In the normal course of business, we periodically enter into agreements to indemnify customers or suppliers against claims of intellectual property infringement made by third parties arising from the use of our products. Historically, costs related to these indemnification provisions have not been significant, and we are unable to estimate the maximum potential impact of these indemnification provisions on our future results of operations.

To the extent permitted under Delaware law, we indemnify our directors and officers for certain events or occurrences while the director or officer is, or was, serving at our request in such capacity, subject to limited exceptions. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification obligations is unlimited; however, we have directors and officers insurance coverage that may enable us to recover future amounts paid, subject to a deductible and the policy limits. There is no assurance that the policy limits will be sufficient to cover all damages, if any.

As previously disclosed, beginning in October 2017, the Company undertook an internal investigation relating to possible violations of U.S. export control laws, including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations administered by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls of the Department of State ("DTCC") and the Export Administration Regulations administered by the Bureau of Industry and Security of the Department of Commerce ("BIS"). In February 2023, the Company settled these matters with the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ"), DTCC and BIS. As a part of these settlement agreements, the Company agreed to pay $15.0 million in civil monetary penalties to these agencies, with an additional $10.0 million suspended penalty amount to be allocated to remedial compliance measures required by DTCC. The penalty amounts subject to payment were broken down as follows: DTCC, $10.0 million (payable in three installments over a three-year period); BIS, $2.8 million; and DOJ, $2.3 million.

During the year ended December 31, 2025, we paid the final installment penalty of $3.0 million in accordance with the DTCC settlement agreement. The original $10.0 million suspended penalty has not been recognized as a liability, as it will be recognized as incurred for remedial compliance measures during the three-year term of the settlement agreement. The application of the Company’s spend on remedial compliance measures as a reduction to the original $10.0 million suspended penalty must be approved by the DTCC, which approval will be sought on an annual basis in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement. As of December 31, 2025, the approved suspended penalty balance remaining was $5.1 million. In February 2026, DTCC approved the Company’s spend of the remaining suspended penalty balance of $5.1 million, resulting in no further suspended penalty due.

On June 2, 2023, we issued $1.2 million of guarantees in the form of a standby letter of credit as security for a long-term real estate lease. The letter of credit has a maturity date of June 2026 and includes automatic one-year extensions, which are not to continue beyond July 1, 2033. As of March 31, 2026, the letter of credit has been reduced to $0.4 million. We have not recorded any liability for this guarantee, as we believe the likelihood of having to perform under the letter of credit is remote. In connection with this transaction, we pledged an equal amount of cash to the issuing bank of this letter of credit. The cash pledged is recorded as restricted cash and included in other assets on our consolidated balance sheets.

On April 15, 2022, the Company was informed the SEC is conducting a formal investigation of the Company related to, among other things, allegations brought in a securities class action lawsuit against the Company in 2021 that settled in 2024, and the Company received subpoenas from the SEC for the production of documents and information related to its investigation as a follow on to a previous voluntary request for documents. The Company received its most recent subpoena from the SEC on August 20, 2024. The Company substantially completed its production in response to the subpoena on or about the deadline of October 4, 2024. The SEC took testimony from the Company’s former Chief Accounting Officer in January 2025, and from the Company’s former Chief Financial Officer in late March 2025. The Company intends to continue to cooperate with the SEC.

Following the acquisition of Volumetric in 2021, the Company could have been required to pay up to $355.0 million of acquisition-related earnout payments to the former owners of Volumetric if the Company was to achieve seven non-financial, science-based milestones prior to either December 31, 2030 or December 31, 2035. Due to the loss of funding from the Company's key strategic partner for kidney and liver research and development efforts, the Company notified the former owners of Volumetric on February 24, 2024 that it was terminating the four milestones that related to those kidney and liver research and development efforts, as achievement was no longer financially viable. As a result of the termination of the four milestones, the Company's maximum liability for acquisition-related earnout payments was reduced to $175.0 million, which would have been payable if each of the three remaining non-financial, science-based milestones was achieved within the timeframes set forth in the Volumetric acquisition agreement.

