The clinical laboratory testing industry is highly regulated, and there can be no assurance that the regulatory environment in which we operate will not change significantly and adversely to us in the future. Areas of the regulatory environment that may affect our ability to conduct business include, without limitation:

In particular, the laws and regulations governing the marketing of clinical laboratory tests are complex, and there are often no sufficient regulatory or judicial interpretations of these laws and regulations. For example, some of our clinical laboratory tests are actively regulated by the FDA pursuant to the medical device provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA. The FDA defines a medical device to include any instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, in vitro reagent or other similar or related article, including a component, part or accessory, intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease, in man or other animals. Our clinical laboratory tests are in vitro diagnostic products that are considered by the FDA to be medical devices. Among other things, pursuant to the FDCA and its implementing regulations, the FDA regulates the research, design, testing, manufacturing, safety, labeling, storage, recordkeeping, premarket clearance or approval, marketing and promotion and sales and distribution of medical devices in the United States to ensure that medical devices distributed domestically are safe and effective for their intended uses. In addition, the FDA regulates the import and export of medical devices. If we do not comply with these requirements or fail to adequately comply, our business may be harmed.

TheWe market some of our tests, Guardant360, Guardant360 Response, Guardant360 Tissue Next, Guardant Reveal and Shield, as LDTs. LDTs are in vitro diagnostic tests that are intended for clinical use and are designed, manufactured, and used within a single laboratory. Although LDTs are classified as medical devices and the FDA has a policy ofstatutory authority to ensure that medical devices are safe and effective for their intended uses, the FDA has historically exercised enforcement discretion and has not enforced certain applicable FDA requirements, including premarket review, with respect to LDTs wherebyLDTs. While we believe that we are in material compliance with applicable laws and regulations, we cannot assure that the FDA does not actively enforce its regulatory requirements for such tests. However, the FDA has stated its intention to modify its enforcement discretion policywill agree with respect to LDTs.us. If there are changes in FDA policy, or if the FDA disagrees that we are marketing our tests as LDTs within the scope of its policy of enforcement discretion, we may become subject to extensive regulatory requirements and may be required to stop selling our existing tests or launching any other tests we may develop and to conduct additional clinical trialsstudies or take other actions prior to continuing to market our tests. This could significantly increase the costs and expenses of conducting, or otherwise harm, our business.

The process of obtaining a PMA is a rigorous, costly, lengthy and uncertain process. In the PMA process, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is safe and effective for its intended use based, in part, on extensive data, including, but not limited to, technical, pre-clinical, clinical trial,study, manufacturing and labeling data. In the 510(k) clearance process, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is “substantially equivalent” to a device legally on the market, known as a “predicate” device, in order to clear the proposed device for marketing. To be “substantially equivalent,” the proposed device must have the same intended use as the predicate device, and either have the same technological characteristics as the predicate device or have different technological characteristics and not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness than the predicate device. Clinical data is sometimes required to support a substantial equivalence determination.

Any delay or failure to obtain necessary regulatory approvals or clearances or certifications would have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

The FDA and foreign authorities or notified bodies can delay, limit or deny clearance or approval or certification of a device for many reasons, including:

If we are unable to obtain clearance or approval or certification for any tests for which we plan to seek clearance or approval or certification, our business may be harmed.

For any product approved pursuant to a PMA, we are required to seek supplemental approval for many types of changes to the approved product, for which we will need to determine whether a PMA supplement or other regulatory filing is needed or whether the change may be reported via the PMA Annual Report. Similarly, any modification to a 510(k)-cleared device that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change in its intended use, design, or manufacture, requires new 510(k) clearance or, possibly, approval of a new PMA. The FDA requires us to make this determination in the first instance, but the FDA may review and may not agree with our determination. If the FDA disagrees with our determination and requires us to seek approvals or clearances for modifications to our previously approved or cleared products, for which we concluded that new approvals or clearances are unnecessary, we may be required to cease marketing or distribution of our products or to recall the modified product until we obtain the approval or clearance, and we may be subject to significant regulatory fines or penalties.

Our revenue and commercial success depend on achieving coverage and reimbursement for our tests from payers, including both commercial and government payers. If payers do not provide coverage of, or do not provide adequate reimbursement for our tests, we may need to seek payment from the patient, which may adversely affect demand for our tests. Coverage determinations by a payer may depend on a number of factors, including but not limited to a payer’s determination that a test is appropriate, medically necessary or cost-effective. If we are unable to provide payers with sufficient evidence of the clinical utility and validity of our test, they may not provide coverage, may provide limited coverage or may terminate coverage, which will adversely affect our revenues and our financial condition. To the extent that more competitors enter our markets, the availability of coverage and the reimbursement rate for our tests may decrease as we encounter pricing pressure from our competitors.

Each payer makes its own decision as to whether to provide coverage for our tests, whether to enter into a contract with us and the reimbursement rate for a test. Negotiating with payers is time-consuming, and payers often insist on their standard form contracts. There is no guarantee that a payer will provide adequate coverage or reimbursement for our tests or that we can reach an agreement with the payer on reasonable terms without being subject to additional regulatory and compliance risks. In cases where there is no coverage, or we do not have a contracted rate for reimbursement with the payer, the patient is typically responsible for a greater share of the cost of the test, which may result in delay of revenue, increase collection costs or decrease the likelihood of collection. We maintain a financial assistance program, the Guardant Access Program, under which we assess patient financial need and offer provide discounted or no cost tests to certain patients. This may result in scrutiny by payers of our Guardant Access Program, and this could result in recoupment actions or termination of coverage of our tests.

Our claims for reimbursement may be denied and we may have to appeal such denials in order to get paid. Such appeals may not result in payment. Payers may perform audits of historically paid claims and attempt to recoup funds years after the funds were initially distributed if the payers believe the funds were paid in error or determine that our tests were medically unnecessary. If a payer's audit of our claims results in a negative finding, and we are unable to reverse the finding through appeal, any subsequent recoupment could result in a material adverse effect on our revenue. Additionally, in some cases commercial payers for whom we are not a participating provider may elect at any time to review claims previously paid and determine the amount they paid was excessive. In these situations, the payer typically notifies us of its decision and then offsets the amount it determines to be overpaid against amounts it owes us on current claims. We do not have a mechanism to dispute these retroactive adjustments, and we cannot predict when, or how often, a payer might engage in these reviews.

When we contract with a payer as a participating provider, reimbursements by the payer are generally made pursuant to a negotiated fee schedule and are limited to only covered indications or where prior approval has been obtained. Becoming a participating provider can result in higher reimbursement amounts for covered uses of our test and, potentially, no reimbursement for non-covered uses identified under the payer’s policies or the contract.

Although we are a participating provider with some commercial payers, certain other large, national commercial payers, including Anthem, Aetna and Humana, have issued non-coverage policies that consider tissue and liquid CGP testing which are not FDA approved, including our Guardant360 and TissueNext test, as experimental or investigational. If we are not successful in obtaining coverage from such payers, or if other payers issue similar non-coverage policies, our business and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Medicare’s National Coverage Determination, or NCD, for Next Generation Sequencing, or NGS, first established in 2018 and subsequently updated in 2020 states that NGS tests, such as our Guardant360 test, are covered by Medicare nationally, when: (1) performed in a CLIA-certified laboratory, (2) ordered by a treating physician, (3) the patient meets certain clinical and treatment criteria, including having recurrent, relapsed, refractory, metastatic, or advanced stages III or IV cancer, (4) the test is approved or cleared by the FDA as a companion in vitro diagnostic for an FDA approved or cleared indication for use in that patient’s cancer, and (5) results are provided to the treating physician for management of the patient using a report template to specify treatment options. The NGS NCD also states that each Medicare Administrative Contractor, or MAC, may provide local coverage of other next-generation sequencing tests for cancer patients only when the test is performed by a CLIA-certified laboratory, ordered by a treating physician and the patient meets the same clinical and treatment criteria required of nationally covered next-generation sequencing tests under the NGS NCD. An NGS test is not covered by Medicare when cancer patients do not have the above-noted indications for cancer under either national or local coverage criteria. In July 2018, Palmetto GBA, or Palmetto, the MAC responsible for administering Medicare’s Molecular Diagnostic Services Program, or MolDx, issued a local coverage determination, or LCD, for our Guardant360 test for non-small cell lung cancer, or NSCLC patients who meet certain clinical and treatment criteria. Subsequently, in 2018, Noridian Healthcare Solutions, the MAC responsible for adjudicating claims in California, where our laboratory is located, and a participant in MolDx, finalized its LCD for our Guardant360 test. In September 2018, we began to receive reimbursement from Medicare for claims submitted with respect to Guardant360 clinical tests performed for NSCLC patients. In December 2019, replacing its prior NSCLC patient LCD, Palmetto GBA finalized its expanded LCD for our Guardant360 test that provides limited Medicare coverage for use of the Guardant360 test for qualifying patients diagnosed with solid cancers of non-central nervous system origin. In May 2019, Noridian also issued an expanded draft LCD for our Guardant360 test consistent with the expanded draft LCD issued by Palmetto in March 2019. In May 2020, Noridian issued a coverage article and confirmed limited Medicare coverage for our Guardant360 test for qualifying patients diagnosed with solid tumor cancers of non-central nervous system origin who meet the criteria of the NGS NCD. Noridian also retired the expanded draft LCD issued in May 2019 as being superseded by the coverage article. Future actions taken by Noridian or Palmetto may change Medicare coverage for our Guardant360 test. In March 2020, we began to receive reimbursement from Medicare for claims submitted, with respect to Guardant360 clinical tests performed for qualifying patients diagnosed with solid tumor cancers of non-central nervous system origin other than NSCLC.

