was met on December 22, 2017. As part of the agreement, VOX may not demand payment prior to the date of the Resolution Funding Date. The Company also agreed to grant 5,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Progress Funding Date and 10,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Funding Date. The 5,000,000 shares were issued on March 13, 2018. The Company shall make mandatory prepayment in the following amounts and at the following times –
 
$1,000 on the effective date.
 
$50,000 on the date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion to dismiss.
 
$50,000 on the date on which discovery closes with respect to the lawsuit.
 
$100,000 on the date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion for summary judgement on the claims.
 
Under the terms of the VOX note consulting agreement (Note 6), any unpaid consulting fees subsequent to December 2017 causes a default on the note with unpaid consulting fees to be added to the principal of the note. During the year ended December 31, 2018, consulting fees totaling $100,000 were added to the note principal and are included in the note balance at March 31, 2018. The notes had a balance of $584,000 and $484,000 as of September 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Through the date of this report, monthly consulting fees have not been repaid and continue to be added to the principal balance of the note. The note remains in default however VOX has voluntarily refrained from making demand prior to the Resolution Funding Date. VOX was granted a first priority security interest in the Litigation Proceeds and is pari passu to Parabellum and Vox. To that end, they share in the litigation in a priority position to proceed to repay the note.
 
On December 23, 2017 (the “effective date”), the Company entered into a $485,000, 7% interest rate, demand promissory note with RLT (Consulting), a related party. The note was in settlement of the amounts accrued under a consulting agreement (Note 6), consisting of $200,000 owed for retainer payments through December 2017, as well as $285,000 owed to RLT when the Resolution Progress Funding was met on December 22, 2017. As part of the agreement, RLT may not demand payment prior to the date of the Resolution Funding Date. The Company also agreed to grant 5,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Progress Funding Date and 10,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Funding Date. The 5,000,000 shares were issued on March 13, 2018. The Company shall make mandatory prepayment in the following amounts and at the following times –
 
$1,000 on the effective date.
 
$50,000 on the date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion to dismiss.
 
$50,000 on the date on which discovery closes with respect to the lawsuit.
 
$100,000 on the date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion for summary judgement on the claims.
 
Under the terms of the RLT note consulting agreement (Note 6), any unpaid consulting fees subsequent to December 2017 causes a default on the note with unpaid consulting fees to be added to the principal of the note. During the year ended December 31, 2018, consulting fees totaling $100,000 were added to the note principal and are included in the note balance at March 31, 2018. The notes had a balance of $584,000 and $484,000 as of September 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Through the date of this report, monthly consulting fees have not been repaid and continue to be added to the principal balance of the note. The note remains in default however RLT has voluntarily refrained from making demand prior to the Resolution Funding Date. RLT was granted a first priority security interest in the Litigation Proceeds and is pari passu to Parabellum and RLT. To that end, they share in the litigation in a priority position to proceed to repay the note.
 
13
 
 
During April 2018, the Company entered into an Investment Return Purchase Agreement with an accredited investor (the “Purchaser”) for proceeds of $50,000 (the “Investment Agreement”). The $50,000 proceeds were paid directly to Bill Delgado to reimburse expenses incurred on behalf of the Company. Under the terms of the Investment Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Purchaser the $50,000 proceeds plus a 50% return, or $25,000 (the “Investment Return”) within seven (7) months from the date of the Investment Agreement. In addition, the Company agreed to issue to the Purchaser 1,000,000 warrants to purchase common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, exercisable for a period of five (5) years. The warrants were valued using the Black Scholes Merton model, resulting in a fair value of $9,000 which were recorded as a discount on the note. The key valuation assumptions used consist, in part, of the price of the Company’s common stock of $0.009 at issuance date; a risk-free interest rate of 2.60% and estimated volatility of the Company’s common stock of 235%. During November 2018, the Company defaulted on the Investment Agreement. As of September 30, 2019, the $50,000 principal and $25,000 Investment Return remained outstanding. During May 2019, the Company and the Purchaser amended the Investment Agreement, as detailed in Note 10.
 
During June 2018, the Company entered in to a one-year $300,000 non-convertible note with an accredited investor with $150,000 original issue discount (“OID”) for net proceeds of $150,000. As part of the note agreement, the Company also agreed to issue the investor 5,000,000 warrants at an exercise price of $0.01, exercisable for a period of three (3) years. The warrants were valued using the Black Scholes Merton model, resulting in a fair value of $35,000 of which $28,378 was recorded as a discount on the note. The key valuation assumptions used consist, in part, of the price of the Company’s common stock of $0.008 at issuance date; a risk-free interest rate of 2.62% and estimated volatility of the Company’s common stock of 218%. The Company defaulted on the note at maturity in June 2019. The note contains a default interest rate of 10% plus a 5% penalty of the outstanding balance of the note. The note holder has voluntarily refrained from making demand for repayment under the default provisions of the note, which would require the Company to pay the holder 130% of the outstanding principal and interest accrued at the default rate. At September 30, 2019, $100,000 of the note remained outstanding. The note bears a personal guarantee by William Delgado, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company. As further security for the note, Mr. Delgado has also pledged the 1,000,000 Convertible Preferred Shares of the Company that he owns, as well as 5,000,000 common shares of SHMP, another public company in which Mr. Delgado is a director and Chief Financial Officer.
 
On January 21, 2019 the Company entered into a Convertible Promissory Note with Crown Bridge Partners, LLC., in the principal amount of $75,000. The note carries original issue discount of $7,500 The Principal amount with interest at 12% will be due in twelve months from the advance. The Principal amount will be advanced in Tranches of $25,000 each. The note is convertible into shares of The Company’s common stock. The conversion price shall equal the lessor of (i) Current Market price or (ii) Variable Market price as defined as Market Price less a 45% discount price. In addition, the Company agreed to issue to Crown Bridge Partners 3,750,000 warrants to purchase common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, exercisable for a period of five (5) years. As of the issuance date of these financial statements, $50,000 has been received and remains outstanding.
 
 
14
 
 
On August 19,2019 The Company entered into a Convertible Promissory Note with Auctus Fund, LLC. in the principal amount of $142,750. The note carries original issue discount of $14,275. The note is convertible at any time following the issuance into shares of The Company’s common stock. The conversion price shall equal the lessor of (i) Current Market price or (ii) Variable Market price as defined as Market Price less a 50% discount price. In addition, the Company agreed to issue to Auctus Fund, LLC 2,500,000 warrants to purchase common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, exercisable for a period of five (5) years. As of the issuance date of these financial statements the note remains outstanding.
 
On August 15, 2019, the Company and Power Up Lending Group entered into a security purchase agreement for a 10% Convertible Note in the aggregate principal of $53,000 due on August 15, 2020. The note is convertible into shares of common stock of the Company. The conversion price is equal to the Variable Conversion price which is defined as 61% of the Market Price for the lowest two trading dates during a fifteen-day trading period ending on the latest complete trading date prior to the Conversion date. As of the issuance date of these financial statements, the note remains outstanding. The note is convertible one hundred eighty (180) days from date of issuance.
 
On May 10, 2019, the Company and GHS Investments LLC entered into a security agreement for a 10% Convertible Note in the aggregate principal of $335,000 due on February 10, 2020. The note carries original issue discount or $35,000. The note is convertible into shares of common stock of the Company. The “Conversion Price” shall mean 60% multiplied by the Market Price (as defined herein), representing a discount rate of 40%. “Market Price” means the lowest Traded Price for the Common Stock during the twenty (20) Trading Day period ending on the latest complete Trading Day prior to the Conversion Date. The Company is required to maintain a common share reserve of not less than three times the number of shares that is actually issuable upon full conversion of the note. The purchaser will also receive warrants to purchase 5,000,000 shares of GDSI common stock at $.01/share. Warrants will have a three-year term to exercise. The Convertible Note is personally guaranteed by William Delgado, CEO. As of the issuance date of these financial statements, the note remains outstanding. The note is convertible one hundred eighty (180) days from date of issuance.
  
On August 1, 2019, the Company and Adar Alef, LLC entered into an 8% Convertible Redeemable Note in the aggregate principal of $52,500 due on August 1, 2020. The note carries original issue discount or $2,500. The note is convertible into shares of common stock of the Company. The “Conversion Price” shall mean 60% multiplied by the Market Price (as defined herein), representing a discount rate of 40%. “Market Price” means the lowest Traded Price for the Common Stock during the twenty (20) Trading Day period ending on the latest complete Trading Day prior to the Conversion Date. The Company is required to maintain a common share reserve of 35,000,000 common shares. The note is convertible one hundred eighty (180) days from date of issuance.
 
For other obligations, please see the Form 10K for the year ending December 31, 2018 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June18, 2019.
 
NOTE 6 – Investments, Acquisitions and Goodwill
Acquisition of HarmAlarm
 
In March of 2019, the Company acquired HarmAlarm. HA was formed in 2002 as a private Texas company to pursue Infrared commercial applications in the aviation services area. HA has developed a system known as Pilot Assisted Landing Systems (PALS). The precision and robustness of PALS has generated a host of new applications mainly through “landing trajectory” optimization which provides additional safety margin against weather related hazardous conditions, like wind shear, wake turbulence, icing, as well as low ceilings and fog.    
 
 
 
15
 
 
The Company completed the purchase agreement with HarmAlarm on September 16, 2019, , the Company issued 5,000,000, shares of its common stock with a fair value of $62,000 in exchange for the assets of HarmAlarm. For investments acquired with common stock, the Company records its investments at the fair value of the common stock issued for the ownership interest acquired.
 
The Company periodically reviews the carrying value of intangible assets not subject to amortization to determine whether impairment may exist. Intangible assets are assessed annually, or when certain triggering events occur, for impairment using fair value measurement techniques. Subsequent to the issuance of the stock the company determined the investment was impaired and recorded an Impairment loss of $62,000 at September 30, 2019.
 
The acquisition of HarmAlarm has contributed $0 revenue and approximately $35,000 of net loss for the period May1, 2019 to September 30,2019 and a net loss of $67,500 for the period January 1, 2018 to September 30, 2018.
 
On March 1, 2019, the Company entered into a consulting agreement with the former owner of HarmAlarm. The agreement commenced on March 1, 2019 and shall continue for a period of thirty-six (36) months. The agreement may only be terminated by either incapacitation or death of consultant or for cause with ten (10) days written notice. During the term of the agreement consultant will be paid at a rate of $5,000 per month. Additionally, the Company will pay 49.1% of any profits generated subsequently to the former owner of HarmAlarm.
 
NOTE 7 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
 
Legal Proceedings
 
We may be involved in legal proceedings in the ordinary course of our business, and our management cannot predict the ultimate outcome of these legal proceedings with certainty. The Company is plaintiff or defendant in the following actions:
 
Dekle, et. al. v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. et. al.
 
Brian A. Dekle and John Ramsay filed suit against the Company and its wholly owned subsidiary, North American Custom Specialty Vehicles, Inc. (“NACSV”), in the Circuit Court of Baldwin Alabama, on January 14, 2015, case no. 05-CV-2015-9000050.00, relating to our acquisition of NACSV (the ''Dekle Action"). Prior to instituting the Dekle Action, in June 2014, the Company had entered into an equity purchase agreement with Dekle and Ramsay to purchase their membership interest in North American Custom Specialty Vehicles, LLC. The Dekle Action originally sought payment for $300,000 in post-closing consideration Dekle and Ramsay allege they are owed pursuant to the equity purchase agreement.
 
