We have entered into several long-term supply agreements, under which we have made advance payments and have $1.58 billion remaining unpaid. As of January 30, 2022, we had outstanding inventory purchase and long-term supply obligations totaling $9.00 billion, inclusive of the $1.58 billion, and other purchase obligations totaling $1.30 billion.

In connection with certain agreements that we have entered in the past, we have provided indemnities for matters such as tax, product, and employee liabilities. We have included IP indemnification provisions in our technology related agreements with third parties. Maximum potential future payments cannot be estimated because many of these agreements do not have a maximum stated liability. We have not recorded any liability for such indemnifications.

The plaintiffs in the putative securities class action lawsuit, captioned 4:18-cv-07669-HSG, initially filed on December 21, 2018 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, and titled In Re NVIDIA Corporation Securities Litigation, filed an amended complaint on May 13, 2020. The amended complaint asserted that NVIDIA and certain NVIDIA executives violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and SEC Rule 10b-5, by making materially false or misleading statements related to channel inventory and the impact of cryptocurrency mining on GPU demand between May 10, 2017 and November 14, 2018. Plaintiffs also alleged that the NVIDIA executives who they named as defendants violated Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. Plaintiffs sought class certification, an award of unspecified compensatory damages, an award of reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees and expert fees, and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. On March 2, 2021, the district court granted NVIDIA’s motion to dismiss the complaint without leave to amend, entered judgment in favor of NVIDIA and closed the case. On March 30, 2021, plaintiffs filed an appeal from judgment in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, case number 21-15604. Oral argument is scheduled for May 10, 2022.

The putative derivative lawsuit pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, captioned 4:19-cv-00341-HSG, initially filed January 18, 2019 and titled In re NVIDIA Corporation Consolidated Derivative Litigation, was stayed pending resolution of the plaintiffs’ appeal in the In Re NVIDIA Corporation Securities Litigation action. On February 22, 2022, the court administratively closed the case, but stated that it would reopen the case once the appeal in the In Re NVIDIA Corporation Securities Litigation action is resolved. The lawsuit asserts claims, purportedly on behalf of us, against certain officers and directors of the Company for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, waste of corporate assets, and violations of Sections 14(a), 10(b), and 20(a) of the Exchange Act based on the dissemination of allegedly false and misleading statements related to channel inventory and the impact of cryptocurrency mining on GPU demand. The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages and other relief, including reforms and improvements to NVIDIA’s corporate governance and internal procedures.

The putative derivative actions initially filed September 24, 2019 and pending in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, Lipchitz v. Huang, et al. (Case No. 1:19-cv-01795-UNA) and Nelson v. Huang, et. al. (Case No. 1:19-cv-01798- UNA), remain stayed pending resolution of the plaintiffs’ appeal in the In Re NVIDIA Corporation Securities Litigation action. The lawsuits assert claims, purportedly on behalf of us, against certain officers and directors of the Company for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, insider trading, misappropriation of information, corporate waste and violations of Sections 14(a), 10(b), and 20(a) of the Exchange Act based on the dissemination of allegedly false, and misleading statements related to channel inventory and the impact of cryptocurrency mining on GPU demand. The plaintiffs seek unspecified damages and other relief, including disgorgement of profits from the sale of NVIDIA stock and unspecified corporate governance measures.

As of January 30, 2022, we have not recorded any accrual for contingent liabilities associated with the legal proceedings described above based on our belief that liabilities, while possible, are not probable. Further, except as specifically described above, any possible loss or range of loss in these matters cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. We are engaged in legal actions not described above arising in the ordinary course of business and, while there can be no assurance of favorable outcomes, we believe that the ultimate outcome of these actions will not have a material adverse effect on our operating results, liquidity or financial position.