Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

The company is subject to various legal proceedings, including, but not limited to, product liability, intellectual property, antitrust, commercial, property damage, personal injury, environmental and regulatory matters arising out of the normal course of its current businesses or legacy EIDP businesses unrelated to Corteva’s current businesses but allocated to Corteva as part of the Separation of Corteva from DuPont.

Often these proceedings raise complex factual and legal issues, which are subject to risks and uncertainties and which could require significant amounts of senior leadership team’s time. Litigation and other claims, along with regulatory proceedings, against the company could also materially adversely affect its operations, reputation, and/or result in the incurrence of unexpected expenses and liability. Even when the company believes liabilities are not expected to be material or the probability of loss or of an adverse unappealable final judgment is remote, the company may consider settlement of these matters, and may enter into settlement agreements, if it believes settlement is in the best interest of the company, including avoidance of future distraction and litigation defense cost, and its shareholders. Information regarding certain of these matters is set forth below and in Note 15 - Commitments and Contingent Liabilities, to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Litigation related to Corteva’s current businesses

Federal Trade Commission Investigation

On September 29, 2022, the FTC, along with ten state attorneys general, filed a lawsuit against Corteva and another competitor alleging the parties engaged in unfair methods of competition, unlawful conditioning of payments, unreasonably restrained trade, and have an unlawful monopoly (the “FTC lawsuit”). In December 2022, two additional state attorneys general joined the FTC lawsuit, and another state attorney general filed a separate lawsuit against Corteva and another competitor based on the allegations set forth in the FTC lawsuit. Several proposed private class action lawsuits alleging anticompetitive conduct based on the allegations set forth in the FTC lawsuit were centralized into a multi-district litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina in February 2023. Further information with respect to these proceedings is set forth under “Federal Trade Commission Investigation” in in Note 15 - Commitments and Contingent Liabilities, to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Lorsban® Lawsuits

As of December 31, 2022, there were pending personal injury and remediation lawsuits filed against the former Dow Agrosciences LLC in California alleging injuries related to exposure to, or contamination by, chlorpyrifos, the active ingredient in Lorsban®, an insecticide used by commercial farms for field fruit, nut and vegetable crops. Corteva ended its production of Lorsban® in 2020. Further information with respect to these proceedings is set forth under “Lorsban® Lawsuits” in Note 15 - Commitments and Contingent Liabilities, to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Bayer Disputes

In August 2022, Corteva filed a lawsuit against Bayer CropScience LLP and Monsanto Company (collectively “Bayer”) in federal court in Delaware for alleged infringement of Corteva’s patented AAD-1 herbicide resistance technology used in Enlist® corn. Corteva seeks to enjoin Bayer from continuing to infringe, as well as appropriate monetary damages. Bayer has filed an answer to the complaint and has asserted various affirmative defenses including invalidity. The case will now proceed to discovery.

Also in August 2022, Bayer filed breach of contract/declaratory judgment lawsuit in Delaware state court against Corteva relating to an agrobacterium cross-license agreement and E3® soybeans. Bayer alleges that Corteva practiced two Bayer patents in developing E3® soybeans, and therefore, is entitled to royalties pursuant to the terms of the cross-license agreement. In October 2022, Corteva moved to dismiss the complaint on the basis that, under the terms of the cross-license agreement and the law, E3® soybeans cannot infringe expired patents. Oral argument on the motion to dismiss occurred in January 2023.

In October 2022, Corteva filed a lawsuit against Bayer in Delaware state court seeking a declaration that, under the terms of Corteva’s licensing agreement and the law, Bayer is not entitled to collect patent royalties on the Roundup Ready® Corn 2 trait after Bayer’s U.S. patent protection expires. Discussions to resolve each of the above disputes remain ongoing.

Litigation related to legacy EIDP businesses unrelated to Corteva’s current businesses

As discussed below and in Note 15 - Commitments and Contingent Liabilities, to the Consolidated Financial Statements, certain of the environmental proceedings and litigation allocated to Corteva as part of the Separation from DuPont relate to the legacy EIDP businesses, including their use of PFOA, which, for purposes of this report, means collectively perfluorooctanoic acid and its salts, including the ammonium salt and does not distinguish between the two forms, and PFAS, which means per-

Part I

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS, continued

and polyfluoroalkyl substances, including PFOA, PFOS (perfluorooctanesulfonic acid), GenX and other perfluorinated chemicals and compounds ("PFCs"). This litigation includes multiple natural resource damage lawsuits across the United States filed by municipalities and alleging PFOA contamination, as well as, lawsuits by four municipalities in the Netherlands filed complaints alleging contamination of land and groundwater resulting from the emission of PFOA and GenX by Corteva, DuPont and Chemours.