On February 9, 2015, the Company and NACSV removed the Dekle Action to federal court in the United States District Court in and for the Southern District of Alabama, case no. 1:15-CV-00069. The Company and NACSV subsequently moved to dismiss the complaint for (1) failing to state a cause of action, and (2) lack of personal jurisdiction. Alternatively, the Company and NACSV sought a transfer of the case to the United States District Court in and for Middle District of Florida.
 
In response to the Company’s and NACSV's motion to dismiss, Dekle and Ramsay filed an amended complaint on March 2, 2015 seeking specific performance and alleging breach of contract, violations of Security and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Rule 10b-5, and violations of the Alabama Securities Act. The amended complaint also names the Company’s Chairman, President, and CEO, Richard J. Sullivan (“Sullivan”), as a defendant. On March 17, 2015, the Company, NACSV and Sullivan filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint seeking dismissal for failure to state valid causes of action, for lack of personal jurisdiction, or alternatively to transfer the case to the United States District Court in and for the Middle District of Florida. Dekle and Ramsay responded on March 31, 2015, and the Company filed its response thereto on April 7, 2015.
 
16
 
 
On June 2, 2015, Dekle passed away.  On June 5, 2015, the Court denied the Company’s motion to transfer the case to Florida.   On June 10, 2015, the Company filed a motion to reconsider the Court’s denial of its motion to transfer the case to Florida. On September 30, 2105, the Court granted the Company’s Renewed Motion to Transfer Venue. The case was transferred to the Middle District of Florida, where it is currently pending.
 
On June 15, 2015, Ramsay filed a second amended complaint. On June 25, 2015, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. The Company’s Motion to Dismiss was denied.
 
Global Digital Solutions, Inc. et. al. v. Communications Laboratories, Inc., et. al.
 
On January 19, 2015 the Company and NACSV filed suit against Communications Laboratories, Inc., ComLabs Global, LLC, Roland Lussier, Brian Dekle, John Ramsay and Wallace Bailey for conversion and breach of contract in a dispute over the payment of a $300,000 account receivable that ComLabs owed to NACSV but sent payment directly to Brian Dekle. The case was filed in the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Brevard County Florida, case no. 05-2015-CA-012250. On February 18, 2015 (i) defendants Communications Laboratories, Inc., ComLabs Global, LLC and Roland Lussier and (ii) defendant Wallace Bailey filed their respective motions to dismiss seeking, among other things, dismissal for failure to state valid causes of action, lumping and failure to post a non-resident bond. On February 26, 2015, defendants Dekle and Ramsay filed their motion to dismiss, or stay action, based on already existing litigation between the parties. NACSV filed its required bond on March 2, 2015. The Company believes the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome of the dispute is remote.
 
Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc., Richard J. Sullivan, David A. Loppert, William J. Delgado, Arthur F. Noterman and Stephanie C. Sullivan United States District Court, District of New Jersey (Trenton), Case No. 3:16-cv-05153-FLW-TJB
 
On August 24, 2016, Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated (“Hull”) filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”), Richard J. Sullivan (“Sullivan”), David A. Loppert (“Loppert”), William J. Delgado (“Delgado”), Arthur F. Noterman (“Noterman”) and Stephanie C. Sullivan (“Stephanie Sullivan”) seeking to recover compensable damages caused by Defendants’ alleged violations of federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. On January 18, 2018, pursuant to the Court’s December 19, 2017 Order granting Plaintiff Hull leave to file an amended Complaint, Plaintiff Hull filed a Second Amended Complaint against Defendants. On February 8, 2018, Defendants GDSI and Delgado filed a Second Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On February 8, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File an Answer. On February 13, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for Lack of (personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim. On February 20, 2018, Plaintiff Michael Perry (“Perry”) filed a Brief in Opposition to Defendants GDSI and Delgado’s Second Motion to Dismiss the Complaint and to Defendant Loppert’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for Lack of (personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim. On February 26, 2018, Defendants GDSI and Delgado filed a Reply Brief to Plaintiff Michael Perry’s Brief in Opposition to their Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. On February 26, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Response in Support of Defendants GDSI and Delgado’s Second Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On March 12, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Reply Brief to Plaintiff Perry’s Brief in Opposition to Defendant Loppert’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for Lack of (personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim. To date, the Court has not issued a decision as to aforementioned Motions. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. and William J. Delgado intend to continue to vigorously defend against the claims asserted by Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated. The Company entered into a court ordered mediation with Plaintiff’s counsel and entered into a settlement agreement on June 12, 2019. The settlement agreement was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on June 13, 2019. The Company notified the attorneys general of the several states and the United States government as required. The settlement agreement received preliminary approval on July 15, 2019. We anticipate that all of the costs of settlement will be covered by the Company’s insurance carrier.
 
 
17
 
 
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc., Richard J. Sullivan and David A. Loppert United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 9:16-cv-81413-RLR
 
On August 11, 2016, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”), Richard J. Sullivan (“Sullivan”) and David A. Loppert (“Loppert”) to enjoin GDSI; Sullivan, GDSI’s former Chairman and CEO; and Loppert, GDSI’s former CFO from alleged further violations of the anti-fraud and reporting provisions of the federal securities laws, and against Sullivan and Loppert from alleged further violations of the certification provisions of the federal securities laws.
 
On October 12, 2016, Defendant GDSI filed its First Answer to the Complaint. On November 9, 2016, Defendant Sullivan filed a Letter with the Court denying all allegations regarding the case. On December 15, 2016, the SEC filed a Motion for Judgment and Notice of Filing of Consent of Defendant Loppert to entry of Final Judgment by the SEC. On December 19, 2016, the Court entered an order granting the SEC’s Motion for Judgment as to Defendant Loppert. On December 21, 2016, the SEC filed a Notice of Settlement as entered into by it and Defendants GDSI and Sullivan. On December 23, 2016, the Court entered an Order staying the case and directing the Clerk of the Court to close the case for statistical purposes per the December 21, 2016 Notice of Settlement. On March 7, 2017, the SEC moved for a Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other Relief and Notice of Filing Consent of Defendant GDSI to Entry of Judgment by the SEC. On March 13, 2017, the Judge signed the Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was entered on the Court’s docket. On April 6, 2017, the SEC moved for a final Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other Relief and Notice of Filing Consent of Defendant Sullivan. On April 10, 2017, the Judge signed the final Judgment as to Defendant Sullivan and it was entered on the Court’s docket. On December 21, 2017, the SEC moved for a final Judgment and Notice of Filing Consent of Defendant GDSI to Entry of Final Judgment. On January 2, 2018, the Judge signed the Final Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was entered on the Court’s docket. The amount of the judgement is One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) plus interest, which is included in accrued expenses in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet.
 
Adrian Lopez, Derivatively and on behalf of Global Digital Solutions, Inc. v. William J. Delgado, Richard J. Sullivan, David A. Loppert, Jerome J. Gomolski, Stephanie C. Sullivan, Arthur F. Noterman, and Stephen L. Norris United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case No. 3:17-cv-03468-PGS-LHG
 
On September 19, 2016, Adrian Lopez, derivatively, and on behalf of Global Digital Solutions, Inc., filed an action in New Jersey Superior Court sitting Mercer County, General Equity Division. That action was administratively dismissed for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff Lopez, through his counsel, filed a motion to reinstate the matter on the general equity calendar on or about February 10, 2017. The Court granted the motion unopposed on or about April 16, 2017. On May 15, 2017, Defendant William Delgado (“Delgado”) filed a Notice of Removal of Case No. C-70-16 from the Mercer County Superior Court of New Jersey to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. On May 19, 2017, Defendant Delgado filed a First Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. On May 20, 2017, Defendant David A. Loppert (“Loppert”) filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of (Personal) Jurisdiction. On June 14, 2017, Plaintiff Adrian Lopez (“Lopez”) filed a First Motion to Remand the Action back to State Court. On June 29, 2017, Defendant Delgado filed a Memorandum of Law in Response and Reply to the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand and in Response to Defendants’ Delgado’s and Loppert’s Motions to Dismiss. On January 1, 16, 2018, a Memorandum and Order granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand the case back to the Mercer County Superior Court of New Jersey was signed by the Judge and entered on the Docket. Defendants Delgado and Loppert’s Motions to Dismiss were denied as moot. On February 2, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On February 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Consolidate Cases. On March 21, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On March 23, 2018, Defendants filed a Brief in Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. The Court held a hearing on the motions to dismiss and consolidate. Jurisdictional discovery was ordered. As of this date, the Court has not issued a decision and Order regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. The Company believes the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome of the dispute is remote. The Company entered into a court ordered mediation with Plaintiff’s counsel and entered into a settlement agreement on June 12, 2019. The settlement agreement was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on June 13, 2019. The Company notified the attorneys general of the several states and the United States government as required. The settlement agreement received preliminary approval on July 15, 2019. We anticipate that all of the costs of settlement will be covered by the Company’s insurance carrier.
 
 
18
 
 
Adrian Lopez v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. and William J. Delgado Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Mercer County, Equity Part, Docket No. MER-L-002126-17
 
On September 28, 2017, Plaintiff Adrian Lopez (“Lopez”) brought an action against Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”) and William J. Delgado (“Delgado”) to compel a meeting of the stockholders of Global Digital Solutions, Inc. pursuant to Section 2.02 of GDSI’s Bylaws and New Jersey Revised Statute § 14A:5-2. On October 27, 2017, Defendants GDSI and Delgado filed a Motion to Stay the Proceeding. On November 24, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Objection to Defendants’ Motion to Stay the Proceeding. On January 19, 2018, Defendants’ Motion to Stay the Proceeding was denied. On February 2, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On February 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Consolidate Cases. On March 21, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On March 23, 2018, Defendants filed a Brief in Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. As of this date, the Court has not issued a decision and Order regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. The Company believes the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome of the dispute is remote. The Company entered into a court ordered mediation with Plaintiff’s counsel and entered into a settlement agreement on June 12, 2019. The settlement agreement was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on June 13, 2019. The Company notified the attorneys general of the several states and the United States government as required. The settlement agreement received preliminary approval on July 15, 2019. We anticipate that all of the costs of settlement will be covered by the Company’s insurance carrier.
 
In the Matter of GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC., ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING File No. 3-18325. Administrative Proceeding Before the Securities and Exchange Commission.
 
On December 26, 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission instituted public administrative proceedings pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against the Respondent Global Digital Solutions, Inc. On January 8, 2018, Respondent Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”) filed its answer to the allegations contained in the Order Instituting Administrative Proceedings and Notice of Hearing Pursuant to Section 12U) of the Exchange Act. A briefing schedule was entered into and on February 15, 2018, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed a motion for an order of summary disposition against Respondent GDSI on the grounds that there is no genuine issue with regard to any material fact, the Division was entitled as a matter of law to an order revoking each class of GDSI's securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act. Respondent GDSI opposed the Securities and Exchange Commission’s motion on the grounds that there were material issues of fact. The Securities and Exchange Commission replied and a hearing was held on April 9, 2018. The Administrative Law Judge ordered supplemental evidence and briefing on the issues of material fact. Subsequent to the supplemental brief, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision questioning the validity of the administrative law judges appointed by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Accordingly, the complaint had to begin again with a new, properly appointed administrative law judge. At the submission of the new complaint, the violations of Section 12(j) of the Exchange Act had been cured and accordingly, then Securities and Exchange Commission moved to dismiss the complaint. The Commission granted the motion and closed the matter.
 