Under Medicare, payment for laboratory tests like ours is generally made under the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule, or CLFS, with payment amounts assigned to specific procedure billing codes. In April 2014, Congress passed the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014, or PAMA, which included substantial changes to the way in which clinical laboratory services are paid under Medicare. Under PAMA, laboratories that receive the majority of their Medicare revenue from payments made under the CLFS are generally required to report to CMS, beginning in 2017 and every three years thereafter (or annually for “advanced diagnostic laboratory tests”), privateor ADLT), commercial payer payment rates and volumes for each test they perform. CMS uses this data to calculate a weighted median payment rate for each test, which is used to establish revised Medicare CLFS reimbursement rates for the test. Laboratories that fail to report the required payment information may be subject to substantial civil monetary penalties. As we have begun billing Medicare for our tests, weWe are subject to reporting requirements under PAMA and the Medicare rate for our tests will be calculated in the future based on our private payer rates. For clinical diagnostic laboratory tests furnished on or after January 1, 2018, their Medicare CLFS reimbursement rates are established upon these reported private payer rates. On December 10, 2021, Congress passed the Protecting Medicare and American Farmers from Sequester Cuts Act, which delayed by one year the next data reporting period and prevented any reduction in payment amounts from commercial payer rate implementation in 2022. On November 2, 2022, CMS published its final rule for the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule for calendar year (CY) 2023, including changes for clinical laboratories that took effect on January 1, 2023. Changes include updated regulatory definitions to specify the data collection period for the data reporting period of January 1, 2023 through March 31, 2023; revisions to indicate that data reporting is required every 3 years beginning January 2023; and to confirm that for CY 2022, payment may not be reduced by more than 0% as compared to CY 2021, and for CYs 2023 through 2025, payment may not be reduced by more than 15% as compared to the amount established for the preceding year. On December 29, 2022, Congress passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, which prevented any reduction in payment amounts from commercial payor rate implementation for 2023; delayed by one year data reporting requirements for tests other than ADLTs; and extended the three-year period in which payment may not be reduced by more than 15%, to CYs 2024 through 2026. If we are unable to obtain and maintain favorable reimbursement rates from commercial payers for our tests, this may adversely affect the tests’ Medicare reimbursement rates. We believe that our tests do not meet the current definition of advanced diagnostic laboratory tests, and we will be required to report private payer rates for our tests every three years; but this determination may change. It is unclear what impact new Medicare pricing structures, such as those adopted under PAMA, may have on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Some payers have implemented, or are in the process of implementing, laboratory benefit management programs, often using third-party benefit managers to manage these programs. The stated goals of these programs are to help improve the quality of outpatient laboratory services, support evidence-based guidelines for patient care and lower costs. The impact on laboratories, such as us, of active laboratory benefit management by third parties is unclear, and we expect that it would have a negative impact on our revenue in the short term. Payers may resist reimbursement for our tests in favor of less expensive tests, require pre-authorization for our tests, or impose additional pricing pressure on and substantial administrative burden for reimbursement for our tests. We expect to continue to focus substantial resources on increasing adoption of, and coverage and reimbursement for, our current tests and any future tests we may develop. We believe it may take several years to achieve broad coverage and adequate contracted reimbursement with a majority of payers for our tests. However, we cannot predict whether, under what circumstances, or at what price levels payers will cover and reimburse our tests. If we fail to establish

The FDA has the authority to require the recall of commercialized products that are subject to FDA regulation in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture. The authority to require a recall must be based on an FDA finding that there is reasonable probability that the device would cause serious, adverse health consequences or death. We may also, on our own initiative, recall a product. The FDA requires that certain classifications of recalls be reported to the FDA within ten working days after the recall is initiated. In the case of our FDA-approved tests, a government-mandated or voluntary recall by us or one of our distributors could occur as a result of an unacceptable risk to health, component failures, malfunctions, manufacturing errors, design or labeling defects or other deficiencies and issues. Recalls of any of our products could impair our ability to produce our products in a cost-effective and timely manner, which would have an adverse effect on our reputation, results of operations and financial condition. We may be subject to liability claims, may be required to bear costs or may take other actions that may have a negative impact on our future sales and our ability to generate profits. Companies are required to maintain certain records of recalls, even if they are not reportable to the FDA. We may initiate voluntary recalls involving our products in the future that we determine do not require notification to the FDA. If the FDA disagrees with our determinations, the FDA could require us to report those actions and take enforcement action for failing to report the recalls when they were conducted. Similar requirements apply in foreign jurisdictions. A future recall announcement could harm our reputation with customers and negatively affect our sales and financial condition.

If we initiate a correction or removal for one of our tests, issue a safety alert or undertake a field action or recall to reduce a risk to health imposed by the test, this could lead to increased scrutiny by the FDA and our customers regarding the quality and safety of our tests and to negative publicity, including FDA alerts, press releases or administrative or judicial actions. Furthermore, circulation of any such negative publicity could harm our reputation, be used by competitors against us in competitive situations and cause customers to delay purchase decisions or cancel orders.

Patient enrollment in clinical studies and completion of patient enrollment, which is a function offollow up depend on many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the study protocol, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the clinical study, patient compliance, competing clinical studies and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the trial eligibility criteria. Clinicalpotential advantages of the product being studied in relation to other available products. In addition, patients participating in our clinical studies may needdrop out before completion of the study or experience adverse medical events unrelated to be conductedour products. Delays in compliance with FDA regulationspatient enrollment or failure of patients to continue to participate in a clinical study may delay commencement or completion of the FDA may take enforcement action. Weclinical study, cause an increase in the costs of the clinical study and delays, or result in the failure of the clinical study. In addition, the target enrollment for certain of our clinical studies, including our ECLIPSE study, is based upon our estimates that a given percentage of enrolled patients will have a specified disease or condition, and we cannot be certain that results fromthese estimates will prove correct, or that our clinical trialsstudies, even if fully enrolled, will produce data sufficient to support ourthe submission of a PMA or other marketing claims or thatapplication to the FDA or foreign authorities will agreea comparable regulatory authority. If our clinical studies do not enroll a sufficient number of patients to support submission of a PMA or similar marketing application, or if the number of patients enrolled with the target disease or condition is lower than we estimated, we may be required to enroll additional patients in our conclusions regarding them. Successclinical studies or conduct additional clinical studies before we are able to seek and/or obtain marketing authorizations for our product candidates, which may result in pre-clinical studiessignificant additional expenses for us and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful, and we cannot be sure that the later trials will replicate the results of prior trials and studies. The clinical trial process may fail to demonstrate that our tests are safe and effective for the proposed indicated uses, which could cause us to abandon or delay development of our tests. Any delay or terminationprevent us from bringing our product candidates to market.

If there are delays in testing or clearances, approvals or approvalscertifications as a result of the failure to perform by third parties, our research and development costs would increase, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory clearance, approval, or approval

Our “research use only” and “investigational use only” products could become subject to more onerous regulation by the FDA or other regulatory agencies in the future, which could increase our costs and delay our commercialization efforts, thereby materially and adversely affecting our business and results of operations.

