Quarterlytics / Healthcare / Medical - Devices / Insulet

Insulet

podd · NASDAQ Healthcare
Claim this profile
Ticker podd
Exchange NASDAQ
Sector Healthcare
Industry Medical - Devices
Employees 501-1000
← All annual reports
FY2012 Annual Report · Insulet
Sign in to download
Loading PDF…
2012 ANNUAL REPORT

 9 Oak Park Drive    BeDfOrD, Ma 01730    781.457.5000
www.MyOMniPOD.cOM

Shannon and Brian Davis are  
all-too-familiar with diabetes. 

Brian was diagnosed when he was 27, and their son Joshua was  
diagnosed at 11 months. They learned about managing their  
diabetes together – and through their journey, found trust in the  
OmniPod System.

“The OmniPod enabled  
us to simplify at least  
a small part of this  
horrible disease.”  
-Shannon Davis

Brian believes Joshua’s diagnosis truly 
saved his life. They finally received the 
proper diabetes management resources 
they were missing – and Brian chose to 
take advantage of this new education  
to be the best role model for his son.

With both of them on the OmniPod,  
the Davis family has found a sense  
of trust and comfort in their diabetes  
management.

Board of Directors

Sally W. Crawford 
Healthcare consultant and Director,  
Hologic, inc., eXacT Sciences, inc.,  
Zalicus, inc., Universal american  
corporation, Prolacta Bioscience, inc.

Duane DeSisto 
President, chief executive Officer  
and Director, insulet corporation

Charles Liamos 
chief Operating Officer and Director,  
insulet corporation

W. Mark Lortz 
Director, cutera, inc.

Regina Sommer 
Director, wright express corporation

John Fallon MD 
chief Physician executive  
and Senior vice President,  
Blue cross Blue Shield  
of Massachusetts

Steven T. Sobieski 
Senior vice President  
and chief financial Officer,  
roka Bioscience, inc.

Daniel Levangie 
chief executive Officer and Director,  
Dune Medical Devices, inc.

Joseph Zakrzewski 
chairman and chief executive Officer,  
amarin corporation

Executive Officers

Duane DeSisto 
President, chief executive Officer  
and Director 

Charles Liamos 
chief Operating Officer and Director

Brian K. Roberts 
chief financial Officer

Peter J. Devlin 
chief commercial Officer

R. Anthony Diehl, Esq. 
General counsel

Investor Inquiries

Insulet Corporation
9 Oak Park Drive
Bedford, Ma 01730
phone: 781.457.5000
fax: 781.457.5010
www.insulet.com

Investor Relations
877.PODD.ir1 (877.763.3471)
email: ir@insulet.com
investors.insulet.com

Independent Registered  
Public Accounting Firm
ernst & young, LLP
200 clarendon Street
Boston, Ma 02116
617.266.2000
www.ey.com

Primary Outside Legal Counsel
Goodwin Procter LLP
exchange Place
Boston, Ma 02109
617.570.1000
www.goodwinprocter.com

Registrar and Transfer Agent
Questions regarding accounts, 
address changes, stock transfers
and lost certificates should be
directed to:

computershare investor Services
P.O. Box 43078
Providence, ri 02940-3078
Overnight Mail: 250 royall Street
canton, Ma 02021
800.662.7232 (toll-free within the U.S.)
781.575.4238 (outside U.S.)
www.computershare.com

Joshua’s Diagnosis

Shannon  and  Brian  found  out  Joshua  had  diabetes  when  he 
was just 11 months old. He got extremely ill one night, and they 
had to take him to the emergency room. The doctors thought it 
was a virus, but after one of the nurses checked his blood glu-
cose, Joshua was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes.

Shannon  and  Brian  were  devastated.  Even  though  Brian  had 
diabetes,  it  all  still  seemed  like  a  completely  new  diagnosis. 
As  parents,  they  kept  thinking  about  how  much  Joshua’s  life 
would change and that it would be hard for him to just be a kid.

Joshua  started  out  on  injection  therapy.  Shannon  and  Brian 
learned  all  the  math  and  recorded  everything  he  ate.  They 
were emotionally drained. It eventually got to the point where 
Joshua couldn’t stand them giving him shots anymore. So the 
family decided it was time to look into pump therapy.

