Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2026
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Legal Proceedings The Company is, from time to time, involved in the normal course of business in various legal proceedings, including intellectual property, contract, employment, and product liability suits. The Company does not expect the outcome of these proceedings, either individually or in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on its results of operations. Hu v. Insulet Corporation, et al.—On July 2, 2026, a putative securities class action, Hu v. Insulet Corporation, et al. (No. 1:26-cv-13062-LTS), was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts against the Company and certain current and former executives and directors. The complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, arising from allegedly false and misleading public statements regarding the quality and safety of the Company’s Omnipod products. The complaint is brought on behalf of a putative class of those who purchased or otherwise acquired Insulet securities between February 21, 2025 and May 26, 2026, and seeks relief including damages and costs, including attorneys’ fees. The Company intends to defend this case vigorously. Based on the information currently available, the Company does not believe that a loss is probable and, accordingly, no accrual has been recorded in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. Insulet Corp. v. EOFlow Co. Ltd. et al.—On April 24, 2025, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts entered final judgment in favor of Insulet Corporation in its ongoing litigation against EOFlow Co., Ltd.; EOFlow, Inc.; Nephria Bio, Inc.; and EOFlow’s CEO, Jesse Kim (collectively, “Defendants”), Insulet Corp. v. EOFlow Co. Ltd. et al., 1:23-cv-11780-FDS (D. Mass.). The litigation concerns the Defendants’ misappropriation of Insulet’s proprietary trade secrets relating to the design and manufacture of the Omnipod insulin patch pump. On December 3, 2024, a unanimous jury found Defendants misappropriated four of Insulet’s trade secrets and awarded Insulet total damages of $452 million, composed of $170 million in compensatory damages and $282 million in exemplary damages. The Court’s April 24, 2025 post-trial orders upheld the jury verdict and entered a permanent injunction against Defendants; to avoid any double recovery with the injunction, the district court also reduced the damages of the award to $59.4 million. The district court’s permanent injunction prohibits Defendants and others subject to the order from using, possessing, selling, distributing, or seeking regulatory approval for any products that were designed, developed, or manufactured, in whole or in part, using or relying on Insulet’s trade secrets. The permanent injunction further requires EOFlow to assign certain patent applications to Insulet, disgorge any break-up fees received from Medtronic in connection with a previously contemplated acquisition, and submit to ongoing audits to ensure compliance with the Court’s orders. The injunction is worldwide and took effect immediately, subject to a limited exception that originally permitted six months of continuing sales to those patients of EOFlow that existed in the Republic of Korea and the European Union as of October 2023. Certain Defendants appealed the judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and moved to stay the district court’s permanent injunction in its entirety pending resolution of the appeal. On July 7, 2025, the Federal Circuit granted Defendants a stay of the permanent injunction in part “only to the extent that the district court’s temporary stay (set to end October 24, 2025), regarding EOFlow patients in the Republic of Korea and the European Union, is extended (1) to include patients residing in the European Union who were using the relevant product(s) as of April 24, 2025, and (2) until further notice of the court. On May 28, 2026, after briefing and argument in the appeal, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s judgment, concluding that Insulet’s claims are barred by the Defend Trade Secret Act’s three-year statute of limitations. Defendants then filed an unopposed motion to modify the partial stay of the permanent injunction while Insulet seeks further review of the Federal Circuit’s decision. On June 22, 2026, the Federal Circuit granted Defendants’ motion, ordering that “[t]he partial stay as to Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the district court’s April 24, 2025 permanent injunction [prohibiting Defendants’ possession of the trade secrets or sales of any product derived from them] is extended to conduct occurring in the Republic of Korea, the European Union, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.” The Federal Circuit’s June 22, 2026 order also provides that, if Insulet’s forthcoming petition for rehearing of the Federal Circuit’s decision “is granted, Insulet may move to rescind th[e] partial stay.” Insulet’s petition for rehearing in the Federal Circuit was filed on July 29, 2026. Since the Company had not previously recorded the damages awarded, the reversal of the judgment had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

The Company is, from time to time, involved in the normal course of business in various legal proceedings, including intellectual property, contract, employment, and product liability suits. The Company does not expect the outcome of these proceedings, either individually or in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on its results of operations.