In the United States, some of our products are currently available for research use only, or RUO, or for investigational use only, or IUO, depending on the proposed application. We make our RUO and IUO products available to a variety of parties, including biopharmaceutical companies and research institutes. Because RUO and IUO products are not intended for use in clinical practice and cannot be advertised or promoted for clinical or diagnostic claims, they are exempt from many regulatory requirements otherwise applicable to medical devices. In particular, while the FDA regulations require that RUO products be labeled “For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures,” and that IUO products be labeled “For Investigational Use Only. The performance characteristics of this product have not been established,” such products are not subject to the FDA’s pre- and post-market controls for medical devices.

A significant change in the laws or policies governing RUO or IUO products or how they are enforced may require us to change our business model in order to maintain compliance. For instance, in November 2013 the FDA issued a guidance document entitled “Distribution of In Vitro Diagnostic Products Labeled for Research Use Only or Investigational Use Only,” or the RUO/IUO Guidance, which highlights the FDA’s interpretation that distribution of RUO or IUO products with any labeling, advertising or promotion that suggests that clinical laboratories can validate the test through their own procedures and subsequently offer it for clinical diagnostic use as an LDT is in conflict with the RUO or IUO status. The RUO/IUO Guidance further articulates the FDA’s position that any assistance offered in performing clinical validation or verification, or similar specialized technical support, to clinical laboratories, is in conflict with RUO or IUO status. If we engage in any activities that the FDA deems to be in conflict with the RUO or IUO status held by any of our products so labeled, we may be subject to immediate, severe and broad FDA enforcement action that would adversely affect our ability to continue operations. Accordingly, if the FDA finds that we are distributing our RUO or IUO products in a manner that is inconsistent with its RUO/IUO Guidance, we may be forced to stop distribution of our RUO/IUO tests until we are in compliance, which would reduce our revenue, increase our costs and adversely affect our business, and results of operations.

Medical devices are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the United States, the MHLW in Japan, the European Commission,authorities, EEA Competent Authorities,competent authorities, and comparable regulatory agencies in other territories where we do business. If any of our products are approved by the FDA, the MHLW, the European Commission, EEA Competent Authorities, or other comparable foreign regulatory agencies or certified by notified bodies in foreign jurisdictions, we will be required to timely file various reports. If these reports are not filed timely, regulators may impose sanctions and sales of our products may suffer, and we may be subject to product liability or regulatory enforcement actions, all of which could harm our business. In addition, as a condition of approving a PMA, application, the FDA may also require some form of post-approval study or post-market surveillance, whereby the applicant conducts a follow-up study or follows certain patient groups for a number of years and makes periodic reports to the FDA on the clinical status of those patients when necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional safety and effectiveness data for the device. The product labeling must be updated and submitted in a PMA supplement as results, including any adverse event data from the post-approval study, become available. Failure to conduct or timely complete post-approval studies in compliance with applicable regulations, update the product labeling, or comply with other post-approval requirements could result in withdrawal of approval of the PMA, which would harm our business and revenue.

The FDA and the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, also regulate the advertising and promotion of medical devices to ensure that their promotional claims made are consistent with the applicable marketing authorizations, that there are adequate and reasonable data to substantiate the claims, and that the promotional labeling and advertising is neither false nor misleading in any respect. If the FDA or FTC determines that any of our promotional claims are false, misleading, not substantiated or not permissible, we may be subject to enforcement actions and we may be required to revise our promotional claims and make other corrections or restitutions.

The FDA, state and foreign authorities have broad enforcement powers. Our failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in enforcement action by the FDA, state or foreign regulatory agencies, which may include any of the following sanctions:

Any of these sanctions could also result in higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales of our products and have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, results of operations and financial condition.

In addition, the FDA may change its clearance and approval policies, adopt additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions which may prevent or delay approval or clearance of our current or future products under development. For example, in November 2018, FDA officials announced forthcoming steps thaton February 23, 2022, the FDA intendsissued a proposed rule to takeamend the Quality System Regulation, or QSR, which establishes current good manufacturing practice requirements for medical device manufacturers, to modernizealign more closely with the premarket notification pathway under Section 510(k) of the FDCA.

In addition, FDA regulations and guidance are often revised or reinterpreted by the FDA in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. Any new statutes, regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of our current or future productsany product candidates or make it more difficult to obtain clearance or approvalmarketing authorizations for, manufacture, market or distribute any product candidate we are developing. We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations, statutes, legal interpretation or policies, when and if promulgated, enacted or adopted may have on our products.business in the future. Such changes could, among other things, require: additional testing prior to seeking marketing authorization, changes to manufacturing methods recalls, replacement or discontinuance of our products or additional record keeping.

The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be promulgated that could prevent, limit or delay marketing authorization of any product candidates we develop. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory clearancecompliance, we may be subject to enforcement action and we may not achieve or approvalsustain profitability.

The EU regulatory landscape concerning medical devices (including in vitro diagnostic medical devices) has evolved in recent years. On April 5, 2017 Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of our product candidates.

We are subject to the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments, or CLIA, a federal law that regulates clinical laboratories that perform testing on specimens derived from humans for the purpose of providing information for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of disease. CLIA regulations establish specific standards with respect to personnel qualifications, facility administration, proficiency testing, quality control, quality assurance and inspections. Any testing subject to CLIA regulation must be performed in a CLIA certified laboratory. CLIA certification is also required in order for us to be eligible to bill state and federal healthcare programs, as well as commercial payers, for our tests. We have a current CLIA certificatecertification to perform our tests at our laboratory in Redwood City, California. To maintain this certificate, we are subject to survey and inspection every two years. Moreover, CLIA inspectors may make random inspections of our laboratory from time to time.

We are also required to maintain a California clinical laboratory license to perform testing in California. California laboratory laws establish standards for day-to-day operation of our clinical laboratory in Redwood City, California, including the training and skills required of personnel and quality control. In addition, some other states require our California laboratory to be licensed in the state in order to test specimens from those states. In addition to California, our laboratory is licensed in Florida, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and New York. Although we have obtained licenses from states where we believe we are required to be licensed, it is possible that other states we are not aware of currently require out-of-state laboratories to obtain licensure in order to test specimens from the state, and that other states may adopt similar requirements in the future.

We may also be subject to regulations in foreign jurisdictions as we seek to expand international utilization of our tests or as such jurisdictions adopt new licensure requirements, which may require review of our tests in order to offer them or may have other limitations such as restrictions on the transport of specimens necessary for us to perform our tests that may limit our ability to make our tests available outside of the United States. Complying with licensure requirements in new jurisdictions may be expensive, time-consuming and subject us to significant and unanticipated delays.

Failure to comply with applicable clinical laboratory licensure requirements may result in a range of enforcement actions, including suspension, limitation or revocation of our CLIA certificatecertification and/or state licenses, imposition of a directed plan of action, on-site monitoring, civil monetary penalties, criminal sanctions, inability to receive reimbursement from Medicare, Medicaid and commercial payers, as well as significant adverse publicity. Any sanction imposed under CLIA, its implementing regulations, or state or foreign laws or regulations governing clinical laboratory licensure or our failure to renew our CLIA certificate,certification, a state or foreign license or accreditation, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Even if we were able to bring our laboratory back into compliance, we could incur significant expenses and potentially lose revenue in doing so.

In order to test specimens from New York, LDTs must be approved by the New York State Department of Health, or NYSDOH, on a product-by-product basis before they are offered, and our Guardant360 test has been approved by NYSDOH. We will need to seek NYSDOH approval of any future LDTs we develop and want to offer for clinical testing to New York residents, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain such approval. As a result, we are subject to periodic inspection by the NYSDOH and are required to demonstrate ongoing compliance with NYSDOH regulations and standards. To the extent NYSDOH identified any non-compliance and we are unable to implement satisfactory corrective actions to remedy such non-compliance, the State of New York could withdraw approval for our tests.

The College of American Pathologists, or CAP, maintains a clinical laboratory accreditation program. While not required to operate a CLIA-certified laboratory, many private insurers require CAP accreditation as a condition to contracting with clinical laboratories to cover their tests. In addition, some countries outside the United States require CAP accreditation as a condition to permitting clinical laboratories to test samples taken from their citizens. In 2014, weWe have obtained CAP accreditation for our laboratories in Redwood City and San Diego, California, laboratory,and Japan, and in order to maintain such accreditation, we are subject to survey for compliance with CAP standards every two years. Failure to maintain CAP accreditation could have a material adverse effect on the sales of our tests and the results of our operations.