PMB HELIN DONOVAN, LLP vs. GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, Docket No.: 50-2017-CA-011937-XXXX-MB
 
On October 31, 2017, PMB Helin Donovan, LLP filed an action for account stated in Palm Beach County. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”) settled the matter for Forty Thousand Dollars ($40,000.00) of which the first payment of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) has been paid on May 16, 2018. The $40,000 is included in accounts payable as of December 31, 2017 and $30,000 at December 31, 2018. The Company defaulted on this Agreement. A judgment has been entered against the Company for the full amount due and owing.
 
 
19
 
 
JENNIFER CARROLL, vs. GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC., NORTH AMERICAN CUSTOM SPECIALTY VEHICLES, INC., IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT in AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, CASE NO.: 50-2015-CC-012942-XXXX-MB
 
On October 27, 2017, Plaintiff Jennifer Carroll the former President of NACSV, moved the court for a default judgment against Defendant Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”) and its subsidiary North American Custom Specialty Vehicles Inc. The amount of the judgement is Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00) plus fees of Thirteen Thousand Three Hundred Fifty - Three Dollars Forty - Four Cents ($13,353.44) and costs of six hundred twenty - four dollars thirty cents ($624.30). The Company defaulted on this Agreement. A judgment has been entered against the Company for the full amount due and owing.
 
Consulting agreements
 
The Company entered into two consulting agreements (See Note 5) in May 2016, for services to be provided in connection towards the resolution of the Rontan lawsuit (below). The consulting agreements includes a monthly retainer payment of$10,000 to each consultant. The agreement also includes consideration of 5,000,000 shares of restricted common stock of the Company, plus a 5% cash consideration of the Resolution Progress Funding, (defined as upon the retention of legal counsel and receipt of funding for the litigation), as of the Resolution Progress Funding date and 10,000,000 shares of restricted common stock of the Company and a 5% cash consideration of the Resolution Funding amount (defined as a settlement or judgement in favor of the Company by Rotan),at the Resolution Funding date. The Resolution Progress funding was met on December 22, 2017.
 
Share Purchase and Sale Agreement for Acquisition of Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A.
 
Effective October 13, 2015, the Company (as “Purchaser”) entered into the SPSA dated October 8, 2015 with Joao Alberto Bolzan and Jose Carlos Bolzan, both Brazilian residents (collectively, the “Sellers”) and Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A., a limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of Federative Republic of Brazil (“Rontan”) (collectively, the “Parties”), pursuant to which the Sellers agreed to sell 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of Rontan to the Purchaser on the closing date.
 
The purchase price shall consist of a cash amount, a stock amount and an earn-out amount as follows: (i) Brazilian Real (“R”) $100 million (approximately US$26 million) to be paid by the Purchaser in equal monthly installments over a period of forty eight (48) months following the closing date; (ii) an aggregate of R$100 million (approximately US$26 million) in shares of the Purchaser’s common stock, valued at US$1.00 per share; and (iii) an earn-out payable within ten business days following receipt by the Purchaser of Rontan’s audited financial statements for the 12-months ended December 31, 2017, 2018 and 2019. The earn-out shall be equal to the product of (i) Rontan’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”) for the last 12 months, and (ii) twenty percent and is contingent upon Rontan’s EBITDA results for any earn-out period being at least 125% of Rontan’s EBITDA for the 12-months ended December 31, 2015. It is the intention of the parties that the stock amount will be used by Rontan to repay institutional debt outstanding as of the closing date.
 
Under the terms of a Finders Fees Agreement dated April 14, 2014, we have agreed to pay RLT Consulting Inc., a related party, a fee of 2% (two percent) of the Transaction Value, as defined in the agreement, of Rontan upon closing. The fee is payable one-half in cash and one-half in shares of our common stock.
 
 
 
20
 
Specific conditions to closing consist of:
 
a)
Purchaser’s receipt of written limited assurance of an unqualified opinion with respect to Rontan’s audited financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2014 (the “Opinion”);
 
b)
The commitment of sufficient investment by General American Capital Partners LLC (the “Institutional Investor”), in the Purchaser following receipt of the Opinion;
 
c)
The accuracy of each Parties’ representations and warranties contained in the SPSA;
 
d)
The continued operation of Rontan’s business in the ordinary course;
 
e)
The maintenance of all of Rontan’s bank credit lines in the maximum amount of R$200 million (approximately US$52 million) under the same terms and conditions originally agreed with any such financial institutions, and the maintenance of all other types of funding arrangements. As of the date of the SPSA, Rontan’s financial institution debt consists of not more than R$200 million (approximately US$52 million), trade debt of not more than R$50 million (approximately US$13 million) and other fiscal contingencies of not more that R$95 million (approximately US$24.7 million);
 
f)
Rontan shall enter into employment or consulting service agreements with key employees and advisors identified by the Purchaser, including Rontan’s Chief Executive Officer; and
 
g)
The Sellers continued guarantee of Rontan’s bank debt for a period of 90 days following issuance of the Opinion, among other items.
 
The Institutional Investor has committed to invest sufficient capital to facilitate the transaction, subject to receipt of the Opinion, as well as the ability to acquire 100% of the outstanding stock of Rontan at a price of $200 million BR, and the Company can acquire 100% of all real estate held by Rontan.
 
Subject to satisfaction or waiver of the condition’s precedent provided for in the SPSA, the closing date of the transaction shall take place within 10 business days from the date of issuance of the Opinion.
 
Rontan is engaged in the manufacture and distribution of specialty vehicles and acoustic/visual signaling equipment for the industrial and automotive markets.
 
Subsequent to December 31, 2015, on April 1, 2016, we believed that we had satisfied or otherwise waived the conditions to closing (as disclosed under the SPSA, the closing was subject to specific conditions to closing, which were waivable by us,) and advised the Sellers of our intention to close the SPSA and demanded delivery of the Rontan Securities. The Sellers, however, notified us that they intend to terminate the SPSA. We believe that the Sellers had no right to terminate the SPSA and that notice of termination by the Sellers was not permitted under the terms of the SPSA.
 
On January 31, 2018, we announced that we initiated a lawsuit for damages against Grupo Rontan Metalurgica, S. A, (“Rontan”) and that company’s controlling shareholders, Joao Alberto Bolzan and Jose Carlos Bolzan. The action has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The complaint alleges that Rontan is wholly-owned by Joao Bolzan and Jose Bolzan. In the complaint, we further allege that Rontan and its shareholders improperly terminated a Share Purchase and Sale Agreement (the “SPA”) by which we were to acquire whole ownership of Rontan.
 
On February 5, 2018, United States District Court Southern District of Florida filed a Pretrial Scheduling Order and Order Referring Case to Mediation dated February 5, 2018 for the Company’s lawsuit against Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A., et al. The Case No. is 18-80106-Civ-Middlebrooks/Brannon. The court has issued a schedule outlining various documents and responses that are to be delivered by the parties as part of the discovery plan.
 
On April 25, 2018, the Note of Filing Proposed Summons was completed by the Company. On April 26, 2018, a summons was issued to Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A. Also, on May 15, 2018, the Company filed a motion for Issuance of Letters Rogatory.
 
21
 
 
On or about January 31, 2019, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim for failure to fulfill conditions precedent in the consummation of the contract in question. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss challenging jurisdiction, venue, and forum nonconvenes. On or about May 21, 2019, the Court denied their motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue and forum nonconvenes. The court granted their Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim for failure to fulfill conditions precedent in the consummation of the contract in question but, granted leave to amend. On or about June 7, 2019, counsel filed an amended complaint. On or about June 21, 2019, defendants answered the amended complaint. The litigation moved from the pleading stage to discovery. The Company and Rontan/Bolzans entered into court order mediation on November 7, 2019. Although there was some movement by each side, the sides still remain apart. Trial is scheduled for December 9, 2019.
 
NOTE 8 – STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
 
Preferred Stock
 
We are authorized to issue 35,000,000 shares of noncumulative, non-voting, nonconvertible preferred stock, $0.001 par value per share. At September 30, 2019 and 2018, 1,000,000 shares of preferred stock were outstanding.
 
 On August 15, 2016, William J. Delgado, our current Chief Executive Officer, agreed to convert $231,565 of indebtedness owed to him by the Company into 1,000,000 shares of convertible preferred stock (the “Preferred Stock”). The Preferred Stock has voting rights as to one (1) preferred share to four hundred (400) shares of the common stock of the Company. The Preferred Stock is convertible into common stock at any time after issuance into 37% of the outstanding common stock of the Company at the time of the conversion. The conversion to common can only take place when there are an adequate number of shares that are available and is subject to normal stock adjustments (i.e. stock splits etc.) that are executed by the Company in its normal course of business.
 
Common Stock
 
We are authorized to issue 2,000,000,000 shares of common stock, $0.001 par value per share. At September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, 637,675,079 and 579,900,814 shares were issued, outstanding, or vested but unissued under stock compensation plans, respectively.
 
On January 31, 2019, the Company increased its authorized common shares to 2,000,000,000.
 
On February 11, 2019, the Company entered into an agreement for the purchase of common stock with Mared Management LLC. Under the terms of the agreement the purchaser purchased 25,000,000 shares of common stock for $250,000. The purchaser also received warrants to purchase 6,250,000 shares of GDSI common stock at $.01/share. Warrants will have a three-year term to exercise.
 
In May 2019 the Company sold 3,513,888 of common stock shares for $35,138 to three individual investors.
 
Common Stock Warrant
 
We have issued warrants, which are fully vested and available for exercise, as follows:
 
Class of Warrant
 
Issued in connection with or for
 
Number outstanding
 
Exercise Price
 
Date of Issue
 
Date Vest
 
Date of Expiration
A-5
 
Financing
 
1,000,000
 
 $ 0.01
 
April 3, 2018
 
April 3, 2018
 
April 3, 2023
A-6
 
Financing
 
2,000,000
 
 $ 0.01
 
May 15, 2018
 
May 15, 2018
 
May 15, 2021
A-7
 
Financing
 
5,000,000
 
 $ 0.01
 
June 1, 2018
 
June 1, 2018
 
June 1, 2021
A-8
 
Financing
 
2,500,000
 
 $ 0.0069
 
Nov. 2, 2018
 
Nov. 2, 2018
 
Nov. 2, 2023
A-9
 
Financing
 
3,750,000
 
$0.01
 
Jan. 21, 2019
 
Jan. 21, 2019
 
Jan. 21, 2024
 
 
 
 
14,250,000
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
22
 
 
All warrants are exercisable at any time through the date of expiration. All agreements provide for the number of shares to be adjusted in the event of a stock split, a reverse stock split, a share exchange or other conversion or exchange event in which case the number of warrants and the exercise price of the warrants shall be adjusted on a proportional basis. The warrants expired unexercised on the dates of expiration, as shown above.
 