On March 29, 2024, the former owners of Volumetric notified the Company that they were initiating dispute resolution under the provisions of the acquisition agreement in an effort to recover the $355.0 million. The parties did not reach a resolution during the 30-day negotiation period following this notice and entered into non-binding mediation in accordance with the terms of the acquisition agreement.

On April 29, 2024, two key employees from Volumetric ("Volumetric Key Employees"), who were required to be employed at the time of achievement of each non-financial, science-based milestone outlined in the Volumetric acquisition agreement for each related acquisition earnout payment to become payable, resigned from their positions with the Company. As a result of the resignation of the Volumetric Key Employees, all parties to which the remaining three milestone-based earnout payments totaling $175.0 million were potentially payable were notified that such amount was no longer eligible to be earned. While the Volumetric Key Employees claim that their terminations were for good reason, which would preserve the rights to milestone-based earnout payments under the Volumetric acquisition agreement, the Company vigorously denies this claim. On August 21, 2024, the Company proposed a settlement of $1.8 million with the former Volumetric shareholders and Volumetric Key Employees during mediation and this amount is recorded within Accrued and other liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets as of March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025. The former Volumetric shareholders have not responded to the settlement offer. On December 13, 2024, the Company received a Notice of Claim for Indemnification from VBI Stockholders’ Representative, LLC, which claims to be the successor Stockholders’ Representative under the acquisition agreement. The Notice repeated the former Volumetric shareholders’ and Volumetric Key Employees' claims of breach. On January 10, 2025, the Company served a Notice of Objection which denied all liability. The delivery of this Notice of Objection triggered a 45-day negotiation period under the terms of the acquisition agreement. As of the date of this filing, there have been no further developments regarding this matter.

On May 19, 2021, 3D Systems, Inc. initiated a lawsuit in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego against five former employees and Intrepid Automation, Inc. ("Intrepid") (collectively, the "Intrepid Parties") alleging theft of trade secrets, unfair competition, breach of contract, and related claims ("2021 Lawsuit"). In June 2021, this lawsuit was removed to the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. In September 2022, the Intrepid Parties filed counterclaims against 3D Systems, Inc. In September 2022, the Company filed a motion to dismiss these counterclaims; this motion was granted in part in May 2023. The Intrepid Parties filed amended counterclaims in May 2023 alleging theft of trade secrets, fraudulent inducement, breach of contract, unfair competition, and related claims; this amended complaint sought damages in excess of $20 million as well as injunctive relief. These counterclaims were partially dismissed in March 2024 in response to a second motion to dismiss filed by the Company. The parties filed motions for summary judgment in April and May 2024. In March 2025, the Court granted the Intrepid Parties’ motion, dismissing the Company’s claims against the Intrepid Parties, but denied the Company’s motion for summary judgment with respect to the counterclaims brought by the Intrepid Parties in the 2021 Lawsuit. Trial on Intrepid’s counterclaims is scheduled to begin on July 27, 2026.

On December 4, 2024, Intrepid filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California against 3D Systems Corporation and 3D Systems, Inc. alleging infringement of U.S. patents 11,014,301 and 11,338,511 ("2024 Lawsuit"); this complaint seeks unspecified damages and injunctive relief. In July 2025, the Company filed inter partes review ("IPR") petitions against the asserted patents, and on December 11, 2025, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office granted review of the IPR petitions. On December 18, 2025, the Court granted a stay of the 2024 lawsuit pending a final decision on the IPR petitions.

The Company and certain of its executive officers were named as defendants in a putative securities class action filed on June 13, 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The action is styled Marcel F.M. Herbermann v. 3D Systems Corporation, et al., No. 1:25-cv-00734-GBW (D. Del.) (the "Securities Class Action"). The complaint in the Securities Class Action alleges defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), and SEC Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by making false and misleading statements and omissions, and that the executive officers named as defendants are control persons under Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. It was filed on behalf of stockholders who purchased the Company’s common stock from August 13, 2024 and May 12, 2025, and seeks monetary damages on behalf of the purported class. Within fourteen days of the entry of an Order appointing Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel, the Parties will submit a proposed scheduling Order for the filing of an amended complaint and Defendants’ responses thereto. The Company intends to defend itself and its executive officers vigorously.

The Company was named as a nominal defendant and certain of its officers and directors were named as defendants in derivative lawsuits pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. The action styled Scanlon v. Graves, et al., No. 0:25-cv-07627-MGL (D.S.C.) (the "Scanlon Action") was filed July 17, 2025, and asserts claims for violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder, breach of fiduciary duties, and unjust enrichment. The action styled Milligan v. Graves, et al., No. 0:25-cv-11177-MGL (D.S.C.) (the "Milligan Action"), was filed August 18, 2025, and asserts claims for violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder, breach of fiduciary duties, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, waste of corporate assets, and for contribution under Section 10(b) and 21D of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The action styled Stoopler v. Graves, et al., No. 0:25-cv-12637-MGL (D.S.C.) (the "Stoopler Action"), was filed on September 20, 2025, and asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, and contribution and indemnification under Sections 10(b) and 21D of the Exchange Act. The Milligan Action, Scanlon Action, and Stoopler Action were consolidated on October 23, 2025 (the "Consolidated District of South Carolina Derivative Action"). On November 17, 2025, the Consolidated District of South Carolina Derivative Action was stayed through the earlier of the dismissal of the Securities Class Action, with prejudice, and the exhaustion of all appeals related thereto, or the close of discovery in the Securities Class Action.

The Company was also named as a nominal defendant and certain of its officers and directors were named as defendants in derivative lawsuits pending in the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas for the 16th Circuit, York County. The action styled Fernicola v. Graves, et al., No. 2025CP4602544 (S.C.), Ct. of Common Pleas for the 16th Judicial Cir., Cty. of York) (the "Fernicola Action") was filed June 27, 2025, and asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duties, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment. The action styled Geza Bohus v. Graves, et al., No. 2025CP4603762 (S.C.), Ct. of Common Pleas for the 16th Judicial Cir., Cty. of York) (the "Bohus Action") was filed on September 26, 2025, and asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment. On November 25, 2025, the Fernicola Action and the Bohus Action were consolidated (the "Consolidated York County Derivative Action"). On December 15, 2025, the Consolidated York County Derivative Action was stayed unless and until either (1) the Securities Class Action is dismissed, with prejudice, and all appeals related thereto have been exhausted; or (2) the motion to dismiss the Securities Class Action is denied in full or in part.

The Company was also named as a nominal defendant and certain of its officers and directors were named as defendants in derivative lawsuits pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The action styled Ataii v. Graves, et al., No. 1:25-cv-01087-GBW (D. Del.) (the "Ataii Action") was filed on August 29, 2025 and asserts claims for violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder, breach of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment. The action styled Carter v. Graves, et al., No. 1:25-cv-01103-GBW (D. Del.) (the "Carter Action"), was filed on September 3, 2025, and asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets, unjust enrichment, and violation of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act. The action styled Michaels v. Graves, et al., No. 1:25-cv-01176-GBW (D. Del.) (the "Michaels Action") was filed on September 22, 2025, and asserts claims for violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, breach of fiduciary duties, and unjust enrichment. On October 30, 2025, the Ataii Action, the Carter Action, and the Michaels Action were consolidated (the "Consolidated District of Delaware Derivative Action.") On November 21, 2025, the Consolidated District of Delaware Derivative Action was stayed through the earlier of the dismissal of the Securities Class Action with prejudice, and the exhaustion of all appeals related thereto, or the close of discovery in the Securities Class Action. The Company intends to defend itself as well as its executive officers and directors vigorously against the derivative actions.

We are involved in various other legal matters incidental to our business. Although we cannot predict the results of the litigation with certainty, we believe that the disposition of all of these various other legal matters will not have a material adverse effect, individually or in the aggregate, on our consolidated results of operations, consolidated cash flows or consolidated financial position.