Item 4. Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we have evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as required by Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(b) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures are effective.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the first quarter of fiscal 2026 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

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. We challenged the validity of claims of eight of these patents at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), with all or most claims being found invalid in each challenged patent. Centripetal is appealing seven of these findings and in January 2026 the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the USPTO invalidating all claims of one of the challenged patents. In addition, in February 2022 Centripetal filed complaints in Germany alleging infringement of three of Centripetal’s German patents. Keysight challenged the validity of the claims of these patents in German nullity or European Patent Office (“EPO”) opposition procedures. Two of the three patents were invalidated and the appeals process has ended. In one of those cases, Centripetal was ordered to repay Keysight’s costs associated with defense of the case. The third patent had all but one claim invalidated at trial and is under appeal. 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. On December 5, 2023, the ITC issued its Notice of Determination that Keysight did not unfairly import products in violation of Section 337 and the investigation was terminated. Centripetal has appealed this determination and in January 2026 the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals had a hearing about the ITC findings as well as the USPTO findings invalidating 18 of 20 claims of one of the patents asserted by Centripetal at the ITC. The lawsuit before the 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 (“UPC”) alleging that certain Keysight products sold in Germany, France, Italy, and the Netherlands infringe a European Centripetal patent. In December 2025, the UPC issued its written determination that Keysight did not infringe the patent. Keysight also challenged the validity of the patent using EPO opposition procedures and the EPO revoked the patent in its hearing in November 2025. Centripetal is appealing both the UPC and EPO’s determinations. We continue to deny all the Centripetal allegations and are aggressively defending each case.

On June 14, 2019, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) issued final regulations relating to Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (“GILTI”) under IRC § 951A (the “tax regulations”). The tax regulations contained language which disallowed GILTI tax deductions for intangible asset amortization resulting from the Singapore restructuring completed in 2018. During the third quarter of fiscal year 2024, we concluded, in response to recent U.S. 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. In response, we amended our U.S. federal income tax returns for the open tax years to claim the deduction and recognized the discrete benefit in the condensed consolidated financial statements. We believe the position meets the more likely than not recognition threshold.

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. We intend to vigorously defend our position. The outcome cannot be predicted with certainty. 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, results of operations, or cash flows, the outcome of litigation is inherently uncertain and is difficult to predict. An adverse outcome in any outstanding lawsuit or proceeding could result in significant monetary damages or injunctive relief. If adverse results are above management’s expectations or are unforeseen, management may not have accrued for the liability, which could impact our results in future periods.

We are also involved in lawsuits, claims, investigations, and other proceedings, including, but not limited to, patent, commercial and environmental matters, which arise in the ordinary course of business.