The following is a summary of outstanding and exercisable warrants at September 30, 2019
 
 
 
 
 
  Outstanding      
 
  Exercisable
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Weighted
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Average
 
 
Outstanding
 
 
Weighted
 
 
 
 
 
Weighted
 
 
Range of
 
 
Number
 
 
Remaining
 
 
Average
 
 
Number
 
 
Average
 
 
Exercise
 
 
Outstanding
 
 
Contractual
 
 
Exercise
 
 
Exercisable
 
 
Exercise
 
 
Prices
 
 
at 6/30/2019
 
 
Life (in yrs.)
 
 
Price
 
 
6/30/2019
 
 
Price
 
 $0.01 
  1,000,000 
  4.26 
 $0.01 
  1,000,000 
 $0.01 
 $0.01 
  2,000,000 
  2.37 
 $0.01 
  2,000,000 
 $0.01 
 $0.01 
  5,000,000 
  2.40 
 $0.01 
  5,000,000 
 $0.01 
 $0.0069 
  2,500,000 
  4.85 
 $0.0069 
  2,500,000 
 $0.0069 
 $0.01 
  3,750,000 
  5 
 $0.01 
  3,750,000 
 $0.01 
                      
                    0.0069 to 0.01
 
  14,250,000 
  3.17 
 $0.0093 
  10,500,000 
 $0.0093 
 
The following is a summary of outstanding and exercisable warrants at December 31, 2018
 
 
 
 
  Outstanding      
 
  Exercisable
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Weighted
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Average
 
 
Outstanding
 
 
Weighted
 
 
 
 
 
Weighted
 
 
Range of
 
 
Number
 
 
Remaining
 
 
Average
 
 
Number
 
 
Average
 
 
Exercise
 
 
Outstanding
 
 
Contractual
 
 
Exercise
 
 
Exercisable
 
 
Exercise
 
 
Prices
 
 
at 6/30/2019
 
 
Life (in yrs.)
 
 
Price
 
 
6/30/2019
 
 
Price
 
 $0.01 
  1,000,000 
  4.26 
 $0.01 
  1,000,000 
 $0.01 
 $0.01 
  2,000,000 
  2.37 
 $0.01 
  2,000,000 
 $0.01 
 $0.01 
  5,000,000 
  2.40 
 $0.01 
  5,000,000 
 $0.01 
 $0.0069 
  2,500,000 
  4.85 
 $0.0069 
  2,500,000 
 $0.0069 
                                          
0.0069 to 0.01
 
  10,500,000
  3.17 
 $0.0093 
  10,500,000 
 $0.0093 
 
The intrinsic value of warrants outstanding at September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 was $0. Aggregate intrinsic value represents the value of the Company’s closing stock price on the last trading day of the fiscal period in excess of the exercise price of the warrant multiplied by the number of warrants outstanding or exercisable.
 
 
23
 
Stock Incentive Plans
 
2014 Global Digital Solutions Equity Incentive Plan
 
On May 9, 2014 our shareholders approved the 2014 Global Digital Solutions Equity Incentive Plan (“Plan”) and reserved 20,000,000 shares of our common stock for issuance pursuant to awards thereunder, including options, stock appreciation right, restricted stock, restricted stock units, performance awards, dividend equivalents, or other stock-based awards. The Plan is intended as an incentive, to retain in the employ of the Company, our directors, officers, employees, consultants and advisors, and to attract new officers, employees, directors, consultants and advisors whose services are considered valuable, to encourage the sense of proprietorship and to stimulate the active interest of such persons in the development and financial success of the Company and its subsidiaries.
 
In accordance with the ACS 718, Compensation – Stock Compensation, awards granted are valued at fair value at the grant date. The Company recognizes compensation expense on a pro rata straight-line basis over the requisite service period for stock-based compensation awards with both graded and cliff vesting terms. The Company recognizes the cumulative effect of a change in the number of awards expected to vest in compensation expense in the period of change. The Company has not capitalized any portion of its stock-based compensation. Stock based compensation under the Equity Incentive Plan was $62,000 in the nine- month period ended September 30, 2019.
 
Awards Issued Under Stock Incentive Plans
 
Stock Option Activity
 
At September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, we have outstanding 13,650,002 stock options - all of which are fully vested stock options that were granted to directors, officers and consultants. The outstanding stock options are exercisable at prices ranging from $0.006 to $0.64 and expire between February 2024 and December 2025, for an average exercise price per share of $0.60 and an average remaining term of 7.5 years as of December 31, 2018. During 2016 1,449,998 unvested stock options were either forfeited due to employees leaving the Company or cancelled by the Board due to performance levels not being met. Any compensation amount previously recognized on the straight-line basis relating to the unvested stock options were reversed in the period of cancellation or forfeiture. The remaining 533,334 options vested during the year ended December 31, 2016. There were no options granted, exercised, or forfeited during the nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018.
 
During the nine- month period ended September 30, 2019 and the year ended December 31, 2018 we did not recognize any stock-based compensation cost related to the outstanding stock options. The intrinsic value of options outstanding at September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 was $0. Aggregate intrinsic value represents the value of the Company’s closing stock price on the last trading day of the fiscal period in excess of the exercise price of the option multiplied by the number of options outstanding.
 
Restricted Stock Units
 
On October 10, 2014 we granted an employee 1 million RSU’s convertible into 1 million shares of the Company’s common stock, with a grant date fair market value of $100,000. The grant was made under our 2014 Equity Incentive Plan. 333,333 RSU’s will vest in respect of each calendar year (commencing January 1 and ending December 31) of the Company from 2015 through 2017 if the Company has achieved at least 90% of the total revenue and EBITDA midpoint targets set forth in the agreement. If less than 90% of the target is achieved in respect of any such fiscal year, then the number of RSU’s vesting for that fiscal year shall be 333,333 times the applicable percentage set forth in the agreement; provided that, if the company shall exceed 100% of the revenue and EBITDA midpoint target for the 2018 or 2017 calendar year, and shall have failed to reach 90% of the target for a prior calendar year, the excess over 100% shall be applied to reduce the deficiency in the prior year(s), and an additional number of RSU’s shall vest to reflect the increased revenue for such prior calendar year. Any such excess shall be applied first to reduce any deficiency for the 2015 calendar year and then for the 2016 calendar year. The vesting of the RSU’s shall be effective upon the issuance of the audited financial statements of the Company for the applicable calendar year and shall be based upon the total revenue and EBITDA of the acquired companies as reflected in such financial statements.
 
 
 
24
 
 
NOTE 9 – INCOME TAXES
 
As of September 30, 2019, the Company had $13,622,276 of federal net operating loss carry forwards. These carry forwards, if not used, will begin to expire in 2028. Current or future ownership changes, including issuances of common stock under the terms of the Company’s convertible notes payable that were entered into during 2015 and the closing of the Rontan Transaction may severely limit the future realization of these net operating losses.
 
The Company provides for a valuation allowance when it is more likely than not that they will not realize a portion of the deferred tax assets. The Company has established a valuation allowance against their net deferred tax asset due to the uncertainty that enough taxable income will be generated in those taxing jurisdictions to utilize the assets. Therefore, they have not reflected any benefit of such deferred tax assets in the accompanying financial statements. The Company’s net deferred tax asset and valuation allowance increased by approximately$309,000 for the nine - month period ending September 30, 2019, related to the current period activity.
 
The Company has reviewed all income tax positions taken or that are expected to be taken for all open years and determined that their income tax positions are appropriately stated and supported for all open years. The Company is subject to U.S. federal income tax examinations by tax authorities for years after 2011 due to unexpired net operating loss carryforwards originating in and subsequent to that year. The Company may be subject to income tax examinations for the various taxing authorities which vary by jurisdiction.
 
The Company’s policy is to record interest and penalties associated with unrecognized tax benefits as additional income taxes in the consolidated statements of operations. As of September 30, 2019, there were no unrecognized tax benefits, or any tax related interest or penalties.
 
The Company files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction and the various states in which they operate. The former members of NACSV are required to file separate federal and state tax returns for NACSV for the periods prior to our acquisition of NACSV. The Company files consolidated tax returns for subsequent periods. The Company has not filed their U.S. federal and certain state tax returns since 2014 and currently do not have any
 
NOTE 10 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
 
During August 2017, Dragon Acquisitions, a related entity owned by William Delgado, a related party, and an individual lender entered into a Promissory Note agreement for $20,000 as well as $2,000 in interest to accrue through maturity on August 31, 2018 for a total of $22,000 due on August 31, 2018. Dragon Acquisition assumed payment of a payable of the Company and the Company took on the note. The Company defaulted on the note at maturity in August 2018. The $20,000 note remained outstanding September 30, 2019 and through the date of this report.
 
On December 26, 2017 (the “effective date”), the Company entered into a $485,000, 7% interest rate, demand promissory note with RLT Consulting, Inc. (RLT), a related party. The note was in settlement of the amounts accrued under a consulting agreement (Note 6), consisting of $200,000 owed for retainer payments through December 2017, as well as $285,000 owed to RLT when the Resolution Progress Funding was met on December 22, 2017. As part of the agreement, RLT may not demand payment prior to the date of the Resolution Funding Date. The Company also agreed to grant 5,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Progress Funding Date and 10,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Funding Date. The 5,000,000 shares were issued on March 13, 2018. The Company shall make mandatory prepayment in the following amounts and at the following times –
  
 
25
 
 
$1,000 on the effective date.
 
$50,000 on the date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion to dismiss.
 
$50,000 on the date on which discovery closes with respect to the lawsuit.
 
$100,000 on the date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion for summary judgement on the claims.
 
Under the terms of the RLT note consulting agreement (Note 6), any unpaid consulting fees subsequent to December 2017 causes a default on the note with unpaid consulting fees to be added to the principal of the note. During the year ended December 31, 2018, consulting fees totaling $100,000 were added to the note principal and are included in the note balance at December 31, 2018. The notes had a balance of $584,000 as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively. Through the date of this report, monthly consulting fees have not been repaid. The note remains in default however RLT has voluntarily refrained from making demand prior to the Resolution Funding Date. RLT was granted a first priority security interest in the Litigation Proceeds and is pari passu to Parabellum and Vox. To that end, they share in the litigation in a priority position to proceed to repay the note.
 
The June 2018 note bears a personal guarantee by William Delgado, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company. As further security for the note, Mr. Delgado has also pledged the 1,000,000 Convertible Preferred Shares of the Company that he owns, as well as 5,000,000 common shares of SHMP, another public company in which Mr. Delgado is a director and Chief Financial Officer.
 
Accounts Payable
 
 At September 30, 2019, and December 31, 2018 included in accounts payable was compensation owed to related parties as seen below
 
 
 
26
 
 
 
 
September 30,
 
 
December 31,
 
 
 
2019
 
 
2018
 
RLT Consulting
 $33,841 
 $33,841 
Jerry Gomolski
  25,000 
  25,000 
Charter 804CS
  20,099 
  20,099 
Gary Gray
  12,000 
  12,000 
 
 $90,940 
 $90,940 
 
Accrued Compensation
 
 At September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, we had $161,676 and $482,431 payable to William J. Delgado and $78,335 and $65,835 to Jerome Gomolski, respectively.