Our operations are subject to other extensive federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations, all of which are subject to change. These laws and regulations may include, among others:

As a clinical laboratory, our business practices may face additional scrutiny from various government agencies such as the Department of Justice, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General, or OIG, and CMS. Certain arrangements between clinical laboratories and referring physicians have been identified in fraud alerts issued by the OIG as implicating the AKS. The OIG has stated that it is particularly concerned about these types of arrangements because the choice of laboratory and the decision to order laboratory tests typically are made or strongly influenced by the physician, with little or no patient input. Moreover, the provision of payments or other items of value by a clinical laboratory to a referral source could be prohibited under the Stark Law unless the arrangement meets all criteria of an exception. The government has been active in enforcement of these laws against clinical laboratories.

The growth and international expansion of our business may increase the potential of violating applicable laws and regulations. The risk is further increased by the fact that many such laws and regulations have not been fully interpreted by the regulatory authorities or the courts, and their provisions are open to a variety of interpretations. Efforts to ensure that our internal operations and business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. Any action brought against us for violation of these or other laws or regulations, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. Any of the foregoing consequences could seriously harm our business and our financial results. To the extent our business operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or regulations, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including, without limitation, damages, monetary fines, individual imprisonment, disgorgement of profits, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting or oversight obligations if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with the law and curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and pursue our strategy. If any of the healthcare providers or other parties with whom we interact or may interact in the future, are found not to be in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from participation in various healthcare programs, which could also negatively affect our business or revenue.

We offer our tests to physicians and to biopharmaceutical companies in connection with clinical trials.studies. We have implemented measures to ensure that data and biological samples that we receive have been collected from subjects who have provided appropriate informed consent. We also act as a sponsor of clinical trialsstudies in connection with the development of our tests, which are frequently conducted in collaboration with different parties. We seek to receive approval from an ethical review board, or institutional review board, or IRB, or other reviewing bodies for projects that meet the definition of “human subjects research,” which includes review and approval of processes for subject informed consent and authorization for use of personal information or waivers thereof. We and our biopharmaceutical partners could conduct clinical trialsstudies in a number of different countries. When we are acting as a vendor in connection with a clinical trialstudy sponsored by our biopharmaceutical partners, we rely upon them to comply with the requirements to obtain the subject’s informed consent and to comply with applicable laws and regulations. The collection of data and samples in many different countries results in complex legal questions regarding the adequacy of informed consent and the status of genetic material under a large number of different legal systems. Those informed consents could be challenged and prove invalid, unlawful, or otherwise inadequate for our purposes. Any such findings against us, or our biopharmaceutical partners, could force us to stop accessing or using data and samples or servicing or conducting clinical trials,studies, which would hinder our product offerings or development. We could also become involved in legal actions, which could consume our management and financial resources.

Billing for our tests is complex, time-consuming and expensive. Depending on the billing arrangement and applicable law, we bill various payers, such as Medicare, Medicaid, health plans, insurance companies and patients, all of which may have different billing requirements. Several factors make the billing process complex, including:

These billing complexities and the related uncertainty in obtaining payment for our tests could negatively affect our revenue and cash flow, our ability to achieve profitability and the consistency and comparability of our results of operations. In addition, if claims for our tests are not submitted to payers on a timely basis, or if we fail to comply with applicable billing requirements, it could have an adverse effect on our revenue and our business.

In addition, the coding procedure used by third-party payers to identify various procedures, including our test, during the billing process is complex, does not adapt well to our tests and may not enable coverage and adequate reimbursement rates. Third-party payers usually require us to identify the test for which we are seeking reimbursement using a Current Procedural Terminology, or the CPT code. CPT coding plays a significant role in how our Guardant360 test is reimbursed both from commercial and governmental payers. The CPT code set is maintained by the American Medical Association, or AMA. In cases where there is not a specific CPT code to describe a test, such as Guardant360 test, the test may be billed under an unlisted molecular pathology procedure code or through the use of a combination of single gene CPT codes, depending on the payer. The Protecting Access to Medicare Act, or PAMA authorized the adoption of new, temporary billing codes and unique test identifiers for FDA-cleared or approved tests as well as advanced diagnostic laboratory tests. The AMA has created a new section of CPT codes, Proprietary Laboratory Analyses codes or PLA, to facilitate implementation of this section of PAMA. In addition, CMS maintains the Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System, or HCPCS, and may assign unique level II HCPCS code to tests that are not already described by a unique CPT code. New CPT codes are issued annually and new HCPCS codes are issued as frequently as quarterly. Payers’ acceptance of the new code could be delayed, and transition to the new code could result in a decrease in reimbursement for our tests, both of which could potentially reduce revenue from commercial and government payers. In addition, Z-Code Identifiers are used by certain payers, including under Medicare's Molecular Diagnostic Services Program, or MolDx, to supplement CPT codes for molecular diagnostics tests such as our Guardant360 test. Following the FDA approval of our Guardant360 CDx test, a new Z-Code Identifier is expected to bewas issued andin August 2020. In January 2021, a new pricing is expected to be established under MolDx for the Guardant360 CDx test. While we expect to continue to submit claims to Medicare for Guardant360 LDT clinical tests performed for such qualifying patients using the existing Z-Code Identifier, Medicare has instructed us to not submit claims to Medicare for Guardant360 CDx clinical tests until the new code is issued for the Guardant360 CDx test and the corresponding pricing is established. This new pricing for Guardant360 CDx

Use of coding for billing our products that does not describe a specific test, requires the claim to be examined to determine what test was provided, whether the test was appropriate and medically necessary, and whether payment should be rendered, which may require a letter of medical necessity from the ordering physician. This process can result in a delay in processing the claim, a lower reimbursement amount or denial of the claim. Because billing third-party payers for our tests is an unpredictable, challenging, time-consuming and costly process, we may face long collection cycles and the risk that we may never collect at all, either of which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition, and we may have to increase collection efforts and incur additional costs.

In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or the ACA, became law. This law substantially changed the way health care is financed by both commercial payers and government payers, and significantly impacted our industry. The ACA contains a number of provisions expected to impact existing state and federal health care programs or result in the development of new programs, including those governing enrollments in state and federal health care programs, reimbursement changes and fraud and abuse. Our business and operations could be affected by the ACA, including in ways we cannot currently predict.

Since its enactment, there have been efforts to repeal all or part of the ACA. On November 10, 2020,June 17, 2021 the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in California vs. Texas to determine whetherdismissed the entire ACA should be unenforceable nationwide or whether it should be unenforceable onlymost recent judicial challenge to the extent that provisions injureACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the individual plaintiffs. It is unclear howconstitutionality of the Supreme Court decision, and efforts to challenge, repeal or replaceACA. Thus, the ACA will impactremain in effect in its current form. Further, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through August 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or our business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to providers, by 2% per fiscal year, effective on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 20292032, unless additional Congressional action is taken.

We anticipate there will continue to be proposals by legislators at both the federal and state levels and in foreign jurisdictions, regulators and commercial and government payers to reduce healthcare costs while expanding individual healthcare benefits. Certain of these changes could impose additional limitations on the prices we will be able to charge for our tests, the coverage of or the amounts of reimbursement available for our tests from commercial and government payers.

The privacyglobal data protection landscape is rapidly evolving, and we are or may become subject to numerous state, federal and foreign laws, requirements and regulations governing the collection, use, disclosure, retention, and security of personally identifiable information stored, maintained, received or transmitted, including electronically, is a major issue in the United States and abroad.personal information. We collect, process, maintain, retain, evaluate, utilize and distribute large amounts of personal health and financial information and other confidential and sensitive data about our customers and others in the ordinary course of our business. Concerns about and claims challenging our practices with regard to the collection, use, retention, disclosure or security of personally identifiable information or other privacy-related matters, even if unfounded and even if we are in compliance with applicable laws, could damage our reputation and harm our business.