“Being able to  
let him be a kid –  
that’s the number  
one thing for us.”  
-Shannon Davis

Brian’s Diagnosis

When  Brian  was  27,  he  realized  something  was  off.  He  was 
drinking a lot of water and his eye sight began to shift. After his 
eye doctor recognized the signs and sent him to get his blood 
glucose checked, Brian was diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes.

Initially Brian’s treatment consisted of oral meds, diet and exer-
cise. He later ended up on injections, which was very difficult 
for him. Both Brian and his wife Shannon felt frustrated because 
they weren’t given the proper diabetes education they need-
ed. It wasn’t until their son Joshua was diagnosed with Type 1 
diabetes  that  Brian  discovered  he  was  also  a Type  1  diabetic  
all along. 

How the OmniPod Changed their Lives…

As they were researching pumps for Joshua, Brian decided to 
look into getting one as well. It made sense to him that they 
should  be  on  the  same  pump,  so  Brian  could  help  Joshua 
through his own firsthand experience.

When  Brian  switched,  he  saw  an  immediate  drop  in  his  A1C. 
The  biggest  difference  for  him  with  the  OmniPod  is  that  it’s  
easy  to  plug  everything  into  his  PDM  and  know  exactly  how 
much insulin to give himself before eating.

But  the  best  thing  overall  about  the  OmniPod  is  that  Joshua 
can  run  around  with  his  friends  and  just  be  a  kid. They  don’t 
have  to  make  him  stop  anymore  to  give  him  insulin,  but  can 
just administer it with the PDM as he plays. 

They went to a class where they were shown all of the pumps 
available on the market and began to trial several of them. As 
a  parent,  Shannon’s  hope  that  Joshua  wouldn’t  be  held  back 
by  his  diabetes  felt  so  much  more  attainable  when  she  saw 
how positively he reacted to the OmniPod. During the trial he 
seemed to forget he was even wearing an insulin pump, which 
was exactly what they were hoping for.

Once  Brian  and  Joshua  switched  to  the  OmniPod,  their  lives 
changed. Shannon quickly gained trust in the OmniPod’s cal-
culations more than her manual math.  Now,  with  the help of 
the OmniPod, she can give Joshua more precise insulin dosing, 
avoiding  the  highs  or  lows  he  experienced  with  shots.  Also, 
with the OmniPod, they can better manage the small amounts 
of carbohydrates he eats.

“There are several 
things we love about  
the OmniPod. We love 
the flexibility it offers 
our son to eat when he  
is hungry and not when  
his shots dictate.”

“We also love the  
discretion and flexibility 
the OmniPod gives us  
to bolus him in social 
situations and the  
option to increase or 
decrease his basal dose 
as needed.”   

-Anna and Peter Kerr

Anna and Peter Kerr found out that their 
son,  Arturo,  had  Type  1  diabetes  when 
he  was  just  shy  of  three  years  old.  The 
diagnosis was a bit of a shock, but they 
soon  became  busy  with  the  daily  rou-
tine  of  managing  their  son’s  diabetes. 
Counting carbs, testing blood sugar and 
administering insulin injections became 
part of their lives. They decided to switch 
to  the  OmniPod  several  months  after  
Arturo  was  diagnosed  in  order  to  gain 
freedom from their rigid injection sched-
ule and more flexibility in their lives. 

The Next-Generation 
OmniPod Advanced 
Pump Therapy - Again.

With the OmniPod System, our clients not only get the most advanced insulin 
pump on the market, but they also get the support of a company full of pas-
sionate employees, many who also use and trust in the System. Together with 
feedback and real-life experiences from our patients and employees, we have 
engineered our next-generation Omnipod System.

Designed with discretion in mind, the new 
Pod  is  34%  smaller,  25%  lighter  and  16% 
slimmer. The  new  PDM  (Personal  Diabetes 
Manager)  has  many  enhancements  that 
make managing diabetes easier.

Our  ultimate  goal  at  Insulet  Corporation  is 
to  provide  a  superior  treatment  option  for 
people  with  diabetes.  With  our  next  gen-
eration  OmniPod,  we  have  done  just  that.  
As always, we will continue to push our re-
search  and  harness  medical,  scientific  and 
technological  advances  –  so  we  can  con-
tinue to make diabetes a smaller part of life.

“The OmniPod has helped us regain flexibility  
in our lives as a Type 1 diabetes family instead  
of living around an insulin schedule.”