 
 
 
 
 
Bill
 
 
Jerome
 
 
 
Total
 
 
Delgado
 
 
Gomolski
 
Balance 12/31/2018
 $548,266 
 $482,431 
 $65,835 
 
    
    
    
2019 Salary
  215,000 
  180,000 
  37,500 
Payments
  (525,755)
  (514,324)
  (25,000)
 
    
    
    
Balance 9/30/2019
 $226,442
 
 $148,107
 
 $78,335 
 
NOTE 11 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
 
On October 16,2019 the Company and Tangiers Global,LLC entered into a security agreement for a 10% Convertible Note in the aggregate principal of $137,500 due on October 20, 2020. The note carries original issue discount or $12,500 The note is convertible into shares of common stock of the Company. The “Conversion Price” shall mean 60% multiplied by the Market Price (as defined herein), representing a discount rate of 40%. “Market Price” means the lowest Traded Price for the Common Stock during the twenty (20) Trading Day period ending on the latest complete Trading Day prior to the Conversion Date. The Company is required to maintain a common share reserve of not less than 125,000,000 shares
 
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
 
Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
 
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q includes a number of forward-looking statements that reflect management's current views with respect to future events and financial performance. Forward-looking statements are projections in respect of future events or our future financial performance. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. These statements include statements regarding the intent, belief or current expectations of us and members of our management team, as well as the assumptions on which such statements are based. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risk and uncertainties, and that actual results may differ materially from those contemplated by such forward-looking statements. These statements are only predictions and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, including the risks set forth in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on June 18, 2019, any of which may cause our company’s or our industry’s actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied in our forward-looking statements. These risks and factors include, by way of example and without limitation:
 
 
27
 
 
 
our ability to successfully commercialize and our products and services on a large enough scale to generate profitable operations;
 
our ability to maintain and develop relationships with customers and suppliers;
 
our ability to successfully integrate acquired businesses or new brands;
 
the impact of competitive products and pricing;
 
supply constraints or difficulties;
 
the retention and availability of key personnel;
 
general economic and business conditions;
 
substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern;
 
our need to raise additional funds in the future;
 
our ability to successfully recruit and retain qualified personnel in order to continue our operations;
 
our ability to successfully implement our business plan;
 
our ability to successfully acquire, develop or commercialize new products and equipment;
 
intellectual property claims brought by third parties; and
 
the impact of any industry regulation.
 
Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, or performance. Except as required by applicable law, including the securities laws of the United States, we do not intend to update any of the forward-looking statements to conform these statements to actual results.
 
Readers are urged to carefully review and consider the various disclosures made by us in this report and in our other reports filed with the SEC. We undertake no obligation to update or revise forward-looking statements to reflect changed assumptions, the occurrence of unanticipated events or changes in the future operating results over time except as required by law. We believe that our assumptions are based upon reasonable data derived from and known about our business and operations. No assurances are made that actual results of operations or the results of our future activities will not differ materially from our assumptions.
 
As used in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and unless otherwise indicated, the terms “GDSI,” “Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to Global Digital Solutions, Inc. and our wholly-owned subsidiaries GDSI Florida, LLC and North American Custom Specialty Vehicles, Inc. Unless otherwise specified, all dollar amounts are expressed in United States dollars.
 
 
28
 
Corporate History and Overview
 
We were incorporated in New Jersey as Creative Beauty Supply, Inc. (“Creative”) in August 1995. In March 2004, Creative acquired Global Digital Solutions, Inc., a Delaware corporation. The merger was treated as a recapitalization of Global Digital Solutions, Inc., and Creative changed its name to Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”). We are focused in the area of cyber arms technology and complementary security and technology solutions. On October 22, 2012, we entered into an Agreement of Merger and Plan of Reorganization to acquire 70% of Airtronic USA, Inc. (“Airtronic”), a then debtor in possession under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, after Airtronic successfully reorganized and emerged from bankruptcy (the “Merger”). During the period from October 2012 through November 2013, we were actively involved in the day to day management of Airtronic pending the completion of the Merger. The Merger did not occur, and we ceased involvement with the Airtronic. In December 2012 we incorporated GDSI Florida LLC (“GDSI FL”), a Florida limited liability company. Except for the payment of administrative expenses on behalf of the Company, GDSI FL has no business operations. In January 2013 we incorporated Global Digital Solutions, LLC, a Florida limited liability company. In November 2013, we incorporated GDSI Acquisition Corporation, a Delaware corporation. On June 16, 2014, we acquired North American Custom Specialty Vehicles, LLC into GDSI Acquisition Corporation, and changed the latter’s name to North American Custom Specialty Vehicles, Inc. (“NACSV”). In July 2014, we announced the formation of GDSI International (f/k/a Global Digital Solutions, LLC) to spearhead our efforts overseas.
 
We are positioning ourselves as a leader in providing comprehensive security and technology solutions. Since May 1, 2012, we have been focusing on acquisitions of defense and defense-related entities both in the United States and abroad. On June 16, 2014 GDSI completed its acquisition of North American Custom Specialty Vehicles (“NACSV”). NACSV’s mobile emergency operations centers (MEOC) can be tailored to the needs of Police, Fire, EMS, Military, Homeland Security, National Guard, FBI, Air National Guard Coast Guard, Chemical/Petrochemical, Humanitarian Aid, Non-Governmental Organizations, Drug Enforcement, Immigration & Customs, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Water Management, Wildlife Management, D.O.T. Engineering & Maintenance, Air & Water Quality Management (EPA), Meteorological Seismic/Oil & Gas Exploration, IS/Mapping Power Generation (Nuclear & Conventional), Power Transmission and Strategic Infrastructure Security. We see many opportunities to improve NACSV and its products and services through the integration of additional software, hardware and firmware technologies.
 
Results of Operations
 
Comparison of the Three Months Ended September 30, 2019 and June 30, 2018
 
Revenue
 
There were no revenues for the three months ending September 30, 2019 or September 30, 2018
 
 
29
 
Expenses
 
Our Operating Expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2019 are summarized as follows, in comparison to our expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2018
 
Expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Three Months Ended September 30,
 
 
 
2019
 
 
2018
 
Salaries and related expenses
 $71,383 
 $72,501 
Rent
  2,896 
  1,400 
Professional fees
  133,280 
  69,089 
Consulting services
  363,796 
  - 
Other general and administrative expenses
  16,038 
  2,952 
Total
 $587,394 
 $145,942 
 
Operating expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2019 were $587,394 representing an approximately 400% increase compared to operating expenses of $145,942 for the same period in 2018. The primary reason for the change is the increase in consulting services incurred in the three months ending September 30, 2019.

Comparison of the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019 and September 30, 2018
 
Revenue
 
There were no revenues for the nine months ending September 30, 2019 or September 30, 2018
 
Expenses
 
Our Operating Expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 are summarized as follows, in comparison to our expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2018.
 
Expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Nine Months Ended September 30,
 
 
 
2019
 
 
2018
 
Salaries and related expenses
 $217,500 
 $243,670 
Rent
  8,470 
  8,764 
Professional fees
  218,754 
  383,035 
Consulting services
  520,981 
  471,758 
Other general and administrative expenses
  66,045 
  67,987 
Total
 $1,031,750 
 $1,175,214 
 
 
 
30
 
 
Operating expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 were $1,031,750 representing an approximately 12% decrease compared to operating expenses of $1,175,214 for the same period in 2018. The primary reason for the change is the decrease in salaries and related expenses and professional fees incurred in the nine months ending September 30, 2019.
 
Liquidity, Financial Condition and Capital Resources
 
As of September 30, 2019, we had cash on hand of $50,625 and a working capital deficit of $ 5,072,867 as compared to cash on hand of $8,100 and a working capital deficit of $4,295,479 as of December 31, 2018. The increase in working capital deficit of $ 777,388 is due primarily to increases in Notes and Convertible Notes of $1,270,131 1,161,656 and decreases in Accounts Payable of $103,415, Accrued Expenses of $ 211,353, and derivative Liability of $ 20,975.
 
Going Concern
 
The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements contained in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. The Company has accumulated losses from inception through the period ended June 30,2019 of approximately $13 million, as well as negative cash flows from operating activities. As of the balance sheet date, the Company did not have sufficient cash resources to meet its plans through September 30, 2019. The Company entered into an Equity Purchase Agreement, which will provide the Company with up to $5,000,000 (after the effectiveness of a registration agreement) through delivery of put notices and delivered the shares.
 
The condensed consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that may be necessary should the Company be unable to continue as a going concern. The Company’s continuation as a going concern is dependent on its ability to obtain additional financing as may be required and ultimately to attain profitability. If the Company raises additional funds through the issuance of equity, the percentage ownership of current shareholders could be reduced, and such securities might have rights, preferences or privileges senior to the rights, preferences and privileges of the Company’s common stock. Additional financing may not be available upon acceptable terms, or at all. If adequate funds are not available or are not available on acceptable terms, the Company may not be able to take advantage of prospective business endeavors or opportunities, which could significantly and materially restrict its future plans for developing its business and achieving commercial revenues. If the Company is unable to obtain the necessary capital, the Company may have to cease operations.
 
Working Capital Deficiency
 
 Periods Ended
 
 
 
September 30,
 
 
December 31,
 
 
 
2019
 
 
2018
 
Current Assets
 $56,625 
 $8,100 
Current Liabilities
  5,129,492 
  4,303,579 
Working Capital
 $(5,072,867)
 $(4,295,479)
 
Current assets increased from December 31, 2018 to June 30,2019 due to the increase in cash based on the cash receipts of new stock issuances and new notes payable offset by the decrease in accounts payables, accrued expenses, and derivative liabilities.
 
 
31
 
 
Cash Flows
 
 
 
September 30,
 
 
September 30,
 
 
 
2019
 
 
2018
 
Cash Flows
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net cash used in operating activities
 $(1,249,720)
 $(447,150)
Net cash used in investing activities
  (26,282)
  - 
Net cash provided by financing activiities
  1,318,527 
  355,150 
Increase(decrease) in cash
 $42,525 
 $(92,000)
 
Operating Activities
 
Net cash used by operating activities was $ 1,249,720 for the nine months ended September 30, 2019, reflecting the net loss of $ 1,848,568. Net cash used by operating activities was $447,150 for the nine months ended September 30, 2018, reflecting the net loss of $1.238,271
 
Investing Activities
 
Net cash used for Investing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 and September 30, 2018 was $26,282 and $0 respectively.
 
Financing Activities
 
During the nine months ended September 30, 2019, cash provided by financing activities of $1,318,527consisted of proceeds from notes payable of $900,000 and convertible notes payable of $ 696,975 and proceeds from the sale of common stock of $286,138, offset by payments on notes payable of 275,000, payments on convertible notes payable of $289,586.
 
Convertible Notes Payable
 
On January 26, 2015, the Company agreed to a $250,000 principal (and a $25,000 original discount amount) Convertible Note with JMJ Financial (“JMJ”.) The Note matured on January 26, 2017, unless earlier converted pursuant to the terms of the Convertible Note. The Note bears interest at 0% if repaid in the first 90 days and then a one-time interest charge of 12% applied on the principal sum. The outstanding principal and interest under the Note, solely upon an Event of Default (as defined in the Note), is convertible at the option of the Holder of the Note into shares of the Company’s common stock as set forth in the Note. On December 13, 2017, the Company entered into a repayment agreement with JMJ Financial to repay the outstanding balance of $84,514. As of September 30, 2019, the Company has paid $25,000 of this balance, leaving an outstanding balance of $59,514.
 
 
32
 
 
On January 16, 2015, the Company agreed to a $78,750 principal Convertible Redeemable Note with LG Capital Funding, LLC (“LG Capital”.) The Note matured on January 16, 2016 unless earlier converted pursuant to terms of the Convertible Note. The Note bears interest at 8% per annum. The outstanding principal and interest under the Note, solely upon an Event of Default (as defined in the Note), is convertible at the option of the Holder of the Note into shares of the Company’s common stock as set forth in the Note. On December 12, 2017, the Company entered into a redemption agreement with LG Capital Funding, LLC to repay the outstanding balance of $68,110. As of September 30, 2019, the Company has paid $6,500 of this balance, leaving an outstanding balance of $61,610.
 
Factoring Agreements
 
During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company entered into two revenue-based factoring agreements for which the Company did not make the required payments, and the factor agreements went into default. On December 21, 2017 the Company entered into a Settlement agreement with Power Up under which Power Up has agreed to accept the sum of $90,000 in full satisfaction of outstanding obligation. The settlement is to be paid in three installments of $30,000. The settlement has been paid in full as of May 15, 2018, with a gain on settlement of $17,266 recognized when the debt was extinguished.
 
Promissory Note Agreement
 
On August 31, 2017, Dragon Acquisitions, a related entity owned by William Delgado, and an individual lender entered into a promissory note agreement for $20,000 as well as $2,000 in interest to accrue through maturity on August 31, 2018 for a total of $22,000 due on August 31, 2018. Dragon Acquisition assumed payment of a payable of the Company and the Company took on the debt. As of September 30, 2019, the Company has accrued $2,000 of the interest.
 
Financing Agreement
 
On December 22, 2017, the Company entered into a financing agreement with an accredited investor for $1.2 million. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company is to receive milestone payments based on the progress of the Company’s lawsuit for damages against Grupo Rontan Metalurgica, S.A (the “Lawsuit”). Such milestone payments consist of (i) an initial purchase price payment of $300,000, which the Company received on December 22, 2017, (ii) $150,000 within 30 days of the Lawsuit surviving a motion to dismiss on the primary claims, (iii) $100,000 within 30 days of the close of all discovery in the Lawsuit and (iv) $650,000 within 30 days of the Lawsuit surviving a motion for summary judgment and challenges on the primary claims. As part of the agreement, the Company shall pay the investor an investment return of 100% of the litigation proceeds to recoup all money invested, plus 27.5% of the total litigation proceeds received by the Company. Through September 30, 2019, $1,200,000 has been received.
 
 
33
 
 
Demand Promissory Note Agreements
 
On December 23, 2017 (the “effective date”), the Company entered into a $485,000, 7% interest rate, Demand Promissory Note with Vox Business Trust, LLC (the “Purchaser”.) The note was in settlement of the amounts accrued under a consulting agreement, consisting of $200,000 owed for retainer payments through December 2017, as well as $285,000 owed to the Purchaser when the Resolution Progress Funding was met on December 22, 2017. As part of the agreement, the Purchaser may not demand payment prior to the date of the Resolution Funding Date. The Company also agreed to grant 5,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Progress Funding Date and 10,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Funding Date. The 5,000,000 shares were issued on March 13, 2018. The Company shall make mandatory prepayment in the following amounts and at the following times:
 
● 
$1,000 on the effective date.
● 
$50,000 on the date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion to dismiss.
● 
$50,000 on the date on which discovery closes with respect to the lawsuit.
● 
$100,000 on the date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion for summary judgement on the claims.
 
On December 26, 2017, the Company entered into a $485,000, 7% interest rate, Demand Promissory Note with RLT Consulting, Inc. (the “Purchaser”.) The note was in settlement of the amounts accrued under a consulting agreement (Note 6), consisting of $200,000 owed for retainer payments through December 2017, as well as $285,000 owed to the Purchaser when the Resolution Progress Funding was met on December 22, 2017. As part of the agreement, the Purchaser may not demand payment prior to the date of the Resolution Funding Date. The Company also agreed to grant 5,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Progress Funding Date and 10,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Funding Date. The 5,000,000 shares were issued on March 13, 2018 (as well as an additional 4,000,000 for further services). The Company shall make mandatory prepayment in the following amounts and at the following times:
 
● 
$1,000 on the effective date.
● 
$50,000 on the date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion to dismiss.
● 
$50,000 on the date on which discovery closes with respect to the lawsuit.
● 
$100,000 on the date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion for summary judgement on the claims.
 
Investment Return Purchase Agreements
 
On April 3, 2018, the Company entered into an Investment Return Purchase Agreement with an accredited investor (the “Purchaser”) for proceeds of $50,000 (the “Investment Agreement”). Under the terms of the Investment Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Purchaser the $50,000 proceeds plus a 25% return, or $25,000 (the “Investment Return”) within seven (7) months from the date of the Investment Agreement. The Investment Return is being recognized as interest expense over the seven months. In addition, the Company agreed to issue to the Purchaser 1,000,000 warrants to purchase common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, exercisable for a period of five (5) years.
 
 
34
 
 
On May 15, 2018, the Company entered into an Investment Return Purchase Agreement with an accredited investor (the “Purchaser”) for proceeds of $200,000 (the “Investment Agreement”). Under the terms of the Investment Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Purchaser a 10% return, or $20,000 (the “Investment Return”) within three (3) months from the date of the Investment Agreement. Such Investment Return shall be paid earlier if the Company secures funding totaling $500,000 within 90 days from the date of the Investment Agreement. In addition, the Company agreed to issue to the Purchaser 2,000,000 warrants to purchase common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, exercisable for a period of three (3) years.
 
Notes Payable
 
On May 1, 2018, the Company entered into a $36,000 promissory note with an individual with $5,000 original issue discount for net proceeds of $31,000.
 
On June 4, 2018, the Company agreed to a $300,000 principal amount (and a $150,000 original issue discount amount) convertible note issued to GS Capital Partners. As part of the note agreement, the Company also agreed to issue the investor 5,000,000 warrants at an exercise price of $0.01, exercisable for a period of three (3) years.
 
Future Financing
 
We will require additional funds to implement our growth strategy for our business. In addition, while we have received capital from various private placements of equity and convertible debt that have enabled us to fund our operations, additional funds will be needed for further business development.
 
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
 
We have no off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that is material to stockholders.
 
Effects of Inflation
 
We do not believe that inflation has had a material impact on our business, revenues or operating results during the periods presented.
 
 
35
 
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
 
Our significant accounting policies are more fully described in the notes to our financial statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017. We believe that the accounting policies below are critical for one to fully understand and evaluate our financial condition and results of operations.
 
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
 
In May 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Topic 606, or ASU 2014-09. ASU 2014-09 establishes the principles for recognizing revenue and develops a common revenue standard for U.S. GAAP. The standard outlines a single comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers and supersedes most current revenue recognition guidance, including industry-specific guidance. In applying the new revenue recognition model to contracts with customers, an entity: (1) identifies the contract(s) with a customer; (2) identifies the performance obligations in the contract(s); (3) determines the transaction price; (4) allocates the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract(s); and (5) recognizes revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. The accounting standards update applies to all contracts with customers except those that are within the scope of other topics in the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. The accounting standards update also requires significantly expanded quantitative and qualitative disclosures regarding the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. The Company adopted ASU 2014-09 as of January 1, 2018, and as there have not been any significant revenues to date, the adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations, and no transition method was necessary upon adoption.
 
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases, or ASU 2016-02. The new guidance requires lessees to recognize the assets and liabilities arising from leases on the balance sheet. For public companies, ASU 2016-02 is effective for annual periods, including interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2018, and early adoption is permitted. The Company does not expect that the adoption of ASU 2016-02 will have a material impact on its financial statements.
 
In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-07 (Topic 718) Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting (“ASU 2018-07”), which expands the scope of ASC Topic 718 to include all share-based payment arrangements related to the acquisition of goods and services from both nonemployees and employees. An entity should apply the requirements of Topic 718 to nonemployee awards except for certain exemptions specified in the amendment. ASU 2018-07 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within that fiscal year. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of this amendment will have on its condensed consolidated financial statements.
 
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
 
Not Applicable. As a smaller reporting company, we are not required to provide the information required by this Item.
 
 
 
36
 
 
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
 
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
 
We carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer (who is our Principal Executive Officer) and our Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (who is our Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer), of the effectiveness of the design of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined by Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) or 15d-15(e)) as of September 30, 2018 pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-15. Based upon that evaluation, our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of September 30, 2019 in ensuring that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. This conclusion is based on findings that constituted material weaknesses. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Company’s interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.
 
In performing the above-referenced assessment, management identified the following deficiencies in the design or operation of our internal controls and procedures, which management considers to be material weaknesses:
 
(i)           Lack of Formal Policies and Procedures. We utilize a third party independent contractor for the preparation of our financial statements. Although the financial statements and footnotes are reviewed by our management, we do not have a formal policy to review significant accounting transactions and the accounting treatment of such transactions. The third party independent contractor is not involved in the day to day operations of the Company and may not be provided information from management on a timely basis to allow for adequate reporting/consideration of certain transactions.
 
(ii)           Audit Committee and Financial Expert. We do not have a formal audit committee with a financial expert, and thus we lack the board oversight role within the financial reporting process.
 
(iii)           Insufficient Resources. We have insufficient quantity of dedicated resources and experienced personnel involved in reviewing and designing internal controls. As a result, a material misstatement of the interim and annual financial statements could occur and not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.
 
(iv)          Entity Level Risk Assessment. We did not perform an entity level risk assessment to evaluate the implication of relevant risks on financial reporting, including the impact of potential fraud related risks and the risks related to non-routine transactions, if any, on internal control over financial reporting. Lack of an entity-level risk assessment constituted an internal control design deficiency which resulted in more than a remote likelihood that a material error would not have been prevented or detected and constituted a material weakness.
 
Our management feels the weaknesses identified above have not had any material effect on our financial results. However, we are currently reviewing our disclosure controls and procedures related to these material weaknesses, and expect to implement changes in the near term, as resources permit, in order to address these material weaknesses. Our management will continue to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of our internal controls and procedures and our internal controls over financial reporting on an ongoing basis and is committed to taking further action and implementing additional enhancements or improvements, as necessary and as funds permit.
 
 
37
 
 
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.
 
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
 
There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended September 30, 2019 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
 
PART II – OTHER INFORMATION
 
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
 
We may be involved in legal proceedings in the ordinary course of our business, and our management cannot predict the ultimate outcome of these legal proceedings with certainty. The Company is plaintiff or defendant in the following actions:
 
Dekle, et. al. v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. et. al.
 