Numerous federal, state and foreign laws and regulations govern collection, dissemination, use and confidentiality of personally identifiable information and protected health information, or PHI, including HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, and regulations promulgated thereunder, or collectively, HIPAA; state privacy and confidentiality laws (including state laws requiring disclosure of breaches); federal and state consumer protection and employment laws; and European and other foreign data protection laws. And new privacy legislationImplementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future, and we cannot yet determine the impact future laws, regulations, standards, or perception of their requirements may have on our business. This evolution may create additional rights for consumersuncertainty in our business, affect our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions or to collect, store, transfer use and share personal information, necessitate the acceptance of more onerous obligations in our contracts, result in liability or impose additional requirementscosts on businesses. Asus. The cost of compliance with these laws, regulations and regulationsstandards is high and is likely to increase in complexitythe future. Any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with federal, state or foreign laws or regulation, our internal policies and number, they may change frequently, sometimes conflictprocedures or our contracts governing our processing of personal information could result in negative publicity, government investigations and increaseenforcement actions, claims by third parties and damage to our compliance efforts, costsreputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our operations, financial performance and risks.business.

HIPAA as amended by HITECH, establishes a set of national privacy and security standards for the protection of protected health information, or PHI, by health plans, certain healthcare providers and others that submit certain covered transactions electronically and healthcare clearinghouses, or ‘‘covered entities,’’ and their ‘‘business associates,’’ which are persons or entities that perform certain services for, or on behalf of, a covered entity that involve creating, receiving, maintaining or transmitting PHI. We are a covered entity under HIPAA and therefore must comply with its requirements to protect the privacy and security of health information and must provide individuals with certain rights with respect to their health information. If we engage a business associate to help us carry out healthcare activities and functions, we must have a written business associate contract or other arrangement with the business associate that establishes specifically what the business associate has been engaged to do and requires the business associate to comply with certain safeguards and other requirements under HIPAA.

Entities that are found to be in violation of HIPAA as the same requirements.

Further, various states, such as California and Massachusetts, have implemented similar privacy laws and regulations, such as the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, that impose restrictive requirements regulating the use and disclosure of health information and other personally identifiable information. Laws in all 50 states require businesses to provide notice to individuals whose personally identifiable information has been disclosed as a result of a data breach. The laws are not consistent, and compliance in the event of a widespread data breach is costly. States are also constantly amending existing laws, and creating new data privacy and security laws, requiring attention to frequently changing regulatory requirements. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act, which cameor CCPA went into effect on January 1, 2020, and creates newcertain data privacy rights for users,.California residents. The CCPA increases the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal information, and provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that has increased the likelihood of, and risks associated with data breach litigation. Further, the California Privacy Rights Act, or CPRA, generally went into effect in January 2023, and imposes additional data protection obligations on covered businesses, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It has also created a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. Additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. Similar laws have passed in Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, and Utah and have been proposed in other states and at the federal level, reflecting a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States. These laws and regulations are not necessarily preempted by HIPAA, particularly if a state affords greater protection to individuals than HIPAA. Where state laws are more protective, we may have to comply with the stricter provisions. In addition to fines and penalties imposed upon violators, some of these state laws also afford private rights of action to individuals who believe their personal information has been misused. The interplay of federal and state laws may be subject to varying interpretations by courts and government agencies, creating complex compliance issues for us and our clients, and potentially exposing us to additional expense, adverse publicity and liability. Further, as regulatory focus on privacy issues continues to increase and laws and regulations concerning the protection of personal information expand and become more complex, these potential risks to our business could intensify. Changes in laws or regulations associated with the enhanced protection of certain types of sensitive data, such as PHI, or personally identifiable information along with increased demands for enhanced data security infrastructure, could greatly increase our costs of providing our services, decrease demand for our services, reduce our revenue and/or subject us to additional risks.

In addition, the interpretation and application of consumer, health-related, and data protection laws, especially with respect to genetic samples and data, in the United States, the EU,European Economic Area, or EEA, and elsewhere are often uncertain, contradictory, and in flux. We and our joint ventures operate or may operate in a number of countries outside of the United States whose laws may in some cases be more stringent than the requirements in the United States. For example, EUEEA member countriesstates have specific requirements relating to cross-border transfers of personal data to certain jurisdictions, including to the United States where our laboratory resides. In addition, some countries have stricter consumer notice and/or consent requirements relating to personal data collection, use or sharing, more stringent requirements relating to organizations’ privacy programs and provide stronger individual rights. Moreover, international privacy and data security regulations may become more complex and have greater consequences. For instance, the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, went into effect in May 2018 and imposes stringent data protection requirements for controllers and processorsthe processing of personal data of persons within the EU.EEA. The GDPR applies to any company established in the EUEEA as well as to those outside the EUEEA if they collect and use personal data in connection with the offering of goods or services to individuals in the EUEEA or the monitoring of their behavior. The

We are also subject to evolving EU privacy laws on cookies and e-marketing. In the EEA, informed consent is required for the placement of a cookie or similar technologies on a user’s device and for direct electronic marketing. The GDPR also imposes conditions on obtaining valid consent, such as a prohibition on pre-checked consents and a requirement to identify an individual’s online behavior, and any such ePrivacy Regulation may provideensure separate consents are sought for new compliance obligations and significant penalties.each type of cookie or similar technology. Any of these changes to EU data protection law or its interpretation could disrupt and harm our business. We rely on a mixture of safeguards to transfer personal data from our EU business to the U.S., and could be impacted by changes in law as a result of a future review of these transfer mechanisms by European regulators or current challenges to these mechanisms in the European courts.

In addition the United Kingdom leaving the EU could also lead to further legislativegovernment regulation, privacy advocates and regulatory changes. It remains unclear how the United Kingdom data protection laws or regulations will developindustry groups have and may in the mediumfuture propose self-regulatory standards from time to longer termtime. These and how data transferother industry standards may legally or contractually apply to the United Kingdom from the EUus, or we may elect to comply with such standards. We expect that there will continue to be regulated, especially following the United Kingdom's departure from the EU on January 31, 2020 without a deal. However, the United Kingdom has transposed the GDPR into domestic law with the Data Protection Act 2018, which remains in force following the United Kingdom's departure from the EU.

We make public statements about our use and disclosure of personal information through our privacy policies, information provided on our website and press statements. Although we endeavor to comply with our public statements and documentation, we may at times fail to do so or be alleged to have failed to do so. The publication of our privacy policies and other statements that provide promises and assurances about data privacy and security can subject us to rapid changepotential government or legal action if they are found to be deceptive, unfair or misrepresentative of our actual practices. Any concerns about our data privacy and security practices, even if unfounded, could damage the reputation of our business and harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Although we work to comply with applicable laws, regulations and standards, our contractual obligations and other legal obligations, these requirements are evolving and may be modified, interpreted and applied in the current environmentan inconsistent manner from one jurisdiction to another, and may conflict with one another or other legal obligations with which we must comply. Any failure or perceived failure by us or our employees, representatives, contractors, consultants, collaborators, or other third parties to comply with such requirements or adequately address privacy and security concerns, even if unfounded, could result in additional cost and liability to us, damage our reputation, and adversely affect our business and results of healthcare reform. Federal, state and foreign enforcement bodies have increased their scrutiny of interactions between healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which has led to a number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry.operations.

Risks related to our intellectual property

We rely on patent protection as well as trademark, copyright, trade secret and other intellectual property rights protection and contractual restrictions to protect our proprietary technologies, all of which provide limited protection and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. If we fail to obtain, maintain and/or protect our intellectual property rights, third parties may be able to compete more effectively against us. In addition, we have incurred and may continue to incur substantial litigation costs in our attempts to recoverenforce or restrict the use of our intellectual property.property rights against third parties or defend ourselves against third parties claiming that we are infringing upon such third parties’ intellectual property rights.

To the extent our intellectual property rights offers inadequate protection, or is found to be invalid or unenforceable, we would be exposed to a greater risk of direct competition. If our intellectual property doesrights do not provide adequate

As is the case with other biotechnology companies, our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain, maintain and maintain protection ofprotect the intellectual property we own solely and may own jointly with others or we have licensed and may continue to license from others, particularly patents, in the United States and other countries with respect to our products and technologies.others. We apply for patents covering our products, services and technologies and uses thereof, as we deem appropriate. However, obtaining, maintaining and enforcing biotechnology patents is costly, time-consuming and complex, and wecomplex. We may fail to apply for patents on important products, services andor technologies in a timely fashion or at all, or we may fail to apply for patents in potentially relevant jurisdictions. We may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications, or maintain or enforce and license any patents that may issue from such patent applications, at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Patent prosecution process can be time-consuming and expensive. We may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the rights to patents licensed to us by third parties. Therefore, these patents and applications may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business.