-Anna and Peter Kerr

To My Fellow Shareholders,

Insulet was founded with the mission to make living 
with diabetes easier. With the first generation Om-
niPod® Insulin Management System, we succeeded 
in expanding the market for Continuous Subcutane-
ous Insulin Infusion (CSII) therapy, making the best 
treatment option appealing to a broader population 
of people with diabetes. With its easy-to-use features, 
tens of thousands of people with diabetes have adopted 
pump therapy and enjoy the freedom of the OmniPod’s 
unique tubeless design. Today, the OmniPod enjoys a 
double digit share of the insulin pump market in the 
United States. More than 70% of new OmniPod custom-
ers have never used an insulin pump before. Consid-
ering that our OmniPod customers only account for 
about 3% of the overall Type 1 U.S. diabetes market, we 
clearly continue to have an enormous market opportu-
nity ahead of us. 

The new OmniPod is perfectly positioned to seize 
this opportunity. 2012 culminated with the U.S. Food 
and Drug Administration (FDA) 510(k) clearance of 
our next generation tubeless insulin pump. The new 
OmniPod retains all the great features and benefits of 
the original OmniPod, but does so in a package that is 
over a third smaller and a quarter lighter. Its discreet 
size fits comfortably on nearly any part of the body, 
without the cumbersome tubing of conventional insulin 
pumps, providing exceptional freedom to people with 
diabetes. It’s no wonder that our fastest growing cus-
tomer segment is people 18 years old and younger. The 
OmniPod’s easy-to-use two part design offers virtually 
painless automatic insertion. With the new OmniPod 
we have once again raised the bar for any potential 
future competitors.

2012: A Year of Strong Execution

We are proud of our robust financial performance 
in 2012, which included strong revenue growth and 
expanded gross profits driving us to achieve operat-
ing cash profitability* in the fourth quarter. Revenue 
increased by nearly 40% in 2012 to $211.4 million as 
compared to $152.3 million in 2011.  

In 2012, we made key commercial investments that 
helped drive our success. We created an inside sales 
team to focus on increasing direct-to-consumer leads. 
Since the implementation of the inside sales team, we 
have seen an increase of approximately 55% in initial 
shipments from leads generated by our direct-to-con-
sumer marketing programs. This increase has enabled 

our external sales team to spend more time educating 
influential healthcare professionals about the benefits 
of the OmniPod System. With this renewed focus, 
referrals coming directly from endocrinologists have 
increased markedly resulting in accelerating OmniPod 
sales as compared to the prior year.

Strong revenue growth coupled with continued gains 
in manufacturing efficiency allowed us to improve our 
gross profit by 38% to $92.3 million in 2012, from $66.7 
million in 2011. With OmniPod demand increasing 
throughout the year, our operations team kept pace by 
increasing production volumes, improving quality and 
driving cost efficiencies.  

Our manufacturing abilities remain a key competitive 
advantage. In 2012 we produced a record six million 
OmniPods while improving the quality of our product. 
These improvements were reflected in a nearly 15% 
decrease in calls to our customer support team in 2012 
even as our customer base grew by approximately 30%.  

We completed the integration of Neighborhood Dia-
betes in the first half of 2012. Neighborhood Diabetes’ 
high-touch service model, which focuses on client 
education and training, promotes a higher level of pa-
tient adherence, compliance and reduced cost of care. 
This strategic acquisition has enabled us to signifi-
cantly strengthen our reimbursement, distribution and 
pharmacy capabilities to support our continued rapid 
growth. As a result of streamlining processes and lever-
aging our greater scale, we have seen a 20% decrease 
in days sales outstanding of carrier receivables, a lower 
cost of shipment to patients and improvements in our 
conversion of referrals to shipments.  

Insulet Corporation 
Annual Revenue (in millions)

$240

$200

$160

$120

$80

$40

$0

$211

$152

$97

$66

$36

$13

$4

2006 

2007 

2008 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012

* Operating cash profitability is defined as operating loss plus certain non-cash expenses such as depreciation, amortization and stock-based compensation.

 
This year’s strong financial performance drove our 
first full quarter of operating cash profitability in 
the fourth quarter of 2012. We ended the year with 
approximately $57.3 million of cash and cash equiv-
alents. In January 2013, we further strengthened 
our balance sheet with the sale of 4.7 million shares 
of our common stock. We received net proceeds, 
after underwriting discounts and issuance costs, of 
$93 million. As of January 31, 2013, we had approxi-
mately $150 million of cash and cash equivalents, an 
amount we believe is sufficient to operate the busi-
ness to profitability. 

