Our business is subject to the risk of litigation and arbitration involving employees, consumers, suppliers, competitors, shareholders, government agencies, or others through private actions, class actions, derivative actions, governmental investigations, administrative proceedings, regulatory actions, mass arbitration or other similar actions. In addition, due to the types of products that we store and sell, our operations are subject to regulatory oversight by the FDA, the USDA, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration, and other federal, state, local and applicable foreign governmental authorities. If such authorities believe that we have failed to comply with applicable regulations and/or procedures, they may require prompt corrective action, and/or proceed directly to other forms of enforcement action, including the imposition of operating restrictions, including a ceasing of operations in one or more facilities, enjoining and restraining certain violations of applicable law pertaining to products, seizure of products, and assessing civil or criminal sanctions or penalties. Any adverse regulatory action, depending on its magnitude, may restrict us from effectively selling our products and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and/or results of operations. From January 11, 2022 through February 11, 2022, DC 202 was inspected by the FDA and USDA. On February 11, 2022, the FDA issued Form 483 observations primarily regarding rodent infestation at DC 202, as well as other items that require remediation. In connection therewith, we initiated the Recall, temporarily closed DC 202 for extensive cleaning, temporarily closed the affected stores to permit the removal and destruction of inventory subject to the Recall, ceased sales of relevant inventory subject to the Recall, committed to the FDA to continue to cease the shipment of FDA-regulated products from DC 202 until FDA approval is received, and initiated corrective actions at DC 202 intended to ensure that these issues will not recur when shipment of FDA-regulated products recommences. If the FDA and/or other governmental authorities are not satisfied with these corrective actions or observe issues in our other distribution centers or stores, they may initiate other enforcement or administrative actions, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and/or results of operations. Also see “We may stop selling or recall certain products for safety-related issues” on page 13. We have received the following class action complaints related to issues associated with DC 202 (and anticipate additional lawsuits of a similar nature): On February 22, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the Circuit Court of Pope County, Arkansas, alleging various causes of action on behalf of the citizens of Arkansas who purchased “contaminated products” covered by the Recall from January 1, 2021 through the date of such Recall. Plaintiffs seek restitution, disgorgement, damages, attorney fees, costs and expenses, punitive damages and such further relief (in each case in unspecified amounts), as the Court deems just and proper. On February 23, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Northern Division, alleging various causes of action related to the sale of products that may be contaminated by virtue of a rodent infestation and other unsanitary conditions in stores throughout Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Missouri and Tennessee. Plaintiffs seek damages, attorney fees and costs, punitive damages and the replacement of, or refund of money paid to purchase the relevant products, and any other legal relief available for their claims (in each case in unspecified amounts), including equitable and injunctive relief. On February 25, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, on behalf of all persons who purchased products subject to the Recall (with a subclass for all persons residing in the State of Tennessee who purchased products subject to the Recall), alleging breach of the implied warranty of merchantability and unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs seek restitution, damages, interest, punitive damages, attorney fees, costs and expenses, and such further relief (in each case in unspecified amounts), as the Court deems just and equitable. On March 2, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, alleging various causes of action related to the sale of products that may be contaminated by virtue of rodent infestation and other unsanitary conditions in stores throughout Louisiana, Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama, Missouri and Tennessee. Plaintiffs seek damages, attorney fees and costs, punitive damages and the replacement of, or refund of money paid to purchase the relevant products, and any other legal relief available for their claims (in each case in unspecified amounts), including equitable and injunctive relief. On March 4, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, alleging various causes of action related to the sale of products that may be contaminated by virtue of rodent infestation and other unsanitary conditions in stores throughout Tennessee, Louisiana, Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama, and Missouri. Plaintiffs seek damages, attorney fees and costs, punitive damages and the replacement of, or refund of money paid to purchase the relevant products, and any other legal relief available for their claims (in each case in unspecified amounts), including equitable and injunctive relief. On March 7, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, alleging various causes of action related to the sale of products that may be contaminated by virtue of rodent infestation and other unsanitary conditions in stores throughout Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Missouri. Plaintiffs seek damages, attorney fees and costs, punitive damages and the replacement of, or refund of money paid to purchase the relevant products, and any other legal relief available for their claims (in each case in unspecified amounts), including equitable and injunctive relief. On March 8, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, alleging various causes of action related to the sale of products that may be contaminated by virtue of rodent infestation and other unsanitary conditions in stores throughout Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Tennessee. Plaintiffs seek damages, attorney fees and costs, punitive damages and the replacement of, or refund of money paid to purchase the relevant products, and any other legal