We own or license numerous U.S. patents and pending U.S. patent applications, with international counterparts in certain countries. It is possible that our or our licensors’ pending patent applications will not result in issued patents in a timely fashion or at all, and even if patents are granted, they may not provide a basis for intellectual property protection of commercially viable products, services or services,technologies, may not provide us with any competitive advantages, or may be challenged and invalidated by third parties.parties and be invalidated or found unenforceable. It is possible that others will design around our current or future patented products, services or technologies. Some of such patent rights are being challenged, including at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, in post-grant proceedings, at the European Patent Office, or EPO, in opposition proceedings, and some of such patent rights may be challenged in the future. We may not be successful in defending any such challenges made against our owned or licensed patents or patent applications. Any successful third-party challenge to such patent rights could result in their unenforceability or invalidity and increased competition to our business. We have challenged and may choose to challenge the patents or patent applications of third parties. The outcome of patent litigationdisputes or other proceeding can be uncertain, and any attempt by us to enforce our patent rights against others or to challenge the patent rights of others may not be successful, or, if successful, may take substantial time and result in substantial cost, and may divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business.

The patent positions of life sciences companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions for which important legal principles remain unresolved. No consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in such companies’ patents has emerged to date in the United States or elsewhere. Courts frequently render opinions in the biotechnology field that may affect the patentability of certain inventions or discoveries, including opinions that may affect the patentability of methods for analyzing or comparing DNA sequences.

In particular, the patent positions of companies engaged in the development and commercialization of genomic diagnostic tests, like our current products and tests, and our future products, are particularly uncertain. Various courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have rendered decisions that affect the scope of patentability of certain inventions or discoveries relating to certain diagnostic tests and related methods. These decisions state, among other things, that a patent claim that recites an abstract idea, natural phenomenon or law of nature (for example, the relationship between particular genetic variants and cancer) are not themselves patentable. Precisely what constitutes a law of nature is uncertain, and it is possible that certain aspects of genetic diagnostics tests would be considered natural laws. Accordingly, the evolving legal and administrative standards around the world, including in the United States may adversely affect our ability to obtain patents and may facilitate third-party challenges to any owned or licensed patents. The laws of some foreign jurisdictions do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, and we may encounter difficulties in protecting and defending such rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of many foreign jurisdictions do not favor the enforcement of patent rights and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patent rights and other intellectual property rights thereunder. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights and other intellectual property protection in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial cost and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business.

Changes in either the patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States or other countries or regions may diminish the value of our intellectual property.property rights. We cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in our patents or in third-party patents. We may not develop additional proprietary products, services, methods and technologies that are patentable.

Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 16, 2013, in the United States, the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent. On or after March 16, 2013, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the America Invents Act, enacted in September 16, 2011, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO on or after March 16, 2013, but before us could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This will require us to be cognizant of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to our product candidates or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our or our licensor’s patents or patent applications.

We may not be aware of all third-party intellectual property rights potentially relating to our product candidates.products, services or technology. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until approximately 18 months after filing or, in some cases, not until such patent applications issue as patents. We, or our licensors, might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by each of our or our licensors’ pending patent applications and we, or our licensors, might not have been the first to file patent applications for these inventions. To determine the priority of theseour inventions, we have participated and may continue to participate in interference proceedings, derivation proceedings or other post-grant proceedings declared by the USPTO that could result in substantial cost to us. The outcome of such proceedings is uncertain. No assurance can be given that other patent applications will not have priority over our or our licensors’ patent applications. In addition, changes to the patent laws of the United States allow for various post-grant opposition proceedings that have not been extensively tested, and their outcome is therefore uncertain. Our licensors may also license patent rights to others, and we may not be aware of such licenses before they are granted or such licenses may be subject to disputes or uncertainties that affect patent rights licensed by us or could limit our ability to enforce such patent rights. If third

We and some of our licensors have initiated, are currently involved in, and may in the future initiate or become involved in legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our products. For example, we filed separate patent infringement suits against Foundation Medicine, Inc. (“Foundation Medicine”) alleging patent infringement related to our digital sequencingproducts, services or technology.

Defendants in such proceedings could counterclaim that the patents covering our productproducts, services or technology are invalid or unenforceable and could institute legal proceedings to challenge such patents both in court and before patent offices. For example, Foundation Medicine has asserted counterclaims of patent invalidity, unenforceability under the doctrine of inequitable conduct, and non-infringement. Foundation Medicine has also filed petition for post-grant review with the USPTO, challenging the patentability of certain patents asserted by us. If Foundation Medicine were to prevail, we would lose at least part of the patent protection on our products. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business. Any assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability against the patents covering our products, services or technology, even if not successful, could be time-consuming and expensive to defend, damage our reputation in the marketplace and the prospects for our business, and divert our management’s attention.

From time to time, we may identify third-party technology we may need, including those related to develop, manufacture or commercialize new products, services or technology. We are,may also need to negotiate agreements to in-license patents or other intellectual property rights from third parties before or after introducing a commercial products, service of technology, and we may acquire companies thatnot be able to obtain necessary licenses to such patents or other intellectual property rights. We are a party to various license agreements, including royalty-bearing license agreements, that grant us rights to use and practice certain intellectual property of third parties, including claims included in issued patents, and patent applications, typically in certain specified fields of use. We may need to obtain additional licenses from others to advance our research, development, manufacture and commercialization activities. We may be unable to enter into the necessary license agreements on acceptable terms or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In return for the use of a third party’s intellectual property rights, we may agree to pay the licensor royalties based on sales of our products, services or technology. Royalties are a component of cost of products, services or technology and affect the margins on our products, services or technology. If we are unable to negotiate reasonable royalties or if we have to pay royalties on technology that becomes less useful for us or ceases to provide value to us, our profit margin will be reduced and we may suffer losses.

Our license agreements impose, and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various development, diligence, commercialization and other obligations on us, including obligations to making payments to our licensors upon achievement of milestones.

In spite of our efforts, our licensors have asserted and may in the future assert that we have materially breached our obligations under such license agreements and could therefore seek or threaten to terminate the license agreements. If these licenses are terminated, or if the underlying patent rights fail to provide the intended exclusivity, our ability to develop, manufacture and commercialize products, services and technology covered by these license agreements would be limited or lost, and our competitors or other third parties might have the freedom to develop, produce, manufacture, seek regulatory approval of, or to market, products, services or technology identical or similar to ours and we may be required to cease our development, andmanufacture and/or commercialization activities.activities in connection with our products, services and/or technology. Our actual or potential licensors could take action with respect to our licensed intellectual property that may decrease the value of such licensed intellectual property. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, disputes could arise with respect to any aspect of our license agreements, including:

If we do not prevail in such disputes, we may lose the rights under any of such license agreements, the license agreements may not be meaningful for our business and operations, and we may be subject to unnecessary or additional payment obligations.

In addition, the agreements under which we currently license intellectual property or technology from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements could be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any such contract interpretation disagreement could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over licensed intellectual property impair our ability to enforce licensed intellectual property against third parties or use it to defend ourselves in litigation, the value of such licensed intellectual property may be diminished.

If we fail to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop, manufacture and commercialize the affected product, candidates,product candidate, service or technology, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If any of these license agreements is terminated, if the licensor fails to abide by the terms of the license agreement, if the licensor fails to prevent infringement byenforce its intellectual property rights licensed to us against third parties that infringe upon such intellectual property rights, or if the licensed patent or other rights are found to be invalid or unenforceable, ourwe may be unable to achieve our business goals and our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected. Absent the license agreements, we could infringe patents and other intellectual property rights of the licensors subject to those agreements, and if the license agreements are terminated, we may be subject to litigation by the licensor. Litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management. If we do not prevail, we may be required to pay damages, including treble damages, attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses, royalties or, be enjoined from selling our products, services or services,technology, including our tests, which could adversely affect our ability to offer products, services or services,technology, our ability to continue operations and our financial condition.

If we cannot license and maintainAny intellectual property rights to use third-party technology on reasonable terms, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our products. Our licensed or acquired technology may lose value or utility or over time.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents onand other intellectual property rights covering our products, services and servicestechnology in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some territories outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries and regions do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, and we may encounter difficulties in protecting and defending such rights in foreign jurisdictions. Consequently, we may not be able to

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of many other countries and regions do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents and other intellectual property rights in such jurisdictions. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights and other intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial cost and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded to us, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage.

