Update Regarding Litigation Related to the Merger
As previously announced, on September 26, 2020, Devon Energy Corporation (“Devon” or the “Company”), East Merger Sub, Inc., a wholly-owned, direct subsidiary of Devon (“Merger Sub”), and WPX Energy, Inc. (“WPX”) entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (as amended from time to time, the “Merger Agreement”), providing for the merger of Merger Sub with and into WPX, with WPX surviving the merger (the “merger”) as a wholly-owned, direct subsidiary of Devon.
Litigation Related to the Merger
Twelve complaints have been filed with respect to the merger as of December 21, 2020—seven in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, three in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, one in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and one in the Supreme Court of the State of New York for the County of New York. The complaints are captioned as follows: Lowinger v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al., No. 1:20-cv-09519 (S.D.N.Y) (“Lowinger”); John Fiscus v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al., No. 1:20-cv-09614 (S.D.N.Y.) (“Fiscus”); Wang v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al., No. 1:20-cv-01504 (D. Del.) (“Wang”); Hull v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al., No. 1:20-cv-01517 (D. Del.) (“Hull”); Rigatos v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al. No. 1:20-cv-09696 (S.D.N.Y.) (“Rigatos”); Miller v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al., No. 1:20-cv-05646 (E.D.N.Y.) (“Miller”); Hogan v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al., No. 1:20-cv-09795 (S.D.N.Y.) (“Hogan”); Westmoreland v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al., No. 1:20-cv-09799 (S.D.N.Y.) (“Westmoreland”); Bushansky v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al., No. 1:20-cv-09873 (S.D.N.Y.) (“Bushansky”); Kohler v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al., No. 1:20-cv-10338 (S.D.N.Y.) (“Kohler”); Allen v. WPX Energy, Inc., et al., No. 656458/2020 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty) (“Allen,” and together with Lowinger, Fiscus, Wang, Hull, Rigatos, Miller, Hogan, Westmoreland, Kohler, and Bushansky, the “WPX Stockholder Actions”); and Lovoi v. Devon Energy Corp., et al., No. 1:20-cv-01540 (D. Del.) (“Lovoi”). The WPX Stockholder Actions and the Lovoi action are referred to collectively as the “Stockholder Actions.”
The WPX Stockholder Actions were filed by purported WPX stockholders and name WPX and the members of the WPX Board as defendants. The Hull and Allen actions also name Devon and the Merger Sub as defendants. The Lovoi complaint was filed by a purported Devon stockholder and asserts claims against Devon and members of the board of directors of Devon (the “Devon Board”).
The Stockholder Actions generally allege claims of breach of fiduciary duty and/or alleged violations of Section 14(a), Rule 14a-9, and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), premised on a purported failure to disclose material information related to WPX’s and Devon’s financial projections, the sales process, the financial analyses of WPX’s and/or Devon’s financial advisors and, in the case of the WPX Stockholder Actions, the compensation and material relationships of WPX’s financial advisor and WPX’s confidentiality agreements. The Allen complaint is a putative class action that also alleges claims that the WPX directors breached their fiduciary duties and that WPX, Devon and Merger Sub aided and abetted the alleged breach of fiduciary duty, premised on, among other things, allegations that the merger consideration is inadequate, that the WPX Board process was unfair to stockholders, that WPX’s Board and executive officers are conflicted, and that certain terms of the merger unduly benefit Devon. The Stockholder Actions seek injunctive relief enjoining the merger and damages and costs, among other remedies.
It is possible that additional, similar complaints may be filed or the complaints described herein may be amended. If this occurs, the Company does not intend to announce the filing of each additional, similar complaint or any amended complaint unless it contains materially new or different allegations. Although the Company cannot predict the outcome of or estimate the possible loss or range of loss from these matters, Devon and the Devon Board believe that the respective claims asserted against them in the Stockholder Actions are meritless and intend to vigorously defend them.
Supplemental Proxy Statement Disclosure
The Company does not believe, with respect to the complaints in which the Company is named, that supplemental disclosures are required or necessary under applicable laws. However, in order to minimize the expense of defending the Stockholder Actions, and without admitting any liability or wrongdoing, the Company is electing to make the supplemental disclosures to the Joint Proxy Statement/Prospectus set forth below in response to the Hull, Allen and Lovoi complaints and solely for the purpose of mooting the allegations contained therein. The Company denies the allegations of the three complaints, and denies any violation of law. The Company believes that the Joint Proxy Statement/Prospectus disclosed all material information required to be disclosed therein, and denies that the supplemental disclosures are material or are otherwise required to be disclosed. The Company is disclosing this information solely to eliminate the burden and expense of litigation. Nothing in the supplemental disclosures should be deemed an admission of the legal necessity or materiality of any supplemental disclosures under applicable laws.