Legal Proceedings
−Removed: On August 3, 2021, we entered into a Consent Agreement with the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Department of State (“DTCC”) to resolve alleged violations of the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”).
−Removed: Pursuant to the Consent Agreement, we were assessed a penalty of $6.6 million to be paid over three years, $2.5 million of which was suspended and designated for remediation activities over three years, including employment of a special compliance officer.
−Removed: The suspended portion of the penalty was satisfied by amounts spent on qualifying compliance activities.
−Removed: On April 23, 2024, we made the final payment on the penalty, bringing the total amount paid to $4.1 million.
−Removed: On May 3, 2024, we submitted a certification letter to the DTCC certifying that Keysight had implemented all aspects of the Consent Agreement and that Keysight’s compliance program is adequate to identify, prevent, detect, correct, and report violations of the ITAR.
−Removed: On May 22, 2024, the DTCC closed the Consent Agreement based on this certification and their conclusion that Keysight had fulfilled the terms of the Consent Agreement.
On January 1, 2022, Centripetal Networks filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Virginia, alleging that certain Keysight products infringe certain of Centripetal’s patents.
−Removed: In addition, in February 2022 Centripetal filed complaints in Germany alleging infringement of certain of Centripetal’s German patents, and in April 2022 Centripetal filed a complaint with the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) requesting that they investigate whether Keysight violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act (“Section 337”) and should be enjoined from importing certain products that are manufactured outside of the U.S.
+Added: We challenged the validity of claims of eight of these patents at the U.S.
+Added: Patent and Trademark Office, with all or most claims being found invalid in each patent.
+Added: Centripetal is appealing seven of these results.
+Added: In addition, in February 2022 Centripetal filed complaints in Germany alleging infringement of three of Centripetal’s German patents.
+Added: Keysight challenged the validity of the claims of these patents in German nullity or European Patent Office (“EPO”) opposition procedures.
+Added: Two of the three patents were invalidated, and the appeals process has ended.
+Added: The third patent had all but one claim invalidated at trial and is under appeal.
+Added: In April 2022, Centripetal filed a complaint with the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) requesting that they investigate whether Keysight violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act (“Section 337”) and should be enjoined from importing certain products that are manufactured outside of the U.S.
and which are alleged to infringe Centripetal patents.
1 unchanged sentence
Centripetal has appealed this determination.
+Added: The lawsuit in Federal District Court in Virginia is stayed pending the finalization of appeals of the ITC findings and validity challenges.
On August 21, 2024, Keysight was served in Germany with a complaint filed in the Unified Patent Court alleging that certain Keysight products sold in Germany, France, Italy, and the Netherlands infringe a European Centripetal patent.
+Added: In December 2025, the court issued its written determination that Keysight did not infringe the patent.
+Added: Keysight also challenged the validity of the patent using EPO opposition procedures, and the EPO revoked the patent in its hearing in November 2025.
We deny the allegations and are aggressively defending each case.
+Added: On June 14, 2019, the U.S.
+Added: Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) issued final regulations relating to Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (“GILTI”) under IRC § 951A (the “tax regulations”).
+Added: The tax regulations contained language which disallowed GILTI tax deductions for intangible asset amortization resulting from the Singapore restructuring completed in 2018.
+Added: During the third quarter of fiscal year 2024, we concluded, in response to recent U.S.
+Added: Supreme Court decisions on a number of relevant cases, the evolving global tax landscape and other changes in circumstances, that Treasury exceeded its regulatory authority and the intangible asset amortization should be deductible.
+Added: In response, we amended our U.S.
+Added: federal income tax returns for the open tax years to claim the deduction and recognized the discrete benefit in the condensed consolidated financial statements.
+Added: We believe the position meets the more likely than not recognition threshold.
+Added: On January 23, 2025, we filed a lawsuit against the United States of America in the United States Court of Federal Claims seeking a tax refund of $107 million, or such greater amount allowed by law, plus any other amount, including interest and cost, allowed by law.
+Added: We intend to vigorously defend our position.
+Added: The outcome cannot be predicted with certainty.
+Added: If we are ultimately unsuccessful in defending our refund claim, we will be required to reverse the benefit previously recorded, most likely resulting in a material increase in the effective tax rate and income tax liability.
Although there are no matters pending that we currently believe are probable and reasonably possible of having a material impact to our business, consolidated financial position, or results of operations or cash flows, the outcome of litigation is inherently uncertain and is difficult to predict.
5 unchanged sentences
Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.