Hu v. Insulet Corporation, et al.—On July 2, 2026, a putative securities class action, Hu v. Insulet Corporation, et al. (No. 1:26-cv-13062-LTS), was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts against the Company and certain current and former executives and directors. The complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, arising from allegedly false and misleading public statements regarding the quality and safety of the Company’s Omnipod products. The complaint is brought on behalf of a putative class of those who purchased or otherwise acquired Insulet securities between February 21, 2025 and May 26, 2026, and seeks relief including damages and costs, including attorneys’ fees. The Company intends to defend this case vigorously. Based on the information currently available, the Company does not believe that a loss is probable and, accordingly, no accrual has been recorded in the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Insulet Corp. v. EOFlow Co. Ltd. et al.—On April 24, 2025, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts entered final judgment in favor of Insulet Corporation in its ongoing litigation against EOFlow Co., Ltd.; EOFlow, Inc.; Nephria Bio, Inc.; and EOFlow’s CEO, Jesse Kim (collectively, “Defendants”), Insulet Corp. v. EOFlow Co. Ltd. et al., 1:23-cv-11780-FDS (D. Mass.). The litigation concerns the Defendants’ misappropriation of Insulet’s proprietary trade secrets relating to the design and manufacture of the Omnipod insulin patch pump. On December 3, 2024, a unanimous jury found Defendants misappropriated four of Insulet’s trade secrets and awarded Insulet total damages of $452 million, composed of $170 million in compensatory damages and $282 million in exemplary damages. The Court’s April 24, 2025 post-trial orders upheld the jury verdict and entered a permanent injunction against Defendants; to avoid any double recovery with the injunction, the district court also reduced the damages of the award to $59.4 million.

The district court’s permanent injunction prohibits Defendants and others subject to the order from using, possessing, selling, distributing, or seeking regulatory approval for any products that were designed, developed, or manufactured, in whole or in part, using or relying on Insulet’s trade secrets. The permanent injunction further requires EOFlow to assign certain patent applications to Insulet, disgorge any break-up fees received from Medtronic in connection with a previously contemplated acquisition, and submit to ongoing audits to ensure compliance with the Court’s orders. The injunction is worldwide and took effect immediately, subject to a limited exception that originally permitted six months of continuing sales to those patients of EOFlow that existed in the Republic of Korea and the European Union as of October 2023.

Certain Defendants appealed the judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and moved to stay the district court’s permanent injunction in its entirety pending resolution of the appeal. On July 7, 2025, the Federal Circuit granted Defendants a stay of the permanent injunction in part “only to the extent that the district court’s temporary stay (set to end October 24, 2025), regarding EOFlow patients in the Republic of Korea and the European Union, is extended (1) to include patients residing in the European Union who were using the relevant product(s) as of April 24, 2025, and (2) until further notice of the court.

On May 28, 2026, after briefing and argument in the appeal, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s judgment, concluding that Insulet’s claims are barred by the Defend Trade Secret Act’s three-year statute of limitations. Defendants then filed an unopposed motion to modify the partial stay of the permanent injunction while Insulet seeks further review of the Federal Circuit’s decision. On June 22, 2026, the Federal Circuit granted Defendants’ motion, ordering that “[t]he partial stay as to Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the district court’s April 24, 2025 permanent injunction [prohibiting Defendants’ possession of the trade secrets or sales of any product derived from them] is extended to conduct occurring in the Republic of Korea, the European Union, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.” The Federal Circuit’s June 22, 2026 order also provides that, if Insulet’s forthcoming petition for rehearing of the Federal Circuit’s decision “is granted, Insulet may move to rescind th[e] partial stay.” Insulet’s petition for rehearing in the Federal Circuit was filed on July 29, 2026. Since the Company had not previously recorded the damages awarded, the reversal of the judgment had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.