Kelvin: I am checking in, as below was the last I heard from you. Specifically, I do not have instructions on whether you intend to instruct me to file the lawsuit against the Singh brothers and their companies. In that regard, please keep in mind that if you should decide to sue, any further delay could prejudice your claim, in the following way. Your complaint against them alleges that you were not aware that they were the principals of Load Konnect, nor the specific actions they were taking in that role. But you received the attached letter in March, 2025, which cited the business relationship between Load Karma and Load Konnect, and those companies’ common officer Jaspreet Singh. At that point, you were on notice of the fact that the Singhs operated Load Konnect (as the draft complaint admits at ¶¶ 22-23). As a corporate officer, you are charged with whatever facts you could have learned at that time through the exercise of reasonable diligence. Yet, after that March 2025 letter, Load Karma continued to do business with Load Konnect, including that it was the named client on over 150 shipping transactions as the agency providing the service, however, the accounting records show no profit to Load Karma for the shipping services. For a period of years, the accounting records show that Load Konnect hired Load Karma to ship goods, at a recited price to the customer of nearly $700,000, with only $361.84 being paid to Load Karma for those shipping brokerage services. This course of conduct could suggest that Load Karma intentionally waived any claim against Load Konnect due to the business relationship. Any further delay in bringing suit against them could also be cited as further evidence of a waiver. George George S. Burns Burns & Moss 620 Newport Center Drive Suite 600 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Tel: (949) 263-6777 From: Kelvin Yan <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2026 7:52 PM To: George Burns <[email protected]> Cc: Victoria Moss <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Yan v. Load Karma Thank you for your suggestion and will not include Beth in our email chains going forward. I will reduce their salaries instead and await Beth further findings Kelvin From: George Burns <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Monday, January 12, 2026 at 11:53 AM To: Kelvin Yan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Victoria Moss <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: RE: Yan v. Load Karma Kelvin: I’m writing to follow up on two important points we discussed in our call with Beth on Friday. First, please keep in mind that Beth represents the company, not you personally. As such, she owes a duty of full disclosure to all owners of the business. So, the Singhs can compel her to disclose anything you say to her or write to her. As an example, below you wrote to me and Beth as a reply to our email chain, which puts our emails in her file. Please don’t do so going forward (and that’s why I terminated our call once we started discussing strategy). The stated purpose for the call was to discuss your desire to terminate the Singhs from Load Karma. As I noted, I do not believe you are authorized to do so under the Bylaws and Amended Bylaws for Load Karma, both of which state at Art. V, Sec. D that officers of the company chosen by the board may not be removed without board approval. The Bylaws, at Art. V, Sec. B-E, recite that the officers shall be chosen by the board. The company records reflect that Karam is the Chief Operations Officer, and Jaspreet Singh is the Secretary. Assuming that they were so appointed by the board (Beth is checking her files), you, as President of Load Karma, cannot fire them. I will follow up further later this week but wanted to be sure that you understood: (1) please do not include Beth in our confidential communications, and (2) you likely cannot unilaterally fire the Sings. George George S. Burns Burns & Moss 620 Newport Center Drive Suite 600 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Tel: (949) 263-6777 From: Kelvin Yan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Monday, January 5, 2026 1:13 PM To: George Burns <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Victoria Moss <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Beth K. Rautiola <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: Yan v. Load Karma George I’ve spoke to Beth about this case and she has some questions she likes to run by you. Would you please coordinate a time to have a call with her? She is attached in this email and contact info below Beth K. Rautiola | Partner Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP 1900 Main Street, Suite 700 | Irvine, CA 92614 Direct Dial (949) 851-7357 | Fax (949) 825-5431 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> | ptwww.com<file:///var/mobile/tmp/com.apple.email.maild/EMContentRepresentation/com.apple.mobilemail/DB3A9904-ADF5-4009-865E-AC002A254C1E/www.ptwww.com> Thank you Kelvin On Jan 2, 2026, at 12:09 PM, George Burns <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:  Kelvin, just a quick note to acknowledge that I received and read everything you sent. I will update and finalize the initial complaint on Monday and we can have it filed by Tuesday morning. I’ll send you a draft before filing of course. Likely we will talk before then, including to discuss whether to respond to their lawyer before filing suit. George On Dec 29, 2025, at 8:41 PM, Kelvin Yan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:  George, Here is an attached email dated 12/19/2025 from one of our carriers to pay them so they can move the business to their “other company”. It is another