Brian A. Dekle and John Ramsay filed suit against the Company and its wholly owned subsidiary, North American Custom Specialty Vehicles, Inc. (“NACSV”), in the Circuit Court of Baldwin Alabama, on January 14, 2015, case no. 05-CV-2015-9000050.00, relating to our acquisition of NACSV (the ''Dekle Action"). Prior to instituting the Dekle Action, in June 2014, the Company had entered into an equity purchase agreement with Dekle and Ramsay to purchase their membership interest in North American Custom Specialty Vehicles, LLC. The Dekle Action originally sought payment for $300,000 in post-closing consideration Dekle and Ramsay allege they are owed pursuant to the equity purchase agreement.
 
On February 9, 2015, the Company and NACSV removed the Dekle Action to federal court in the United States District Court in and for the Southern District of Alabama, case no. 1:15-CV-00069. The Company and NACSV subsequently moved to dismiss the complaint for (1) failing to state a cause of action, and (2) lack of personal jurisdiction. Alternatively, the Company and NACSV sought a transfer of the case to the United States District Court in and for Middle District of Florida.
 
In response to the Company’s and NACSV's motion to dismiss, Dekle and Ramsay filed an amended complaint on March 2, 2015 seeking specific performance and alleging breach of contract, violations of Security and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Rule 10b-5, and violations of the Alabama Securities Act. The amended complaint also names the Company’s Chairman, President, and CEO, Richard J. Sullivan (“Sullivan”), as a defendant. On March 17, 2015, the Company, NACSV and Sullivan filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint seeking dismissal for failure to state valid causes of action, for lack of personal jurisdiction, or alternatively to transfer the case to the United States District Court in and for the Middle District of Florida. Dekle and Ramsay responded on March 31, 2015, and the Company filed its response thereto on April 7, 2015.
On June 2, 2015, Dekle passed away.  On June 5, 2015, the Court denied the Company’s motion to transfer the case to Florida.   On June 10, 2015, the Company filed a motion to reconsider the Court’s denial of its motion to transfer the case to Florida. On September 30, 2105, the Court granted the Company’s Renewed Motion to Transfer Venue. The case was transferred to the Middle District of Florida, where it is currently pending.
 
 
38
 
 
On June 15, 2015, Ramsay filed a second amended complaint. On June 25, 2015, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. The Company’s Motion to Dismiss was denied.
 
Global Digital Solutions, Inc. et. al. v. Communications Laboratories, Inc., et. al.
 
On January 19, 2015 the Company and NACSV filed suit against Communications Laboratories, Inc., ComLabs Global, LLC, Roland Lussier, Brian Dekle, John Ramsay and Wallace Bailey for conversion and breach of contract in a dispute over the payment of a $300,000 account receivable that ComLabs owed to NACSV but sent payment directly to Brian Dekle. The case was filed in the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Brevard County Florida, case no. 05-2015-CA-012250. On February 18, 2015 (i) defendants Communications Laboratories, Inc., ComLabs Global, LLC and Roland Lussier and (ii) defendant Wallace Bailey filed their respective motions to dismiss seeking, among other things, dismissal for failure to state valid causes of action, lumping and failure to post a non-resident bond. On February 26, 2015, defendants Dekle and Ramsay filed their motion to dismiss, or stay action, based on already existing litigation between the parties. NACSV filed its required bond on March 2, 2015. The Company believes the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome of the dispute is remote.
 
Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc., Richard J. Sullivan, David A. Loppert, William J. Delgado, Arthur F. Noterman and Stephanie C. Sullivan United States District Court, District of New Jersey (Trenton), Case No. 3:16-cv-05153-FLW-TJB
 
On August 24, 2016, Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated (“Hull”) filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”), Richard J. Sullivan (“Sullivan”), David A. Loppert (“Loppert”), William J. Delgado (“Delgado”), Arthur F. Noterman (“Noterman”) and Stephanie C. Sullivan (“Stephanie Sullivan”) seeking to recover compensable damages caused by Defendants’ alleged violations of federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. On January 18, 2018, pursuant to the Court’s December 19, 2017 Order granting Plaintiff Hull leave to file an amended Complaint, Plaintiff Hull filed a Second Amended Complaint against Defendants. On February 8, 2018, Defendants GDSI and Delgado filed a Second Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On February 8, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File an Answer. On February 13, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for Lack of (personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim. On February 20, 2018, Plaintiff Michael Perry (“Perry”) filed a Brief in Opposition to Defendants GDSI and Delgado’s Second Motion to Dismiss the Complaint and to Defendant Loppert’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for Lack of (personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim. On February 26, 2018, Defendants GDSI and Delgado filed a Reply Brief to Plaintiff Michael Perry’s Brief in Opposition to their Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. On February 26, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Response in Support of Defendants GDSI and Delgado’s Second Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On March 12, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Reply Brief to Plaintiff Perry’s Brief in Opposition to Defendant Loppert’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for Lack of (personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim. To date, the Court has not issued a decision as to aforementioned Motions. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. and William J. Delgado intend to continue to vigorously defend against the claims asserted by Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated. The Company entered into a court ordered mediation with Plaintiff’s counsel and entered into a settlement agreement on June 12, 2019. The settlement agreement was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on June 13, 2019. The Company notified the attorneys general of the several states and the United States government as required. The settlement agreement received preliminary approval on July 15, 2019. We anticipate that all of the costs of settlement will be covered by the Company’s insurance carrier.
 
 
 
39
 
 
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc., Richard J. Sullivan and David A. Loppert United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 9:16-cv-81413-RLR
 
On August 11, 2016, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”), Richard J. Sullivan (“Sullivan”) and David A. Loppert (“Loppert”) to enjoin GDSI; Sullivan, GDSI’s former Chairman and CEO; and Loppert, GDSI’s former CFO from alleged further violations of the anti-fraud and reporting provisions of the federal securities laws, and against Sullivan and Loppert from alleged further violations of the certification provisions of the federal securities laws.
 
On October 12, 2016, Defendant GDSI filed its First Answer to the Complaint. On November 9, 2016, Defendant Sullivan filed a Letter with the Court denying all allegations regarding the case. On December 15, 2016, the SEC filed a Motion for Judgment and Notice of Filing of Consent of Defendant Loppert to entry of Final Judgment by the SEC. On December 19, 2016, the Court entered an order granting the SEC’s Motion for Judgment as to Defendant Loppert. On December 21, 2016, the SEC filed a Notice of Settlement as entered into by it and Defendants GDSI and Sullivan. On December 23, 2016, the Court entered an Order staying the case and directing the Clerk of the Court to close the case for statistical purposes per the December 21, 2016 Notice of Settlement. On March 7, 2017, the SEC moved for a Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other Relief and Notice of Filing Consent of Defendant GDSI to Entry of Judgment by the SEC. On March 13, 2017, the Judge signed the Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was entered on the Court’s docket. On April 6, 2017, the SEC moved for a final Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other Relief and Notice of Filing Consent of Defendant Sullivan. On April 10, 2017, the Judge signed the final Judgment as to Defendant Sullivan and it was entered on the Court’s docket. On December 21, 2017, the SEC moved for a final Judgment and Notice of Filing Consent of Defendant GDSI to Entry of Final Judgment. On January 2, 2018, the Judge signed the Final Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was entered on the Court’s docket. The amount of the judgement is One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) plus interest, which is included in accrued expenses in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet.
 
Adrian Lopez, Derivatively and on behalf of Global Digital Solutions, Inc. v. William J. Delgado, Richard J. Sullivan, David A. Loppert, Jerome J. Gomolski, Stephanie C. Sullivan, Arthur F. Noterman, and Stephen L. Norris United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case No. 3:17-cv-03468-PGS-LHG
 
On September 19, 2016, Adrian Lopez, derivatively, and on behalf of Global Digital Solutions, Inc., filed an action in New Jersey Superior Court sitting Mercer County, General Equity Division. That action was administratively dismissed for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff Lopez, through his counsel, filed a motion to reinstate the matter on the general equity calendar on or about February 10, 2017. The Court granted the motion unopposed on or about April 16, 2017. On May 15, 2017, Defendant William Delgado (“Delgado”) filed a Notice of Removal of Case No. C-70-16 from the Mercer County Superior Court of New Jersey to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. On May 19, 2017, Defendant Delgado filed a First Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. On May 20, 2017, Defendant David A. Loppert (“Loppert”) filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of (Personal) Jurisdiction. On June 14, 2017, Plaintiff Adrian Lopez (“Lopez”) filed a First Motion to Remand the Action back to State Court. On June 29, 2017, Defendant Delgado filed a Memorandum of Law in Response and Reply to the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand and in Response to Defendants’ Delgado’s and Loppert’s Motions to Dismiss. On January 1, 16, 2018, a Memorandum and Order granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand the case back to the Mercer County Superior Court of New Jersey was signed by the Judge and entered on the Docket. Defendants Delgado and Loppert’s Motions to Dismiss were denied as moot. On February 2, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On February 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Consolidate Cases. On March 21, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On March 23, 2018, Defendants filed a Brief in Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. The Court held a hearing on the motions to dismiss and consolidate. Jurisdictional discovery was ordered. As of this date, the Court has not issued a decision and Order regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. The Company entered into a court ordered mediation with Plaintiff’s counsel and entered into a settlement agreement on June 12, 2019. The settlement agreement was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on June 13, 2019. The Company notified the attorneys general of the several states and the United States government as required. The settlement agreement received preliminary approval on July 15, 2019. We anticipate that all of the costs of settlement will be covered by the Company’s insurance carrier.
 
 
40
 
 
Adrian Lopez v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. and William J. Delgado Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Mercer County, Equity Part, Docket No. MER-L-002126-17
 
On September 28, 2017, Plaintiff Adrian Lopez (“Lopez”) brought an action against Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”) and William J. Delgado (“Delgado”) to compel a meeting of the stockholders of Global Digital Solutions, Inc. pursuant to Section 2.02 of GDSI’s Bylaws and New Jersey Revised Statute § 14A:5-2. On October 27, 2017, Defendants GDSI and Delgado filed a Motion to Stay the Proceeding. On November 24, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Objection to Defendants’ Motion to Stay the Proceeding. On January 19, 2018, Defendants’ Motion to Stay the Proceeding was denied. On February 2, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On February 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Consolidate Cases. On March 21, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On March 23, 2018, Defendants filed a Brief in Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. As of this date, the Court has not issued a decision and Order regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. The Company entered into a court ordered mediation with Plaintiff’s counsel and entered into a settlement agreement on June 12, 2019. The settlement agreement was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on June 13, 2019. The Company notified the attorneys general of the several states and the United States government as required. The settlement agreement received preliminary approval on July 15, 2019. We anticipate that all of the costs of settlement will be covered by the Company’s insurance carrier.
 
In the Matter of GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC., ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING File No. 3-18325. Administrative Proceeding Before the Securities and Exchange Commission.
 
