With the exception of the below, we are not a party to any material, pending legal proceedings or claims at June 30, 2026. From time-to-time, we may be a party to, or otherwise involved in, legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business. The nature of our business ordinarily results in a certain amount of pending as well as threatened claims, litigation, investigations, regulatory and legal and administrative cases, matters and proceedings, all of which are considered incidental to the normal conduct of business. When we determine that we have meritorious defenses to the claims asserted, we vigorously defend ourself. We consider settlement of cases when, in management’s judgment, it is in the best interests of both Vertiv and its shareholders to do so. On May 3, 2022, a putative securities class action, In re Vertiv Holdings Co Securities Litigation, 22-cv-3572, was filed against Vertiv, certain of the Company’s officers and directors, and other defendants in the Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on September 16, 2022. The amended complaint alleges that certain of the Company’s public statements were materially false and/or misleading with respect to inflationary and supply chain pressures and pricing issues, and asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. These claims are asserted on behalf of a putative class of all persons and entities that (i) purchased Vertiv securities between February 24, 2021 and February 22, 2022; and/or (ii) purchased Vertiv securities in or traceable to the November 4, 2021 secondary public offering by a selling stockholder pursuant to a resale registration statement. On January 31, 2024, the Court issued an order dismissing the claims under Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act. The motion to dismiss the claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act remains pending. On June 9, 2023, two Vertiv shareholders, Matthew Sullivan and Jose Karlo Ocampo Avenido, brought a derivative lawsuit, Sullivan v. Johnson, et al., C.A. No. 2023-0608 (the "Sullivan Action"), against Vertiv (as nominal defendant only) and certain of the Company’s directors and officers in Delaware Court of Chancery for breach of fiduciary duty. Further, on November 19, 2024, another Vertiv shareholder, Laura Hanna, brought a derivative lawsuit, Hanna v. Johnson, et al. (the "Hanna Action"), against Vertiv (as nominal defendant only) and certain of Company’s directors and officers in Delaware Court of Chancery for breach of fiduciary duty. The complaints allege that the named directors and officers caused the Company to issue materially false and/or misleading public statements with respect to inflationary and supply chain pressures and pricing issues, and that the Company suffered damages as a result. The Sullivan Action has been stayed since August 10, 2023 pending the outcome of the motion to dismiss in the securities class action. On February 13, 2025, the Delaware Court of Chancery entered an order that (i) consolidated the Sullivan Action and Hanna Action into a single consolidated derivative lawsuit, In re Vertiv Holdings Co Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Consolidated C.A. No. 2023-0608-NAC (the “Consolidated Derivative Action”), (ii) designated the complaint in the Hanna Action as the operative complaint in the Consolidated Derivative Action, and (iii) stayed the Consolidated Derivative Action on terms identical to those of the existing stay of the Sullivan Action. We believe we have meritorious defenses against the allegations made in the aforementioned lawsuits, which are at the preliminary stages. However, we are unable at this time to predict the outcome of these matters or the amount of any cost associated with their resolution. As of June 30, 2026, other than as described above, there were no known contingent liabilities (including guarantees, taxes and other claims) that management believes were or will be material in relation to the Company’s Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, nor were there any material commitments outside the normal course of business. ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS