Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Some links on this page are affiliate links: if you buy through them we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you.
Former OSOM Products Chief Privacy Officer Mary Stone Ross sued the company and CEO Jason Keats in Delaware in August 2024, seeking access to corporate records. Her complaint alleged that Keats used company resources for personal expenses, including two Lamborghinis and auto racing. OSOM denied the allegations. A February 2025 court ruling addressed interim legal fees—not whether the spending claims were true.
What Ross filed—and what she sought
Ross, who reportedly worked at OSOM from 2021 until May 2024, filed the action in the Delaware Court of Chancery on August 30, 2024, according to contemporaneous coverage. The defendants named in reporting were OSOM Products Inc. and Keats, its CEO and controlling stockholder. Notebookcheck’s report gives the filing date and employment background; Law360 describes the Delaware case and its records-access focus.
The action was principally a books-and-records case: Ross asked for access to company documents to investigate suspected mismanagement and possible related claims. It was not itself a final damages judgment, a criminal prosecution, or a finding that Keats improperly spent company money. A records inspection can help a qualified claimant assess whether further litigation is warranted; it does not establish the underlying allegations.
What the complaint alleged about spending
Ross alleged that Keats used OSOM resources for expenses she considered personal or unrelated to its business. Reports on the complaint described allegations involving:
#1 Best Overall
- Two Lamborghini vehicles and expenses connected to Keats’s auto-racing activities.
- Payments toward his mortgage and an American Express card.
- Multiple first-class travel tickets.
- Compensation for a racing partner.
These are allegations attributed to Ross and the complaint, not independently established findings. Bloomberg Law’s coverage summarizes the reported expense categories, while TechSpot reports the allegations concerning the vehicles.
Governance concerns beyond the purchases
The complaint also reportedly raised questions about OSOM’s finances and oversight. Ross cited the possible departure of the company’s former head of finance and alleged that the replacement was more willing to process Keats’s expenses. She pointed to board discussions and internal documents as reasons to seek records. Those descriptions reflect Ross’s claims as reported, not a court’s determination about the finance team or board.
Rank #2
- Ideal for Gifting
- Ideal for a bookworm
- Compact for travelling
Other reported allegations concerned OSOM’s need for more capital, a possible sale to Hewlett-Packard that did not close, and a proposed pivot to an AI camera after those discussions failed. The available coverage presents these as claims in the complaint; it does not independently establish that a transaction was completed or that these events caused the company’s later shutdown. TechSpot and The Times of India recount those reported claims.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
OSOM’s response
An OSOM spokesperson rejected the allegations as outlandish and said the company and Keats would disprove them in court, according to TechSpot. That was the company’s reported response; it is not proof that the allegations were false. Likewise, the filing does not prove that they were true.
What the Delaware court decided in February 2025
In Mary Ross v. Jason Keats, C.A. No. 2024-1045-MTZ, the Delaware Court of Chancery denied Ross’s request for interim attorneys’ fees and expenses without prejudice on February 11, 2025. The court said the case remained at the pleading stage and identified factual disputes, including when and why Keats allegedly abandoned a share issuance. It explained that credibility disputes could not be resolved on the papers alone. The ruling did not decide whether the personal-spending allegations were true or false. Read the official court opinion or its searchable Justia copy.
How OSOM went from privacy hardware to Solana Saga
OSOM was formed by former Essential employees after Essential shut down in 2020. It initially pursued privacy-focused hardware, including the planned OV1 phone. The device was later connected to Solana’s Web3 ecosystem and became the Solana Saga. Contemporaneous reporting described OSOM as responsible for the hardware, with Solana central to the blockchain and Web3 positioning; the relationship should not be reduced to treating OSOM and Solana as the same company. TechCrunch’s 2022 account explains the shift.
Rank #4
OSOM also sold a Privacy Cable and discussed a possible successor to the Saga, often called “Saga Two” in coverage, but that successor did not materialize. The product pivot changed the startup’s commercial exposure: hardware makers must contend with manufacturing, inventory, certification, support, and distribution costs, while a Web3 phone also depends on interest in crypto products and its ecosystem. Those business pressures provide context, not proof that any alleged spending caused OSOM’s failure.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute2Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems3Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesShutdown and the separate insurance case
Later reporting in July 2025 described OSOM as having shut down in 2024. The same coverage concerned a separate insurance dispute over whether directors-and-officers policies covered claims connected to Ross’s books-and-records and derivative litigation. That insurance proceeding was not a ruling on whether Keats used company funds improperly. Bloomberg Law’s report describes the later dispute and the company’s reported status.
Best Value
- It can be a gift option
- Comes with secure packaging
- Helpful in various ways
The available court ruling and later insurance coverage establish procedural developments, not a final merits judgment on Ross’s spending allegations. The public record cited here therefore supports describing what Ross alleged, what OSOM said in response, and what the court ruled procedurally—not declaring either side vindicated.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