In addition to the matters set forth in Note 15 - Commitments and Contingent Liabilities, to the Consolidated Financial Statements on March 25, 2019, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (“NJDEP”) issued a Statewide PFAS Directive to several companies, including Chemours, DuPont, and EIDP. The Directive seeks information relating to the use and environmental release of PFAS and PFAS-replacement chemicals at and from two former EIDP sites in New Jersey, Chambers Works and Parlin, and a funding source for costs related to the NJDEP’s investigation of PFAS issues and PFAS testing and remediation.

On January 22, 2021, Chemours, DuPont, Corteva and EIDP entered into a binding memorandum of understanding containing a settlement to resolve legal disputes related to Chemours' responsibility for litigation and environmental liabilities allocated to it, and to establish a cost sharing arrangement and escrow account to be used to support and manage potential future legacy PFAS liabilities arising out of pre-July 1, 2015 conduct (the “MOU”). See Note 15 - Commitments and Contingent Liabilities, to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion.

Other Environmental Proceedings

The matters below involve the potential for $1 million or more in monetary fines and are included per Item 103(3)(c)(iii) of Regulation S-K of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

Related to Corteva’s current businesses

La Porte Plant, La Porte, Texas - Crop Protection - Release Incident Investigations

On November 15, 2014, there was a release of methyl mercaptan at EIDP's La Porte, Texas, facility. The release occurred at the site’s crop protection unit resulting in four employee fatalities inside the unit. The Chemical Safety Board (“CSB”) issued its final report on June 18, 2019, which included recommendations related to the emergency response program at La Porte. Corteva responded to the CSB on September 30, 2019, outlining the actions it has taken to date to address the recommendations for the site and providing its plan to address the CSB’s remaining recommendations. After the conclusion of the CSB investigation, criminal U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") and the Department of Justice ("DOJ") investigations related to the incident continued.

On January 8, 2021, EIDP and the facility's former unit operations leader were indicted by the DOJ on two felony and one misdemeanor charges of violations of the Clean Air Act related to the release. On January 18, 2022, the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Texas dismissed the felony charge for failing to implement a safety practice. The maximum statutory penalties per charge are $500,000, or twice the gross gain or loss derived from the incident, as well as up to three years of probation and related ongoing reporting obligations. While the company moved to dismiss the remaining charges, the DOJ appealed the dismissal of the felony charge. In August 2022, the court reversed its prior dismissal of the failing to implement a safety practice charge and denied the company’s motion to dismiss the remaining charges. The company and the DOJ reached a mutually agreeable resolution for this matter in February 2023. The company expects to enter its amended plea on March 20, 2023. As of December 31, 2022, an accrual was established for this proceeding.

Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, AltEn Facility

The EPA and the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy (“NDEE”) are pursuing investigations, response and removal actions, litigation and enforcement action related to an ethanol plant located near Mead, Nebraska and owned and operated by AltEn LLC (“AltEn”). Corteva is one of six seed companies, who were customers of AltEn (collectively, the "Facility Response Group"), participating in the NDEE’s Voluntary Cleanup Program to address certain interim remediation needs at the site. Further information with respect to these proceedings is set forth under “Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, AltEn Facility” in Note 15 - Commitments and Contingent Liabilities, to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Related to legacy EIDP businesses unrelated to Corteva’s current businesses

Divested Neoprene Facility, La Place, Louisiana - EPA Compliance Inspection

In 2016, the EPA conducted a focused compliance investigation at the Denka Performance Elastomer LLC (“Denka”) neoprene manufacturing facility in La Place, Louisiana. EIDP sold the neoprene business, including this manufacturing facility, to Denka

Part I

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS, continued

in the fourth quarter of 2015. In the spring of 2017, the EPA, the DOJ, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, EIDP and Denka began discussions relating to the inspection conclusions and allegations of noncompliance arising under the Clean Air Act, including leak detection and repair. These discussions, which include potential settlement options, continue. Under the Separation Agreement, DuPont is defending and indemnifying the company in this matter.

New Jersey Directive Pompton Lakes

On March 27, 2019, the NJDEP issued to Chemours and EIDP a Natural Resource Damages Directive relating to chemical contamination (non-PFAS) at and around EIDP’s former Pompton Lakes facility in New Jersey. The Directive alleges that this contamination has harmed the natural resources of New Jersey. It seeks $125,000 as reimbursement for the cost of preparing a natural resource damages assessment, which the State will use to determine the extent of such damage and the amount it expects to seek to restore the affected natural resources to their pre-damage state.