relief available for their claims (in each case in unspecified amounts), including equitable and injunctive relief. On March 10, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Delta Division, alleging various causes of action related to the sale of products that may be contaminated by virtue of rodent infestation and other unsanitary conditions in stores throughout Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee and Missouri. Plaintiffs seek damages, attorney fees and costs, punitive damages and the replacement of, or refund of money paid to purchase the relevant products, and any other legal relief available for their claims (in each case in unspecified amounts), including equitable and injunctive relief. On March 10, 2022, a proposed class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, Memphis Division, on behalf of all persons who purchased products subject to the Recall (with a subclass for all persons residing in the State of Tennessee who purchased products subject to the Recall), alleging breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, and unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs seek refunds of unjust benefits, damages, interest, punitive damages, attorney fees, costs and expenses, and such further relief (in each case in unspecified amounts), as the Court deems just and equitable. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves in the foregoing (and any similar) litigations. Although we have recently received the complaints, we do not believe that any of them will, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition. However, we cannot assure that these litigations, individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations for the period or year in which they are reserved or resolved. On March 1, 2022, a federal grand jury subpoena was issued to us by the Eastern District of Arkansas requesting the production of information, documents and records pertaining to pests, sanitation and compliance with law regarding certain of our procedures and products. We intend to cooperate fully with the subpoena and any related investigation, however, no assurance can be given as to the timing or outcome of this matter. Three personal injury lawsuits are pending against us and our vendors alleging that certain talc products that were sold by the company in the past caused cancer. We intend to vigorously defend against these claims. Although we have been able to resolve previous talc lawsuits against us without material loss to the company, given the inherent uncertainties and high potential losses of talc litigation there can be no assurances regarding the outcome of pending or future cases. Future costs to litigate these cases are not known but may be significant, and it is uncertain whether our costs will be covered by insurance. In addition, although we have indemnification rights against our vendors in several of these cases, it is uncertain whether the vendors will have the financial ability to carry out their obligations. We do not believe that any of these lawsuits will, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition. However, we cannot assure that these lawsuits, individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations for the period or year in which they are reserved or resolved. Our products (or our storage and handling of such products) could also cause illness or injury, harm our reputation, and subject us to litigation. We are dependent on our vendors to ensure that the products we buy comply with all applicable safety standards. However, product liability, personal injury or other claims may be asserted against us relating to product contamination, product tampering, mislabeling, recall and other safety issues with respect to the products that we sell, or with respect to our handling or storage of such products, including as a result of the issues raised by the pending Arkansas FDA Matter (which has led to increased scrutiny of our operations by regulatory agencies, requiring further management attention and potential legal fees and other expenses). A significant product liability or other legal judgment against us, a related regulatory compliance or enforcement action or a product recall could materially and adversely affect our reputation, financial condition and/or results of operations. Moreover, even if a product liability, consumer fraud or other claim is unsuccessful, has no merit or is not pursued, the negative publicity surrounding assertions against the products we sell could materially and adversely affect our reputation. We seek but may not be successful in obtaining contractual indemnification from our vendors, where appropriate, or insurance coverage, and if we do not have adequate contractual indemnification or insurance available, such product liability or safety claims could adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations. Our ability to obtain the benefit of contractual indemnification from foreign vendors may be hindered by our ability to enforce contractual indemnification obligations against such vendors. Our litigation-related expenses could increase as well, which also could have a materially negative impact on our financial condition and/or results of operations even if a product liability claim is unsuccessful or is not fully pursued. The outcome of such matters is difficult to assess or quantify. Plaintiffs in these types of lawsuits or proceedings may seek recovery of very large or indeterminate amounts, and the magnitude of the potential loss may remain unknown for substantial periods of time. In addition, certain of these matters, if decided adversely to us or settled by us, may result in an expense that may be material to our financial statements as a whole or may negatively affect our operating results if changes to our business operations are required. The cost to defend current and future litigation or proceedings, including arbitrations, may be significant. There also may be adverse publicity associated with litigation, including litigation related to product or food safety, customer information and environmental or safety requirements, which could negatively affect customer perception of our business, regardless of whether the allegations are valid or whether we are ultimately found liable. For a discussion of current legal matters, please see “Item 3. Legal Proceedings” and Note 4 to our consolidated financial statements under the caption “Contingencies.” Resolution of these matters, if decided against us, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, accrued liabilities or cash flows.