On May 14, 2021, a putative class action (the “Plymouth Action”) was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “District Court”) against the Company and certain officers and directors alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Rule 10b-5, promulgated thereunder, and Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). On June 30, 2021, a substantially similar second putative class action was filed in the Southern District of New York against the Company and certain officers and directors alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5, promulgated thereunder, and Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act, which was consolidated with the Plymouth Action. A consolidated amended class action complaint was filed on December 7, 2021.

All defendants in the Plymouth Action, including the Company, moved to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. On May 19, 2023, the court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss and, on July 5, 2023, denied a request from the Plymouth Action plaintiffs for leave to amend the consolidated amended complaint and dismissed the Plymouth Action in its entirety with prejudice. On August 4, 2023, the lead plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal of the court’s dismissal of the consolidated amended complaint to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. After full briefing, the court of appeals heard oral argument on June 26, 2024. On March 24, 2026, the Second Circuit issued a summary order affirming the District Court's dismissal of the Plymouth Action with prejudice.

On July 16, 2021, a verified derivative complaint was filed in the Southern District of New York against certain officers and directors of the Company. The complaint alleged: (i) violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act for misleading proxy statements; (ii) breach of fiduciary duty; (iii) unjust enrichment; (iv) abuse of control; (v) gross mismanagement; (vi) corporate waste; (vii) aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty; and (viii) contribution under Sections 10(b) and 21D of the Exchange Act.

On July 30, 2021, a second verified derivative complaint was filed in the Southern District of New York against certain officers and directors of the Company. The complaint alleged: (i) violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act for causing the issuance of a false/misleading proxy statement; (ii) breach of fiduciary duty; and (iii) aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty.

On August 24, 2021, the Southern District of New York derivative actions were consolidated, and the court appointed co-lead counsel. On April 28, 2026, the District Court entered a stipulation and order submitted by the parties voluntarily dismissing the New York derivative action in light of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ affirmance of the dismissal of the Plymouth Action with prejudice.

On August 3, 2022, a verified derivative complaint was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against certain officers and directors of the Company, asserting claims for: (i) breach of fiduciary duty; and (ii) unjust enrichment. The derivative plaintiff in this action seeks: an award of compensatory damages in favor of

the Company; restitution from the defendants and disgorgement of profits, benefits, and other compensation obtained by the defendants; an order directing the Company to reform its corporate governance and internal procedures; equitable or injunctive relief as permitted by law and equity; and the costs and disbursements of the action, including attorneys’ fees.

On August 11, 2022, a second verified derivative complaint was filed with the Court of Chancery against certain officers and directors of the Company, asserting claims for: (i) breach of fiduciary duty; (ii) aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty; (iii) waste of corporate assets; (iv) unjust enrichment; (v) insider selling; and (vi) aiding and abetting insider selling. The derivative plaintiff in this action seeks: declaratory relief; an award of compensatory damages in favor of the Company; disgorgement of profits obtained from certain sales of Company stock by certain of the defendants; establishment of a constructive trust over certain amounts obtained by certain of the defendants; and the costs and disbursements of the action, including attorneys’ fees.

On September 16, 2025, Sterling & Wilson Solar Solutions Inc. (“SWSS”) served an arbitration demand (the “Demand”) on the Company asserting contractual and negligence claims purportedly arising out of the Company’s provision of goods for use in a solar project in Bickleton, Washington. The Company filed its Answer on October 30, 2025, and asserted defenses, including that (i) SWSS’s claims are barred by applicable contractual limitations provisions and statutes of limitations, and (ii) are otherwise unsupported. In February 2026, SWSS filed a statement of claims and damages, specifying that it is seeking contractual damages from the Company, and further adding a claim seeking indemnification by the Company for any damages incurred by SWSS relating to counterclaims brought against SWSS in another litigation concerning the same solar project. The Company is not a party to that litigation. The amount of potential damages to SWSS, if any, is unknown because the Company understands the underlying litigation to be in its early and preliminary stages. On March 5, 2026, the Company sought leave to file a dispositive motion concerning all of SWSS’ claims. On March 24, 2026, that request was denied, but the arbitration panel noted that it would consider additional requests at a later date. On April 29, 2026, the parties requested that the panel stay the arbitration pending the resolution of the underlying litigation. The Company is vigorously defending the arbitration.

