We are from time to time subject to, and are presently involved in, litigation and other legal proceedings and from time to time, we receive inquiries from government agencies. See “Note 11—Commitments and Contingencies”. On November 14, 2018, Chanel, Inc. sued the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Complaint alleged federal and state law claims of trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false advertising. On February 1, 2019, Chanel, Inc. filed its First Amended Complaint that included substantially similar claims against the Company. On March 4, 2019, the Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint, which was granted in part and dismissed in part on March 30, 2020. The surviving claims against the Company include trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1114, false advertising under 15 U.S.C. § 1125, and unfair competition under New York common law. On May 29, 2020, the Company filed its Answer to the Amended Complaint. On November 3, 2020, the Company sought leave to amend its Answer to assert counterclaims against Chanel, Inc. for violations of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 & 2, the Donnelly Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law. § 340, and New York common law. The motion for leave to amend was granted on February 24, 2021. On February 25, 2021, the Company filed its First Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims against Chanel. The Company’s Counterclaims allege violations of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 & 2, the Donnelly Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law. § 340, and New York common law. On March 18, 2021, Chanel moved to dismiss the Company’s Counterclaims and moved to strike the Company’s unclean hands affirmative defense. The parties agreed to a stay in April 2021 to engage in settlement discussions. After several mediation sessions, the parties were unable to reach a resolution, and the stay was lifted in November 2021. Chanel then sought a partial stay of discovery on the Company's counterclaims and unclean hands defense while Chanel's motion to dismiss and strike those claims are pending, and on March 10, 2022, the Court granted Chanel's request. The parties continued to engage in fact discovery regarding Chanel's counterfeiting and false advertising claims against the Company. Fact discovery was scheduled to be completed by August 15, 2023. However, on July 19, 2023, the Court ordered a stay of the case at the parties’ request to enable the parties to attempt mediation again. The parties engaged in settlement discussions moderated by the mediator over the course of two years but were unable to reach a settlement. The court held a settlement conference on March 5, 2026, but the parties were unable to reach a settlement. On March 6, 2026, the stay was vacated, and on March 27, 2026, the court issued a ruling denying Chanel’s motion to strike the Company’s unclean hands defense and granting its motion to dismiss the counterclaims without prejudice to a motion for leave to amend some of the counterclaims. The Company moved to amend the counterclaims on April 20, 2026 to assert antitrust, tort, and statutory claims based on new allegations involving conduct discovered since the original counterclaims were filed. Chanel filed its opposition to the motion on May 15, 2026, and the Company filed its reply on May 29, 2026. The motion for leave to amend remains pending for resolution by the Court, and discovery is currently ongoing. The final outcome of this litigation, including our liability, if any, with respect to Chanel’s claims, is uncertain. An unfavorable outcome in this or similar litigation could adversely affect the Company’s business and could lead to other similar lawsuits. The Company is not able to predict or reasonably estimate the ultimate outcome or loss or range of possible losses relating to this claim. Beginning on September 10, 2019, purported shareholder class action complaints were filed against the Company, its officers and directors and the underwriters of its IPO in the San Mateo Superior Court, Marin County Superior Court, and the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. On July 27, 2021, the Company reached an agreement in principle to settle the shareholder class action. On November 5, 2021, plaintiff filed the executed stipulation of settlement and motion for preliminary approval of the settlement with the federal court. On March 24, 2022, the court entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement. On July 28, 2022, the court entered an order finally approving the settlement and dismissing the case. The financial terms of the stipulation of settlement provide that the Company will pay $11.0 million within thirty (30) days of the later of preliminary approval of the settlement or plaintiff’s counsel providing payment instructions. The Company paid the settlement amount on March 29, 2022 with available resources and recorded approximately $11.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2021 under our Operating expenses as a Legal settlement. One of the plaintiffs in the Marin County case opted out of the federal settlement and is pursuing the claim in Marin County Superior Court. The stay of the state court case has been lifted, and the opt out plaintiff filed an amended complaint on October 31, 2022 alleging putative class claims under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) on behalf of the two shareholders who opted out of the settlement and those who purchased stock from November 21, 2019 through March 9, 2020, based on purported new revelations. The claims are for alleged violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act. On February 23, 2024, plaintiff filed a motion for class certification. On July 22, 2025, the court entered an order denying the motion for class certification. On September 19, 2025, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal of the class certification decision, which appeal remains pending. While the Company intends to defend vigorously against this litigation, there can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in its defense. For this reason, the Company cannot currently estimate the loss or range of possible losses it may experience in connection with this litigation. 41 Table of Contents We are currently involved in, and may in the future be involved in, 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 matters described above, the resolution of all such matters will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position or liquidity, but could be material to our results of operations in any one accounting period. Regardless of final outcomes, however, any such legal proceedings may nonetheless impose a significant burden on management and employees and may come with costly defense costs or unfavorable preliminary and interim rulings. There are inherent uncertainties in these legal matters, some of which are beyond management’s control, making the ultimate outcomes difficult to predict. Moreover, management’s 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. 42 Table of Contents