MongoDB, Inc.MDB
MongoDB, Inc. Commitments Disclosure
Commitments and Contingencies
The following table includes certain non-cancelable agreements primarily for subscription, marketing services and cloud infrastructure capacity commitments entered into by the Company (in thousands):
Year Ending January 31, | Other Obligations | |||||||
| 2027 | $ | 382,067 | ||||||
| 2028 | 392,574 | |||||||
| 2029 | 123,285 | |||||||
| 2030 | — | |||||||
| 2031 | — | |||||||
Thereafter | — | |||||||
Total minimum payments | $ | 897,926 | ||||||
During the year ended January 31, 2026, the Company entered into a renewal agreement with a cloud infrastructure provider that includes a non-cancelable commitment of $300 million to be paid over a period from October 2025 through October 2028. During the year ended January 31, 2026, other than certain non-cancelable operating leases described in Note 8, Leases and the renewal agreement with a cloud infrastructure provider, there have been no material changes outside the ordinary course of business to the Company’s contractual obligations and commitments.
Legal Matters
The Company investigates all claims, litigation and other legal matters as they arise. From time to time, the Company has become involved in claims, litigation and other legal matters arising in the ordinary course of business, including intellectual property, labor and employment and breach of contract claims. For example, on July 9, 2024, a putative class action lawsuit, captioned Baxter v. MongoDB, Inc., et al., was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against MongoDB, former CEO Dev Ittycheria, and former COO and CFO Michael Gordon. On January 27, 2025, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit (the “Securities Action”) filed an Amended Complaint naming former Senior Vice President of Finance and former Interim CFO Srdjan Tanjga as an additional defendant. The operative complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act, and alleges that defendants made material misstatements and/or omissions, including regarding MongoDB’s sales strategy and its financial results. The complaint is purportedly brought on behalf of a putative class of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired MongoDB common stock between June 1, 2023 and May 30, 2024. It seeks unspecified monetary damages, costs and attorneys’ fees, and other unspecified relief. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on May 9, 2025. Plaintiffs filed an opposition brief on July 1, 2025, and defendants filed their reply brief on July 29, 2025. The Court has not yet ruled on Defendants’ motion.The
Company is unable to estimate any reasonably possible loss, or range of loss, with respect to these matters at this time. The Company intends to vigorously defend itself in this matter.
On October 7, 2024, a purported shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Case. No. 1:24-cv-07594, against the Company, as a nominal defendant, and former CEO Dev Ittycheria, former COO and CFO Michael Gordon, and several of the Company’s current and former directors. The case is captioned Roy v. Ittycheria et al. The lawsuit alleges that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties and committed other alleged misconduct in connection with the statements at issue in the Securities Action and by causing the Company to issue allegedly false and misleading statements to investors. Another similar case was subsequently filed in the same district and has been consolidated with the Roy action with the caption In re MongoDB, Inc. Shareholder Litigation (the “S.D.N.Y. Derivative Litigation”). On September 12, 2025 another purported derivative action was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, Case No. 2025-1030, against the Company, as a nominal defendant, and former CEO Dev Ittycheria, former COO and CFO Michael Gordon, and several of the Company’s current and former directors. The case is captioned Sansone v. Ittycheria, et al. The lawsuit, like the S.D.N.Y. Derivative Action, alleges that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties and committed other alleged misconduct in connection with the statements at issue in the Securities Action and by causing the Company to issue allegedly false and misleading statements to investors. The S.D.N.Y. Derivative Litigation and the Delaware Derivative Action are both at early stages and have both been stayed, pending the outcome of the Court’s decision on the defendants’ motion to dismiss the Securities Action.
Although claims and litigation are inherently unpredictable, as of January 31, 2026, other than as disclosed above, the Company is currently not aware of any matters that, if determined adversely to the Company, would individually or taken together have a material adverse effect on its business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The Company accrues estimates for resolution of legal and other contingencies when losses are probable and estimable. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on the Company because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors.
Indemnification
The Company enters into indemnification provisions under its agreements with other companies in the ordinary course of business, including business partners, landlords, contractors and parties performing its research and development. Pursuant to these arrangements, the Company agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and reimburse the indemnified party for certain losses suffered or incurred by the indemnified party as a result of the Company’s activities. The terms of these indemnification agreements are generally perpetual. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these agreements is not determinable. To date, the Company has not incurred material costs as a result of such commitments. The Company maintains commercial general liability insurance and product liability insurance to offset certain of the Company’s potential liabilities under these indemnification provisions.
The Company has entered into indemnification agreements with each of its directors and executive officers. These agreements require the Company to indemnify such individuals, to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law, for certain liabilities to which they may become subject as a result of their affiliation with the Company.
Historical Timeline
| Fiscal Year | Filed | |
|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Mar 11, 2026 | Showing above |
| 2025 | Mar 21, 2025 | |
| 2024 | Mar 15, 2024 | |
| 2023 | Mar 17, 2023 | |
| 2022 | Mar 18, 2022 | |
| 2021 | Mar 22, 2021 | |
| 2020 | Mar 27, 2020 | |
| 2019 | Apr 1, 2019 | |
| 2018 | Mar 30, 2018 | |
About Commitments Disclosures
Commitments and contingencies disclosures catalog a company's off-balance-sheet obligations and legal exposures — purchase commitments, guarantee arrangements, pending litigation, and regulatory proceedings. These items represent potential future cash outflows that may not appear as liabilities on the balance sheet until they become probable and estimable.
Key signals: litigation reserves and disclosed loss ranges quantify management's estimate of legal exposure, but unquantified "reasonably possible" losses often represent the larger risk. Watch for changes in language around pending cases — shifts from "remote" to "reasonably possible" or increases in estimated loss ranges signal deteriorating outcomes. Unconditional purchase obligations and take-or-pay contracts create fixed cost structures that reduce operational flexibility. Guarantee arrangements for subsidiaries or joint ventures can create cascading obligations. Compare the total commitment schedule against projected free cash flow to assess whether the company can meet its obligations without additional financing.