On June 28, 2024, Ngan In Leng and First Laser Limited (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”) filed a complaint in the Fuzhou Intermediate People’s Court (the “Court”) in Fuzhou, China against Fujian Enterprises (Holdings) Co., Ltd. (“FEHC”), Jian An Investment Limited (“Jian”), and Casix, Inc. (“Casix”), our wholly-owned subsidiary located in the PRC. The complaint alleged unjust enrichment related to a purported investment in Casix by the Plaintiffs in 1997, which predates our acquisition of Casix from JDS Uniphase Corporation. The Plaintiffs requested that the Court order FEHC to return the unjust enrichment to the Plaintiffs in the amount of RMB 400 million, with interest from March 1, 2000, and order Jian and Casix to bear joint and several liability for all payment obligations of FEHC. In September 2024, the Court dismissed the complaint in its entirety based on jurisdictional grounds. The Plaintiffs subsequently appealed the Court’s ruling to the High People's Court of Fujian Province (the "Appellate Court"). In their appeal, the Plaintiffs claimed that Casix is the primary obligor to return the alleged unjust enrichment to the Plaintiffs. In November 2025, the Appellate Court upheld the Court's ruling and dismissed the complaint on jurisdictional grounds. In April 2026, the Plaintiffs appealed the Appellate Court’s ruling to the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China (the “PRC Supreme Court”). The PRC Supreme Court held an initial hearing on July 2, 2026 and, on July 30, 2026, rendered a ruling accepting the case for retrial. The acceptance of the case for retrial does not represent a determination on the merits of the Plaintiffs' claims. At this time, we are not able to quantify any potential liability in connection with this litigation because of the early stage of this litigation. We are subject to a variety of international and U.S. laws and regulations relating to the use, disposal, cleanup of and human exposure to hazardous materials. Item 103 of the SEC’s Regulation S-K requires disclosure of certain environmental matters when a governmental authority is a party to the proceedings and the proceedings involve potential monetary sanctions unless we reasonably believe the monetary sanctions, exclusive of interest and costs, will not equal or exceed a threshold which we determine is reasonably designed to result in disclosure of any such proceeding that is material to our business or financial condition. Item 103 states that the disclosure threshold is $0.3 million, or at our election, a threshold that does not exceed the lesser of $1.0 million or one percent of our consolidated current assets. As permitted by Item 103, we have elected to adopt a quantitative threshold for environmental proceedings of $1.0 million. Given the size of our operations, we believe that environmental matters under this threshold are not material to our business or financial condition. In addition, we are from time to time subject to, and are presently involved in, litigation and other legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business. While it is not possible to determine the outcome of any legal proceedings brought against us, we believe that, except for the matter described above, there are no pending lawsuits or claims that, individually or in the aggregate, may have a material effect on our business, financial condition or operating results. Our views and estimates related to these matters may change in the future, as new events and circumstances arise and as the matters continue to develop.