In addition to pursuing patents oncovering our products, services and technology, we take steps to protect our intellectual property and proprietary technology by entering into agreements, including confidentiality agreements,and non-disclosure agreements with those that have access to our confidential and intellectual propertyproprietary information including employees, independent contractors, academic institutions, corporate partners and our advisers, and invention assignment agreements with our employees consultants, academic institutions, corporate partnersand independent contractors, and when needed, our advisers. However, we cannot be certain that such agreements have been entered into with all relevant parties, and we cannot be certain that our trade secrets and other proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. For example, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Such agreements may not be enforceable or may not provide meaningful protection for our trade secrets or other proprietary information in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure or other breaches of the agreements, and we may not be able to prevent such unauthorized use or disclosure. If we are required to assert our rights against such party, it could result in significant cost and distraction.

Monitoring unauthorized use or disclosure is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to prevent such use or disclosure are, or will be, adequate. If we were to enforce a claim that a third party had illegally obtained and was using our trade secrets, it would be expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome would be unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the United States may be less willing to protect trade secrets.

We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our proprietary information by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems, but it is possible that these security measures could be breached. If any of our confidential proprietary information were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, absent patent protection, we would have no right to prevent such competitor from using that technology or information to compete with us, which could harm our competitive position.

We have employed or engaged and expect to employ or engage individuals who were previously employed at or associated with universities or other companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees consultants and independent contractors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that our employees consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers or other third parties, or to claims that we have improperly used or obtained such trade secrets. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we lose, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may be deprived of valuable intellectual property and face increased competition. A loss of

We have not yet registered trademarks in all of our potential markets, although we have registered Guardant Health, Guardant360 and GuardantOMNI in the United States. If we apply to register additional trademarks in the United States and other countries, our applications may not be allowed for registration in a timely fashion or at all, and our registered trademarks may not be maintained or enforced. In addition, opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademark applications and registrations, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. If we do not timely register and enforce marks used in connection with our products, services or services,technology, we may encounter difficulty in enforcing them against third parties, and if these marks are registered by others, we could infringe such trademarks.trademarks and may have to defend ourselves to continue the use of our trademarks, which may be time consuming and costly, and we may be unsuccessful.

We or our licensors may be subject to claims that former employees, independent contractors, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in or right to our owned or licensed patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property. For example, we or our licensors may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of employees, consultantsindependent contractors or others who are involved in developing such intellectual property. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership of our owned or licensed patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property. If we or our licensors fail in defending against any such claims, we may lose exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in damage to our reputation and substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We have been, are currently in, and may also in the future be, involved with litigation or USPTO actions with various third parties. We expect that the number of such claims may increase as the number of our products or services grows, and the level of competition in our industry segments increases. Any infringement claim, regardless of its validity, could harm our business by, among other things, resulting in time-consuming and costly litigation, diverting management’s time and attention from the development of our business, or requiring the payment of monetary damages (including treble damages, attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses if we are found to have willfully infringed) and ongoing royalties.

Litigation may be necessary for us to enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights or to determine the scope, coverage and validity of the intellectual property and proprietary rights of others. We are currently engaged in lawsuits against Foundation Medicine, Inc. for infringement over some of our patents and in proceedings before the USPTO in relation to certain such patents. The outcome of such lawsuits, as well as any other litigation or proceeding, is inherently uncertain and might not be favorable to us. Further, we could encounter delays in product introductions or interruptions in the development, manufacture or sale of products, services or services,technologies, as we develop alternative products, services or services.technologies. In addition, if we resort to legal proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights (as we have against Foundation Medicine, Inc.) or to determine the validity, scope and coverage of the intellectual property or other proprietary rights of others, the proceedings could be burdensome and expensive, even if we were to prevail. If we do not prevail in such legal proceedings, we may be required to pay damages, and we may lose significant intellectual property protection for our products, services or services,technologies, such that competitors could copy our products, services or services.technologies. Any litigation that may be necessary in the future could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results or financial condition.

As we move into new markets and applications for our products, services or services,technologies, incumbent participants in such markets may assert their patents and other intellectual property or proprietary rights against us as a means of slowing our entry into such markets or as a means to extract substantial license and royalty payments from us. As our business matures and our public profile grows, we may also be subject to an increased number of allegations of patent or other intellectual property infringement, whether by our competitors or other patent owners,third parties, both in the United States and throughout the world

Third parties have asserted and may in the future assert that we are employing their proprietary technology or trade secrets without authorization. For instance, Foundation Medicine,TwinStrand Biosciences, Inc. and the University of Washington filed a lawsuit for patent infringement against us in May 2016, which we settledAugust 2021 and a jury verdict was entered against us in July 2018.November 2023. We are also aware of issued U.S. patents and patent applications with claims related to our products and services, and there may be other related third-party patents or patent applications of which we are not aware. By interacting with us, our licensors may learn more about our business or technology and could assert additional patent rights against us, such as patent rights that are not currently licensed to us or patent rights that may be obtained by any such licensors in the future, which may occur if such patent rights are not available for licensing or if they are not offered on acceptable or commercially reasonable terms. Because patent applications can take many years to issue and are not publicly available until a certain period of time passes from filing, there may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that our current or future products, and services or technologies may infringe. In addition, similar to what other companies in our industry have experienced, we expect our competitors and others may develop or obtain patents with our products, services or servicestechnologies in mind and claim that making, having made, using, selling, offering to sell or importing our products, services or servicestechnologies infringes these patents.

We could incur substantial costs and divert the attention of our management and technical personnel in defending against any of these claims. Parties making claims against us may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can, for example, because they have substantially greater resources.

Parties making claims against us may be able to obtain injunctive or other relief, which could block our ability to develop, manufacture, commercialize, sell and sellimport certain products, services or services,technologies, and could result in the award of substantial damages against us, including treble damages, attorney’s fees, costs and expenses if we are found to have willfully infringed. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may be required to pay damages and ongoing royalties, and obtain one or more licenses from third parties, or be prohibited from developing, manufacturing, commercializing, selling and importing certain products, services or services.technologies. We may not be able to obtain these licenses on acceptable or commercially reasonable terms, if at all, or these licenses may be non-exclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. In addition, we could encounter delays in product, service or servicetechnologies introductions while we attempt to develop alternative products, services or servicestechnologies to avoid infringing third-party patents or proprietary rights. Defense of any lawsuit or failure to obtain any of these licenses could prevent us from developing, manufacturing or commercializing products, services or services,technologies and the prohibition of saledeveloping, manufacturing or commercializing of any of our products, services or servicestechnologies could materially affect our business and our ability to gain market acceptance for our products, services or services.technologies.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. In addition, during the course of this kind of litigation, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States at several stages over the lifetime of the patents and/or applications. We have systems in place to remind us to pay these fees, and we rely on our outside counsel to pay these fees due to non-U.S. patent agencies. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar requirements during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or forfeiture of the patent or patent application and thus loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Such an event would allow our competitors to enter the unprotected market and have a material adverse effect on our business.

Risks related to our common stock and indebtedness

The market price of our common stock has been volatile and may fluctuate substantially in the future due to many factors, including:

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. These sales, or the perception in the market that the holders of a large number of shares intend to sell their shares, could result in a decrease in the market price of our common stock.

In recent years, the stock markets generally have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. Broad market and industry factors may significantly affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. In addition, in the past, class action litigation has often been instituted against companies whose securities have experienced periods of volatility in market price. Securities litigation brought against us following volatility in our stock price, regardless of the merit or ultimate results of such litigation, could result in substantial costs, which would hurt our financial condition and operating results and divert management’s attention and resources from our business.

In 2020, we sold $1,150,000,000 aggregate principal amount of 0% convertible senior notes due 2027, or the 2027 Notes. We may also incur additional indebtedness to meet future needs. Our indebtedness could have significant negative consequences for our security holders, business, results of operations and financial condition by, among other things:

Our business may not generate sufficient funds, and we may otherwise be unable to maintain sufficient cash reserves, to pay amounts due under the 2027 Notes or any additional indebtedness that we may incur. In addition, the 2027 Notes contain, and any future indebtedness that we may incur may contain, financial and other restrictive covenants that limit our ability to operate our business, raise capital or make payments under our indebtedness. If we fail to comply with these covenants or to make payments under our indebtedness when due, then we would be in default under that indebtedness, which could, in turn, result in that indebtedness becoming immediately payable in full.