The Company is party to various other legal proceedings, claims, governmental and/or regulatory inspections, inquiries and investigations arising out of the ordinary course of its business. The Company believes that there are no other proceedings or claims pending against it, the ultimate resolution of which could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations. In all cases, at each reporting period, the Company evaluates whether or not a potential loss amount or a potential range of loss is probable and reasonably estimable under ASC 450, Contingencies (ASC 450). Legal costs are expensed as incurred. It is possible that future results for any particular quarter or annual period may be materially affected by changes in our assumption or the effectiveness of the Company’s strategies relating to these proceedings.

Concurrent with the Former Parent’s acquisition of Array Technologies Patent Holdings Co., LLC on July 8, 2016, the Company’s operating subsidiary, Array Tech, Inc. (f/k/a Array Technologies, Inc.), entered into a tax receivable agreement (the “TRA”) with the former majority stockholder of Array Tech, Inc. The TRA is valued based on the future expected payments under the agreement. The TRA provides for the payment by Array Tech, Inc., to the former owners for certain federal, state, local and non-U.S. tax benefits deemed realized in post-closing taxable periods by Array Tech, Inc., from the use of certain deductions generated by the increase in the tax value of the developed technology. The TRA is accounted for as contingent consideration and subsequent changes in fair value of the contingent liability are recognized in contingent consideration on the condensed consolidated statements of operations. As of March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025, the fair value of the TRA was $5.8 million and $8.3 million, respectively.

Estimating the amount of payments that may be made under the TRA is by nature imprecise. The significant fair value inputs used to estimate the future expected TRA payments to the former owners include the timing of tax payments, a discount rate, book income projections, timing of expected adjustments to calculate taxable income and the projected rate of use for attributes defined in the TRA.

Payments made under the TRA consider tax positions taken by the Company and are due within 125 days following the filing of the Company’s U.S. federal and state income tax returns under procedures described in the agreement. The current portion of the TRA liability is based on tax returns. The TRA will continue until all tax benefit payments have been made or the Company elects early termination under the terms described in the TRA.

As discussed in Note 3 – Acquisition, the Purchase Agreement includes an earnout provision pursuant to which Seller may be granted shares of the Company’s common stock, or equivalent cash value at the Buyer’s discretion, based upon APA’s achievement of certain financial performance targets during the three-year period ending September 30, 2028 (the “Earnout Consideration”). The maximum number of shares payable as Earnout Consideration is 4,686,530 shares of common stock, which was determined by dividing $40 million by the volume weighted average price of the Company’s common stock for the 10 trading days immediately following the Closing Date. The number of shares payable will be subject to reduction if the cumulative value of the Earnout Consideration earned (measured on each date such shares are issued) exceeds $90 million. The Purchase Agreement provides that, to the extent the issuance of any Earnout Consideration or Deferred

Upon the Closing Date, the Earnout Consideration was accounted for as contingent consideration, and the fair value is estimated each reporting period. As of March 31, 2026, the Earnout Consideration was estimated to have a fair value of approximately $16.4 million using a Monte-Carlo simulation method. Changes in fair value of the contingent liability are recognized in Change in fair value of contingent consideration in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. Estimating the amount of payments that may be made under the Earnout Consideration is by nature imprecise. The significant fair value inputs used to estimate the future expected Earnout Consideration payments to Seller include a discount rate, earnings forecasts, and actual and estimated future volatility in the Company’s stock price.

The Company is required to provide surety bonds to various parties as required for certain transactions initiated during the ordinary course of business to guarantee the Company’s performance in accordance with contractual or legal obligations. These off-balance sheet arrangements do not adversely impact the Company’s liquidity or capital resources. As of March 31, 2026, the Company had surety bonds outstanding in the total amount of $230.8 million.