reason carrier payments not release. I think this may be good evidence when the time is right to use. Kelvin From: Kelvin Yan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Monday, December 29, 2025 at 5:27 PM To: George Burns <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Victoria Moss <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: Yan v. Load Karma This is going in circles. As I stated in our call earlier today we have no income coming in since December due to losing our bond renewal. I am freezing everyone salaries including people in India which are not on W2. Jas concern is because the same Load Karma staff in India is use for their other businesses operations. Load Karma creditworthiness is gone that is why the bond is not renewed due to claims of unpaid bills from carriers which Load Konnect profit from. They are using any excuse for leverage. I am merely preserving cash to debt obligations Kelvin From: George Burns <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Monday, December 29, 2025 at 4:39 PM To: Kelvin Yan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Victoria Moss <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: FW: Yan v. Load Karma Kelvin: Just received. I know you were meeting with these guys today, so I assume receiving this email from their lawyer is not a coincidence. I am around tomorrow if you want to discuss. George George S. Burns Burns & Moss 620 Newport Center Drive Suite 600 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Tel: (949) 263-6777 From: Mandeep Rupal <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Monday, December 29, 2025 4:35 PM To: Victoria Moss <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: George Burns <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: Yan v. Load Karma Dear Ms. Moss, Thank you for your patience. I finally got around to gathering all the information required to answer your concerns. 1. Recent factoring agreement (last I heard it had either been cancelled or at least not drawn upon): Nothing has been drawn upon the factoring agreement. 2. Quickbooks WebBank Note: $25,000 outstanding Load Karma is making payments. 3. Quickbooks LOC: $40,000 outstanding Nothing has been drawn upon this LOC 4. Tesla TD Auto Finance: $30,000 outstanding (Jas’ car) Jas was given the company car to conduct company business. This was part of the compensation package. All the other partners were drawing a monthly auto expense of approximately $1600. Jas never drew the monthly auto expense; instead, he was given this car to drive. There is approximately $30,000 left on the loan. We propose that the car should be appraised, if the equity is greater than what Jas would have been entitled to under the arrangement, Load Karma will be reimbursed. In the event, the equity is less than what Jas was entitled to, it should be adjusted accordingly. 5. Kanex Pro (Kelvin’s company) Remaining balance of $48,000 Load Karma will pay this. This loan is collateralized with Prosche Taycan. Once the loan is paid off, Load Karma will own the subject care free and clear. The equity in this care then be equally divided among all stakeholders. 6. Dialsight (Vivek’s company): $50,000 obligation Load Karma will pay this obligation. Additionally, Dialsight is not Vivek's company. All partners own equal shares in Dialsight. Additionally, Load Karma paid all of Dialsight's bills, in other words, Load Karma invested in Dialsight. My client owns warrants in Dialsight. This company will have to be appraised, and the value will be equally divided among all the partners. 7. American Express CC balance Load Karma will pay off the AmEx balance. However, there are points worth $4,700. These points must be divided equally. 8. Bank of America CC balance Load Karma will pay off this balance. Real Estate: Property in the name of Haven 9377 LLC is burdened with an SBA Loan obligation in name of Load Karma, with $965,000 outstanding, guaranteed by Vivek. It’s my understanding that under the current negotiations, Kelvin would be acquiring your clients’ interest. My clients are agreeable to sell their interest in the property for a FMV. Accounts Receivable: $2m in outstanding AR, although recovery is unlikely from MS International ($328,000), and there are insider debt obligations claimed by Load Konnect ($8,000) and Abacus transport ($15,000) My clients are willing to sit down and talk about Load Connect and Abacus' obligations. They believe that this will even out because Load Karma owes money to both entities. MS International Claim for approximately $930,000, last settlement demand was $650,000: Address claim and representation of the company My clients do not believe MSI has a claim against Load Karma. MSI's employees were actively demanded to engage in graft payments. MSI is equally responsible for violating the anti-graft laws. Dialsight, a company owned by Vivek, which owns the IP rights to the software used by Load Karma, for which a license must be negotiated. This is not true. All four partners own an equal stake in Dialsight. Additionally, I have a grave concern about the business as a going concern. Mr. Yan is refusing to pay Load Karma's employees, vendors, and all the necessary expenses. His actions are creating such extreme hardship for my client that the company is unable to function. Once employees don't get paid, they will leave, and vendors will leave. Load Karma will lose its credibility and creditworthiness. This will cease all operations. This will leave me with no option but to seek judicial intervention to take control away from Mr. Yan and appoint a receiver for the company. My clients are willing to resolve this matter amicably and are open to