In the event the conditional conversion feature of the 2027 Notes is triggered, holders of the 2027 Notes will be entitled to convert their 2027 Notes into shares of our common stock upon the occurrence of certain events. If one or more holders of the 2027 Notes elect to convert their 2027 Notes, unless we satisfy our conversion obligation by delivering only shares of our common stock, we would be required to settle all or a portion of our conversion obligation through the payment of cash, which could adversely affect our financial condition. In the event the

In connection with the sale of the 2027 Notes, we entered into convertible note hedge, or the 2027 Note Hedge, transactions with certain financial institutions, or option counterparties. The 2027 Note Hedge transactions are expected generally to reduce the potential dilution upon any conversion of the 2027 Notes and/or offset any cash payments we are required to make in excess of the principal amount of converted 2027 Notes.

The option counterparties and/or their respective affiliates may modify their hedge positions by entering into or unwinding various derivatives with respect to our common stock and/or purchasing or selling our common stock in secondary market transactions prior to the maturity of the 2027 Notes (and are likely to do so during any observation period related to a conversion of the Notes, or following any repurchase of the 2027 Notes by us on any fundamental change repurchase date (as provided in the indenture governing the 2027 Notes) or otherwise). This activity could also cause or avoid an increase or a decrease in the market price of our common stock or the 2027 Notes, which could affect note holders’ ability to convert the 2027 Notes and, to the extent the activity occurs during any observation period related to a conversion of the 2027 Notes, it could affect the amount and value of the consideration that note holders will receive upon conversion of the 2027 Notes.

The option counterparties are financial institutions, and we will be subject to the risk that any or all of them may default under the 2027 Note Hedge transactions. Our exposure to the credit risk of the option counterparties will not be secured by any collateral. If an option counterparty becomes subject to insolvency proceedings, we will become an unsecured creditor in those proceedings, with a claim equal to our exposure at that time under our transactions with that option counterparty. Our exposure will depend on many factors but, generally, an increase in our exposure will be correlated to an increase in the market price and in the volatility of our common stock. In addition, upon a default by an option counterparty, we may suffer adverse tax consequences and more dilution than we currently anticipate with respect to our common stock. We can provide no assurances as to the financial stability or viability of the option counterparties.

Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control of us that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which our stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares. These provisions could also limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock, thereby depressing the market price of our common stock. In addition, these provisions may make it more difficult for our stockholders to replace current members of our board of directors or add new members thereto. Because our board of directors is responsible for appointing the members of our management team, these

Moreover, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which prohibits a person who owns in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with us for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person acquired in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock, unless the merger or combination is approved in a prescribed manner. Furthermore, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation specifies that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for most legal actions involving actions brought against us by stockholders; provided that, the exclusive forum provision will not apply to suits brought to enforce any liability or duty created by the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction; and provided further that, if and only if the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware dismisses any such action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, such action may be brought in another state or federal court sitting in the State of Delaware. We believe these provisions may benefit us by providing increased consistency in the application of Delaware law by Delaware courts, particularly experienced in resolving corporate disputes, efficient administration of cases on a more expedited schedule relative to other forums and protection against the burdens of multi-forum litigation. However, these provisions may have the effect of discouraging lawsuits brought against us and our directors and officers by our stockholders. The enforceability of similar choice of forum provisions in other companies’ certificates of incorporation has been challenged in legal proceedings, and it is possible that, in connection with any applicable action brought against us, a court could find the choice of forum provisions contained in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in such action.

We may consider raising additional capital in the future to expand our business, to meet existing obligations, to pursue acquisitions or strategic investments, to take advantage of financing opportunities or for other reasons, including to:

We may seek to sell equity or convertible securities, enter into a credit facility or another form of third-party funding, or seek other debt financing. The various ways we could raise additional capital carry potential risks. If we raise funds by issuing equity or convertible securities, dilution to our stockholders could result. Any preferred equity securities issued also could provide for rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. If we raise funds by issuing debt securities, those debt securities would have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. The terms of debt securities issued or borrowings pursuant to a credit agreement could impose significant restrictions on our operations. If we raise funds through collaborations and licensing arrangements, we might be required to relinquish significant rights to our platform technologies or products or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. These alternatives of raising additional capital may not be available to us on acceptable or commercially reasonable terms, if at all, or in amounts sufficient to meet our needs. The failure to obtain any required future financing may require us to reduce or curtail existing operations and could contribute to negative market perceptions about us or our securities.

Pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC, we are required to furnish in this Annual Report on Form 10-K a report by our management regarding the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. The report includes, among other things, an assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of the end of our fiscal year, including a statement as to whether or not our internal control over financial reporting is effective. This assessment must include disclosure of any material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting identified by management. While we believe our internal control over financial reporting is currently effective, the effectiveness of our internal controls in future periods is subject to the risk that our controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions. Establishing, testing and maintaining an effective system of internal control over financial reporting requires significant resources and time commitments on the part of our management and our finance staff, may require additional staffing and infrastructure investments and would increase our costs of doing business.

In addition, under the federal securities laws, our auditors are required to express an opinion on the effectiveness of our internal controls. If we are unable to confirm that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to express an opinion on the effectiveness of our internal controls, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, which could cause the price of our common stock to decline.

We are subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. We designed our disclosure controls and procedures to provide reasonable assurance that information we must disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated, communicated to management, recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. We believe that any disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well-conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other misconduct by our employees, principal investigators, consultants and commercial partners. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional failures to comply with the regulations of the FDA, CMS and non-U.S. regulators, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing, and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Such misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical studies, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. We currently have a code of conduct applicable to all of our employees, but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and our code of conduct and the other precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses, or in protecting us from governmental investigations, lawsuits or other actions stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could result in the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including, without limitation, damages, monetary fines, individual imprisonment, disgorgement of profits, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs or from coverage of commercial payers, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and

The marketing, sale and use of our products could lead to the filing of product liability claims were someone to allege that our products identified inaccurate or incomplete information regarding the genomic alterations of the tumor or malignancy analyzed, reported inaccurate or incomplete information concerning the available therapies for a certain type of cancer, or otherwise failed to perform as designed. We may also be subject to professional liability for errors in, a misunderstanding of, or inappropriate reliance upon, the information we provide in the ordinary course of our business activities. A product liability or professional liability claim could result in substantial damages and be costly and time-consuming for us to defend.

We maintain product and professional liability insurance, but this insurance may not fully protect us from the financial impact of defending against product liability or professional liability claims. Any product liability or professional liability claim brought against us, with or without merit, could increase our insurance rates or prevent us from securing insurance coverage in the future. Additionally, any product liability or professional liability lawsuit could damage our reputation or cause current clinical customers to terminate existing agreements with us and potential clinical customers to seek other partners, any of which could adversely impact our results of operations.

In the ordinary course of our business, we collect and store sensitive data, including PHI and other personal information, credit card and other financial information, intellectual property and proprietary business information owned or controlled by us or other parties such as customers and payers. We manage and maintain our applications and data utilizing a combination of on-site systems and cloud-based data centers. We utilize external security and infrastructure vendors to manage parts of our data centers. We also communicate sensitive data, including patient data, through phone, Internet, facsimile, multiple third-party vendors and their subcontractors. We depend on information technology systems, and any failure of these systems could harm our business.

The costs of attempting to protect against the foregoing risks and the costs of responding to a cyber-attackcyberattack are significant. Large scale data breaches at other entities increase the challenge we and our vendors face in maintaining the security of our information technology systems and of our customers’ sensitive information. Following a cyber-attack,cyberattack, our and/or our vendors’ remediation efforts may not be successful, and a cyber-attackcyberattack could result in interruptions, delays or cessation of service, and loss of existing or potential customers. In addition, breaches of our and/or our vendors’ security measures and the unauthorized dissemination of sensitive personal information or proprietary information or confidential information about us, our customers or other third-parties, could expose our customers' private information and our customers to the risk of financial or medical identity theft, or expose us or other third parties to a risk of loss or misuse of this information, and result in investigations, regulatory enforcement actions, material fines and penalties, loss of customers, litigation or other actions which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, reputation, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, if we fail to adhere to our privacy policy and other published statements or applicable laws concerning our processing, use, transmission and disclosure of protected information, or if our statements or practices are found to be deceptive or misrepresentative, we could face regulatory actions, fines and other liability.