We are subject to various claims, complaints and legal actions that arise from time to time in the normal course of business, including commercial insurance, product liability, intellectual property and employment related matters. In addition, from time to time we may bring claims or initiate lawsuits against various third parties with respect to matters arising out of the ordinary course of our business, including commercial and employment related matters. Securities Class Actions Between August 21 and October 9, 2024, three substantially similar putative class action complaints were filed against us and certain of our executive officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. On December 13, 2024, the court appointed lead plaintiff and consolidated the three actions (now captioned In re Dexcom, Inc. Class Action Securities Litigation, Lead Case No.: 24-cv-1485-RSH-VET). On January 27, 2025, lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint. The consolidated complaint alleges violations of the Exchange Act against us and certain of our current and former executive officers for allegedly making false and misleading statements between April 28, 2023 and July 25, 2024, with respect to our expected revenue for fiscal 2024 and ability to capitalize on our growth potential. On March 13, 2025, we filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint. On May 14, 2025, the court granted the motion to dismiss with leave to amend. On May 28, 2025, lead plaintiff filed an amended consolidated complaint. On June 11, 2025, we filed a motion to dismiss the amended consolidated complaint. On September 9, 2025, the court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss. On October 7, 2025, defendants answered the amended consolidated complaint. On October 10, 2025, defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the two surviving challenged statements. On January 7, 2026, the court granted defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings with leave to amend. On February 6, 2026, lead plaintiff filed a second amended consolidated complaint. On February 20, 2026, we filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. On March 20, 2026, we filed a reply in support of the motion. The court has not scheduled any oral argument on the motion. On October 27, 2025, a putative class action complaint was filed against us and certain of our executive officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (captioned Prime v. Dexcom, Inc., et al, Case No.: 1:25-cv-08912). The complaint alleges violations of the Exchange Act against us and certain of our executive officers for allegedly making false and misleading statements between July 26, 2024 and September 17, 2025, with respect to the accuracy, reliability, and functionality of our G7 device, as well as our enhancements to and manufacturing of the device. A lead plaintiff has been appointed and filed an amended complaint on April 10, 2026. On June 9, 2026, we filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. Lead plaintiff’s deadline to oppose our motion to dismiss is July 31, 2026. Derivative Actions Between September 13 and April 14, 2025, three putative stockholders filed derivative lawsuits against us and certain of our current and former executive officers and directors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The derivative complaints allege factual allegations largely tracking allegations made in the In re Dexcom, Inc. Securities Class Action Litigation and seek, among other things, damages and restitution to be paid to the Company by the individual defendants, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees and costs. These actions have been consolidated (captioned In Re: Dexcom, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No.: 24-cv-1645-RSH-VET), and are currently stayed pending a resolution of the motion to dismiss in the In re Dexcom, Inc. Securities Class Action Litigation. On September 25, 2025, an additional derivative lawsuit was filed against us and certain of our current and former executive officers and directors in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The allegations largely track those made in the In re Dexcom, Inc. Securities Class Action Litigation and seek, among other things, damages and restitution to be paid to the Company by the individual defendants, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees and costs. This action is currently stayed pending a resolution of the motion to dismiss in the In re Dexcom, Inc. Securities Class Action Litigation. 41 Table of Contents On March 24, 2026, Dexcom’s board members and certain of its current and former executives were named as defendants in a complaint filed as a stockholder derivative action in the Southern District of California (captioned Bud & Sue Frashier Family Trust U/A Dated 5/5/98 v. Jacob S. Leach, et al., Case No. 3:26-cv-01852-AGS-SBC. The Company is named as a nominal defendant. The case makes similar allegations to those in the securities class action complaint filed in the Southern District of New York. On May 11, 2026, the parties filed a joint motion and stipulation to stay the action pending the resolution of the securities class action, which the court granted on May 12, 2026. On April 28, 2026, certain current and former members of Dexcom’s board of directors and executives were named as defendants in a complaint filed as a stockholder derivative action in the Southern District of New York (captioned Jerome Malone v. Kevin R. Sayer et al., Case No. 1:26-cv-03527). The Company is named as a nominal defendant. As with the stockholder derivative action filed in the Southern District of California, the case makes similar allegations to those in the securities class action complaint filed in the Southern District of New York. On May 21, 2026, the parties filed a joint motion and stipulation to stay the action pending the resolution of the securities class action, which the court granted on May 26, 2026. G6 and G7 Class Action Litigation Between September 29, 2025, and January 8, 2026, various plaintiffs, purported users of G6 or G7 devices, filed six overlapping putative class action complaints against us. Five of the complaints, which originally were filed as individual actions in federal court (Levens, et al. v. Dexcom, Inc., No. 3:25-cv-02565-BJC-JAC; Estravit v. Dexcom, Inc., No. 3:25-cv-02845-BJC-JAC; Dalora v. Dexcom, Inc., No. 3:25-cv-03210-BJC-JAC; Grisoli, et al. v. Dexcom, Inc., No. 3:25-cv-03488-BJC-JAC; and Dickinson, et al. v. Dexcom, Inc., No. 3:26-cv-00102-BJC-JAC), were consolidated by the Court on May 15, 2026 (and the consolidated litigation is now captioned In re: Dexcom CGM Litigation, No. 3:25-cv-02565-BJC-JAC). The sixth putative class action complaint was filed and remains pending in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, California (Chatelain v. Dexcom, Inc., No. 25STCV30722). Plaintiffs in all six actions allege they overpaid for G6 and/or G7 devices or components that were worth less than the purchase price because, among other reasons, G6 and/or G7 devices or components they purchased allegedly were adulterated or misbranded under federal law; G6 and/or G7 devices or components they purchased allegedly failed to perform as advertised; and because we allegedly misled patients and providers about the safety, accuracy, efficacy, and reliability of G6 and/or G7 devices or components. Plaintiffs in each action assert various state law consumer protection, express and implied warranty, common law, and Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act claims, and seek, among other things, damages for economic losses, restitution, disgorgement, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees and costs. Plaintiffs seek to represent nationwide classes and state-specific subclasses of individuals. Federal Court Consolidated Class Action On May 15, 2026, the Court consolidated the five cases in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. On May 29, 2026, various groups of plaintiffs’ counsel filed competing motions to appoint interim class counsel. The motions are fully briefed and remain pending. It is anticipated that plaintiffs will file an amended consolidated complaint to which we will file a response after the Court resolves the motions to appoint interim class counsel. There currently is not a date-certain deadline for the filing of an anticipated amended consolidated complaint or Dexcom’s response to the same. State Court Class Action The putative class action pending in Los Angeles County Superior Court remains stayed in favor of the federal class actions. The parties must submit a joint status report on the status of the consolidated federal litigation no later than August 19, 2026. We intend to vigorously defend against such claims; however, we cannot be certain of the outcome of our ongoing proceedings and, if determined adversely to us, our business and financial condition may be adversely affected. We do not believe we are party to any other currently pending legal proceedings, the outcome of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations. There can be no assurance that existing or future legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business or otherwise will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations. 42 Table of Contents