negotiation. Sincerely, Mandeep On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 11:20 AM Mandeep Rupal <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Dear Ms. Moss, Thank you for your email. I will consult with my client and get back to you next week. Mandeep On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 1:16 PM Victoria Moss <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Mandeep: I am George Burns’ partner and with him represent Kelvin Yan. I know you and George spoke the other day and I believe all agree that it is time for our clients to close out their business relationship, with your clients retaining Load Karma for an agreed consideration, and resolving outstanding obligations that could create personal liability for any party. To do so, there’s a number of outstanding issues, of which I am aware of at least the following. This list may be a helpful checklist for you to discuss with your clients and solicit their proposal to resolve all these matters. Feel free to reach out for any required clarification, but I believe this summary will be sufficient for them to explain same to you. Load Karma is the company in which the two sides hold roughly similar ownership stakes, which I understand your clients wish to retain, acquiring Kelvin’s interest for some fair consideration. It has several outstanding financial liabilities: 1. Recent factoring agreement (last I heard it had either been cancelled, or at least not drawn upon): 2. Quickbooks WebBank Note: $25,000 outstanding 3. Quickbooks LOC: $40,000 outstanding 4. Tesla TD Auto Finance: $30,000 outstanding (Jas’ car) 5. Kanex Pro (Kelvin’s company) Remaining balance of $48,000 6. Dialsight (Vivek’s company): $50,000 obligation 7. American Express CC balance 8. Bank of America CC balance Real Estate: Property in the name of Haven 9377 LLC is burdened with an SBA Loan obligation in name of Load Karma, with $965,000 outstanding, guaranteed by Vivek. It’s my understanding that under the current negotiations, Kelvin would be acquiring your clients’ interest. Accounts Receivable: $2m in outstanding AR, although recovery is unlikely from MS International ($328,000), and there are insider debt obligations claimed by Load Konnect ($8,000) and Abacus transport ($15,000) MS International Claim for approximately $930,000, last settlement demand was $650,000: Address claim and representation of company Dialsight a company owned by Vivek, which owns the IP rights to software used by Load Karma, for which a license must be negotiated. After you have had a chance to discuss this list with your clients, please reach out to me or George with your clients’ positions. Thank you, Vicky Moss Victoria E. Moss Burns & Moss 620 Newport Center Drive Suite 600 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Tel: (949) 263-6777 -- Mandeep S. Rupal Attorney at Law Rupal Law 4740 Green River Road, Suite 209 Corona, CA 92878 Office (951) 460-0830 Cell (951) 241-2571 www.rupallaw.com<http://www.rupallaw.com> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any files attached may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. FOR COUNSEL: The contents of this e-mail and any attachments hereto are not intended to be admissible in any litigation or arbitration proceeding, and the provisions of California Evidence Code § 1152 are hereby invoked. FOR POTENTIAL CLIENTS: Nothing contained herein should be construed as creating or intending to create an attorney-client relationship. Any and all communications are undertaken in an effort to evaluate potential claims and determine if our firm will be able or is interested in representing you. Unless and until a formal retainer agreement has been fully executed between Law Office of Mandeep S. Rupal, APC and yourself, we will not take any action on your behalf. Most cases have time deadlines or "statutes of limitations" limiting the amount of time a plaintiff has in which to file a lawsuit or a charge with the appropriate agency such as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the California Department of Labor, or some other agency. Therefore, you should immediately contact another attorney if you have an approaching deadline and we have not yet signed a contract agreeing to represent you. -- Mandeep S. Rupal Attorney at Law Rupal Law 4740 Green River Road, Suite 209 Corona, CA 92878 Office (951) 460-0830 Cell (951) 241-2571 www.rupallaw.com<http://www.rupallaw.com/> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any files attached may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. FOR COUNSEL: The contents of this e-mail and any attachments hereto are not intended to be admissible in any litigation or arbitration proceeding, and the provisions of California Evidence Code § 1152 are hereby invoked. FOR POTENTIAL CLIENTS: Nothing contained herein should be construed as creating or intending to create an attorney-client relationship. Any and all communications are undertaken in an effort to evaluate potential claims and determine if our firm will be able or is interested in representing you. Unless and until a formal retainer agreement has been fully executed between Law Office of Mandeep S. Rupal, APC and yourself, we will not take any action on your behalf. Most cases have time deadlines or "statutes of limitations" limiting the amount of time a plaintiff has in which to file a lawsuit or a charge with the appropriate agency such as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the California Department of Labor, or some other agency. Therefore, you should immediately contact another attorney if you have an approaching deadline and we have not yet signed a contract agreeing to represent you. <FW: Payment status.pdf>