On December 26, 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission instituted public administrative proceedings pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against the Respondent Global Digital Solutions, Inc. On January 8, 2018, Respondent Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”) filed its answer to the allegations contained in the Order Instituting Administrative Proceedings and Notice of Hearing Pursuant to Section 12U) of the Exchange Act. A briefing schedule was entered into and on February 15, 2018, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed a motion for an order of summary disposition against Respondent GDSI on the grounds that there is no genuine issue with regard to any material fact, the Division was entitled as a matter of law to an order revoking each class of GDSI's securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act. Respondent GDSI opposed the Securities and Exchange Commission’s motion on the grounds that there were material issues of fact. The Securities and Exchange Commission replied and a hearing was held on April 9, 2018. The Administrative Law Judge ordered supplemental evidence and briefing on the issues of material fact. Subsequent to the supplemental brief, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision questioning the validity of the administrative law judges appointed by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Accordingly, the complaint had to begin again with a new, properly appointed administrative law judge. At the submission of the new complaint, the violations of Section 12(j) of the Exchange Act had been cured and accordingly, then Securities and Exchange Commission moved to dismiss the complaint. The Commission granted the motion and closed the matter.
 
PMB HELIN DONOVAN, LLP vs. GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, Docket No.: 50-2017-CA-011937-XXXX-MB
 
On October 31, 2017, PMB Helin Donovan, LLP filed an action for account stated in Palm Beach County. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”) settled the matter for Forty Thousand Dollars ($40,000.00) of which the first payment of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) has been paid on May 16, 2018. The $40,000 is included in accounts payable as of December 31, 2017 and $30,000 at December 31, 2018. The Company defaulted on this Agreement. A judgment has been entered against the Company for the full amount due and owing.
 
JENNIFER CARROLL, vs. GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC., NORTH AMERICAN CUSTOM SPECIALTY VEHICLES, INC., IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT in AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, CASE NO.: 50-2015-CC-012942-XXXX-MB
 
On October 27, 2017, Plaintiff Jennifer Carroll the former President of NACSV, moved the court for a default judgment against Defendant Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”) and its subsidiary North American Custom Specialty Vehicles Inc. The amount of the judgement is Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00) plus fees of Thirteen Thousand Three Hundred Fifty -Three Dollars Forty- Four Cents ($13,353.44) and costs of Six hundred Twenty- Four dollars thirty cents ($624.30). The Company defaulted on this Agreement. A judgment has been entered against the Company for the full amount due and owing.
 
 
41
 
 
Consulting agreements
 
The Company entered into two consulting agreements (See Note 5) in May 2016, for services to be provided in connection towards the resolution of the Rontan lawsuit (below). The consulting agreements includes a monthly retainer payment of$10,000 to each consultant. The agreement also includes consideration of 5,000,000 shares of restricted common stock of the Company, plus a 5% cash consideration of the Resolution Progress Funding, (defined as upon the retention of legal counsel and receipt of funding for the litigation), as of the Resolution Progress Funding date and 10,000,000 shares of restricted common stock of the Company and a 5% cash consideration of the Resolution Funding amount (defined as a settlement or judgement in favor of the Company by Rotan),at the Resolution Funding date. The Resolution Progress funding was met on December 22, 2017.
 
Share Purchase and Sale Agreement for Acquisition of Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A.
 
Effective October 13, 2015, the Company (as “Purchaser”) entered into the SPSA dated October 8, 2015 with Joao Alberto Bolzan and Jose Carlos Bolzan, both Brazilian residents (collectively, the “Sellers”) and Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A., a limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of Federative Republic of Brazil (“Rontan”) (collectively, the “Parties”), pursuant to which the Sellers agreed to sell 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of Rontan to the Purchaser on the closing date.
 
The purchase price shall consist of a cash amount, a stock amount and an earn-out amount as follows: (i) Brazilian Real (“R”) $100 million (approximately US$26 million) to be paid by the Purchaser in equal monthly installments over a period of forty eight (48) months following the closing date; (ii) an aggregate of R$100 million (approximately US$26 million) in shares of the Purchaser’s common stock, valued at US$1.00 per share; and (iii) an earn-out payable within ten business days following receipt by the Purchaser of Rontan’s audited financial statements for the 12-months ended December 31, 2017, 2018 and 2019. The earn-out shall be equal to the product of (i) Rontan’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”) for the last 12 months, and (ii) twenty percent and is contingent upon Rontan’s EBITDA results for any earn-out period being at least 125% of Rontan’s EBITDA for the 12-months ended December 31, 2015. It is the intention of the parties that the stock amount will be used by Rontan to repay institutional debt outstanding as of the closing date.
 
Under the terms of a Finders Fees Agreement dated April 14, 2014, we have agreed to pay RLT Consulting Inc., a related party, a fee of 2% (two percent) of the Transaction Value, as defined in the agreement, of Rontan upon closing. The fee is payable one-half in cash and one-half in shares of our common stock.
 
Specific conditions to closing consist of:
 
a)
Purchaser’s receipt of written limited assurance of an unqualified opinion with respect to Rontan’s audited financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2014 (the “Opinion”);
 
b)
The commitment of sufficient investment by General American Capital Partners LLC (the “Institutional Investor”), in the Purchaser following receipt of the Opinion;
 
c)
The accuracy of each Parties’ representations and warranties contained in the SPSA;
 
d)
The continued operation of Rontan’s business in the ordinary course;
 
e)
The maintenance of all of Rontan’s bank credit lines in the maximum amount of R$200 million (approximately US$52 million) under the same terms and conditions originally agreed with any such financial institutions, and the maintenance of all other types of funding arrangements. As of the date of the SPSA, Rontan’s financial institution debt consists of not more than R$200 million (approximately US$52 million), trade debt of not more than R$50 million (approximately US$13 million) and other fiscal contingencies of not more that R$95 million (approximately US$24.7 million);
 
 
42
 
 
f)
Rontan shall enter into employment or consulting service agreements with key employees and advisors identified by the Purchaser, including Rontan’s Chief Executive Officer; and
 
g)
The Sellers continued guarantee of Rontan’s bank debt for a period of 90 days following issuance of the Opinion, among other items.
 
The Institutional Investor has committed to invest sufficient capital to facilitate the transaction, subject to receipt of the Opinion, as well as the ability to acquire 100% of the outstanding stock of Rontan at a price of $200 million BR, and the Company can acquire 100% of all real estate held by Rontan.
 
Subject to satisfaction or waiver of the conditions precedent provided for in the SPSA, the closing date of the transaction shall take place within 10 business days from the date of issuance of the Opinion.
 
Rontan is engaged in the manufacture and distribution of specialty vehicles and acoustic/visual signaling equipment for the industrial and automotive markets.
 
Subsequent to December 31, 2015, on April 1, 2016, we believed that we had satisfied or otherwise waived the conditions to closing (as disclosed under the SPSA, the closing was subject to specific conditions to closing, which were waivable by us,) and advised the Sellers of our intention to close the SPSA and demanded delivery of the Rontan Securities. The Sellers, however, notified us that they intend to terminate the SPSA. We believe that the Sellers had no right to terminate the SPSA and that notice of termination by the Sellers was not permitted under the terms of the SPSA.
 
On January 31, 2018, we announced that we initiated a lawsuit for damages against Grupo Rontan Metalurgica, S. A, (“Rontan”) and that company’s controlling shareholders, Joao Alberto Bolzan and Jose Carlos Bolzan. The action has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The complaint alleges that Rontan is wholly-owned by Joao Bolzan and Jose Bolzan. In the complaint, we further allege that Rontan and its shareholders improperly terminated a Share Purchase and Sale Agreement (the “SPA”) by which we were to acquire whole ownership of Rontan.
 
On February 5, 2018, United States District Court Southern District of Florida filed a Pretrial Scheduling Order and Order Referring Case to Mediation dated February 5, 2018 for the Company’s lawsuit against Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A., et al. The Case No. is 18-80106-Civ-Middlebrooks/Brannon. The court has issued a schedule outlining various documents and responses that are to be delivered by the parties as part of the discovery plan.
 
On April 25, 2018, the Note of Filing Proposed Summons was completed by the Company. On April 26, 2018, a summons was issued to Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A. Also, on May 15, 2018, the Company filed a motion for Issuance of Letters Rogatory.
 
On or about January 31, 2019, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim for failure to fulfill conditions precedent in the consummation of the contract in question. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss challenging jurisdiction, venue, and forum nonconvenes. On or about May 21, 2019, the Court denied their motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue and forum nonconvenes. The court granted their Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim for failure to fulfill conditions precedent in the consummation of the contract in question, but granted leave to amend. On or about June 7, 2019, counsel filed an amended complaint. On or about June 21, 2019, defendants answered the amended complaint. The litigation moved from the pleading stage to discovery. Trial is scheduled for December 9, 2019.
 
 
 
43
 
 
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
 
As a smaller reporting company, we are not required to provide the information required by this Item. We note, however, that an investment in our common stock involves a number of very significant risks. Investors should carefully consider the risk factors included in the “Risk Factors” section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for our fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, as filed with SEC on June 27, 2018, in addition to other information contained in such Annual Report and in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, in evaluating the Company and our business before purchasing shares of our common stock. The Company’s business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected due to any of those risks.
 
ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
 
On July 5, 2018, the Company sold 1,330,000 of their common shares to an unrelated party, at $0.005 per share, for a total purchase price of $6,650.
 
On August 15, 2018, the Company sold 2,000,000 of their common shares to an unrelated party, at $0.005 per share, for a total purchase price of $10,000.
 
The above issuances were exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act pursuant to the exemption for transactions by an issuer not involved in any public offering under Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act. The Company intends to use the proceeds of the foregoing transactions for general working capital purposes. The foregoing descriptions do not purport to be complete, and are qualified in their entirety by reference to the full text of such documents attached hereto as exhibits and incorporated herein by reference.
 
ITEM 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
 
None.
 
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
 
Not Applicable.
 
ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION
 
None.
 
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS

Exhibit Number
Description
(2)
Plan of acquisition, reorganization, arrangement, liquidation or succession
Purchase Agreement with Bronco Communications, LLC dated January 1, 2012 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
Amendment to Purchase Agreement with Bronco Communications, LLC dated October 15, 2012 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
Agreement of Merger and Plan of Reorganization with Airtronic USA, Inc. dated October 2012 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
First Amendment to Agreement of Merger and Plan of Reorganization with Airtronic, USA, Inc. dated August 5, 2013 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
Equity Purchase Agreement with Brian A. Dekle, John Ramsey, GDSI Acquisition Corporation, Global Digital Solutions, Inc., and North American Custom Specialty Vehicle, LLC dated June 16, 2014 (incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 19, 2014)
Share Purchase and Sale Agreement with Global Digital Solutions, Inc., Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A., Joao Alberto Bolzan and Jose Carlos Bolzan dated October 8, 2015 (incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 19, 2015)
(3)
(i) Articles of Incorporation; and (ii) Bylaws
Certificate of Incorporation dated August 28, 1995 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
Articles of Merger dated March 18, 2004 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
Certificate of Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation dated August 06, 2013 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
Bylaws dated August 28, 1995 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation dated July 7, 2014 (incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 30, 2014)
Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation dated May 18, 2015 (incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 20, 2015)
(10)
Material Agreements
Debtor in Possession Note Purchase Agreement with Airtronic USA, Inc. dated October 22, 2012 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
Secured Promissory Note with Airtronic USA, Inc. dated October 22, 2012 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)