Delaware Supreme Court to Review ATG Capital’s Nomination Notice in Empery Digital Board Fight

MakeCryippreferred on

• The Delaware Supreme Court agreed to an expedited appeal reviewing whether ATG Capital’s director-nomination notice was valid ahead of Empery Digital’s 2026 annual meeting, with oral arguments scheduled for October 7
• Proxy advisory firm ISS recommended shareholders vote for 7 of Empery Digital’s 9 board nominees, and for one ATG-backed nominee, Mr. Gliksberg
• Empery Digital disputes ISS’s support for Gliksberg, citing prior Delaware Court of Chancery findings that he engaged in “furtive” coordination and was sanctioned for destroying campaign documents

Empery Digital said in a release published on its investor relations site on September 28, 2026 that the Delaware Supreme Court has agreed to an expedited appeal reviewing the validity of ATG Capital Management’s director-nomination notice ahead of the company’s 2026 annual meeting, with oral arguments scheduled for October 7. The case centers on a long-running boardroom dispute between Empery Digital and activist investor ATG Capital.

Proxy advisory firm ISS has recommended that shareholders vote for 7 of Empery Digital’s 9 board nominees, while also recommending support for one ATG-backed nominee, Mr. Gliksberg. Empery Digital’s release disputes that specific recommendation, pointing to prior findings from the Delaware Court of Chancery that Gliksberg engaged in what the court described as “furtive” coordination and was sanctioned for destroying campaign-related documents during earlier litigation.

The company’s release also argues that Gliksberg “didn’t really have a plan” for Empery Digital and “never conducted due diligence” or sought dialogue with management before pursuing board representation, framing his nomination as unprepared relative to Empery Digital’s own slate of candidates.

ATG Capital is separately seeking approximately $10 million in expense reimbursement, including litigation fees, tied to its campaign, according to the same release. The financial stakes attached to the reimbursement claim add another dimension to a dispute that has already produced multiple rounds of Chancery Court litigation this year.

Shareholders face an October 13, 2026 deadline at 11:59 p.m. ET to cast their votes in the annual meeting, putting the Delaware Supreme Court’s October 7 oral arguments on the validity of ATG’s nomination notice squarely in the middle of the voting window and adding urgency to a ruling that could directly affect which nominees remain eligible for the ballot.

Boardroom fights of this kind have become increasingly common among publicly traded companies that hold large digital asset treasuries, as activist investors seek influence over how those treasuries are managed, and disputes over the procedural validity of nomination notices, as opposed to disagreements over strategy alone, have repeatedly ended up before Delaware’s courts as a threshold question that must be resolved before any vote on the underlying board seats can proceed.