Keurig Dr Pepper Inc.

15. Commitments and Contingencies

We are occasionally subject to litigation or other legal proceedings. Reserves are recorded for specific legal proceedings when we determine that the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. We had litigation reserves of $3 million and $2 million as of June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively. We have also identified certain other legal matters where we believe an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible and/or for which no estimate of possible losses can be made. We do not believe that the outcome of these, or any other, pending legal matters, individually or collectively, will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity.

ANTITRUST LITIGATION

In February 2014, TreeHouse Foods, Inc. and certain affiliated entities filed suit against KDP’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Keurig (formerly known as Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc.), in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (“SDNY”) (TreeHouse Foods, Inc. et al. v. Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc. et al.). The TreeHouse complaint asserted claims under the federal antitrust laws and various state laws, contending that Keurig had monopolized alleged markets for single serve coffee brewers and single serve coffee pods. The TreeHouse complaint sought treble monetary damages, declaratory relief, injunctive relief and attorneys’ fees. In the months that followed, a number of additional actions, including claims from another coffee manufacturer (JBR, Inc.), as well as putative class actions on behalf of direct and indirect purchasers of Keurig’s products, were filed in various federal district courts, asserting claims and seeking relief substantially similar to the claims asserted and relief sought in the TreeHouse complaint. Additional similar actions were filed by individual direct purchasers (including McLane Company, Inc., BJ’s Wholesale Club, Inc., Winn-Dixie Stores Inc., and Bi-Lo Holding LLC) in 2019 and in 2021. All of these actions were transferred to the SDNY for coordinated pre-trial proceedings (In re: Keurig Green Mountain Single-Serve Coffee Antitrust Litigation) (the “Multidistrict Antitrust Litigation”).

In July 2020, Keurig reached an agreement with one of the plaintiff groups in the Multidistrict Antitrust Litigation, the putative indirect purchaser class, to settle the claims asserted for $31 million. The settlement class consisted of individuals and entities in the United States that purchased, from persons other than Keurig and not for purposes of resale, Keurig manufactured or licensed single serve beverage portion packs during the applicable class period (beginning in September 2010 for most states). The settlement was approved and paid, and the indirect purchasers’ claims have been dismissed.

Discovery in all remaining matters pending in the Multidistrict Antitrust Litigation is concluded, with the plaintiffs collectively claiming more than $5 billion of monetary damages. Keurig strongly disputes the merits of the claims and the calculation of damages. Keurig has fully briefed summary judgment motions that, if successful, would end the cases entirely. Keurig is also pursuing its opposition to direct purchaser plaintiffs’ motion for class certification.

Keurig intends to continue vigorously defending the remaining lawsuits. At this time, we are unable to predict the outcome of these lawsuits, the potential loss or range of loss, if any, associated with the resolution of these lawsuits or any potential effect they may have on us or our results of operations. Accordingly, we have not accrued for a loss contingency. Additionally, as the timelines in these cases may be beyond our control, we can provide no assurance as to whether or when there will be material developments in these matters.