Driving Future Growth:  
The New OmniPod

With FDA clearance now in hand, we are prepared 
to launch the new OmniPod in early 2013. In ad-
dition to the obvious appeal of its smaller size, 
the new OmniPod offers the benefit of significant 
manufacturing efficiencies making it less costly to 
produce. This will help us to continue to expand 
gross margins as we transition customers to the 
new product.  

Since FDA approval we have been aggressively 
implementing our launch plan across the organiza-
tion. Currently, we have capacity to produce up to 
approximately 600,000 new OmniPods per month. 
By the end of 2013, we expect to have capacity to 
produce approximately one million pods per month, 
enough to service nearly twice as many customers 
as we have today. The sales team is trained on the 
new OmniPod and is focused on educating health-
care professionals on its benefits. We commenced 
our first shipments of the new OmniPod in Febru-
ary, and we are confident that the new OmniPod 
will be a significant catalyst for continued revenue 
growth.  

International sales are also expected to be an im-
portant growth driver for us moving forward. The 
OmniPod is now available in ten markets across 
Europe, Israel and Canada. Our European partner, 
Ypsomed Distribution AG, launched the new Om-
niPod last year and has completed transitioning its 
customer base. Initial feedback has been extremely 
positive about the smaller size and lighter feel of the 
product. In 2012, we expanded our relationship with 
Ypsomed to cover a total of 22 countries within Eu-
rope, the Middle East and Asia. We expect to bring 
the OmniPod to several of these additional markets 
over the next year.  

Continuing to Raise the Bar

We aim to remain the leading innovator in the 
industry by continuing to raise the bar with best-
in-class products. Last year we announced a global 
agreement with LifeScan, Inc., to integrate their 
market-leading OneTouch® blood glucose monitor-
ing technologies into a future version of the Om-
niPod Personal Diabetes Manager (PDM). We have 
begun development efforts and hope to have this 
new product commercially available later in 2013. 
In addition, we have partnered with a developer 
of a continuous glucose monitoring sensor that 
we can integrate directly into the Pod. We believe 
the OmniPod is uniquely positioned to be the only 
insulin pump to integrate both the pump and the 
CGM sensor into just one on-body device, offering a 
significant incremental benefit to customers. 

We are exploring several other areas of strategic ex-
pansion for Insulet, where we can capitalize on our 
existing core strengths and extend our leadership. 
These opportunities include expanding into the 
Type 2 diabetes market, with an incremental target 
market of over two million people as well as expand-
ing the use of the OmniPod drug delivery platform 
in non-diabetes applications, including oncology, 
infertility, obesity and other disease states. 

Looking ahead, we expect to demonstrate strong 
financial results in the coming year, as we continue 
to grow revenue, expand gross margins and move 
closer to overall profitability. Approximately 45,000 
customers enjoy the benefits of the OmniPod. 
With the launch of the new OmniPod, we expect to 
further accelerate new user adoption and deliver a 
solid return on investment to our shareholders.  

I would like to thank our investors, customers, refer-
ring healthcare professionals and employees for 
your support. We have so much success to celebrate 
in our efforts to positively impact the lives of people 
living with diabetes. We look forward to continuing 
to advance our mission with you.

Sincerely,

Duane DeSisto
President & Chief Executive Officer

 
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K

(Mark One)

Í ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012

‘ TRANSITION REPORTING PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from

to

Commission File No. 001-33462
INSULET CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)

9 Oak Park Drive
Bedford, Massachusetts
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)

04-3523891
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)

01730
(Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code:
(781) 457-5000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of Each Class

Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered

Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value Per Share
Preferred Stock Purchase Rights

The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC
The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities

Act. Yes Í

No ‘

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the

Act. Yes ‘

No Í

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file
such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes Í

No ‘

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every
Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during
the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such
files). Yes Í No ‘

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and

will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference
in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. Í

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a
smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer Í

Non-accelerated filer ‘

Smaller reporting company ‘

Accelerated filer ‘

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act). Yes ‘

No Í

The aggregate market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant computed by reference to the last

reported sale price of the Common Stock as reported on The NASDAQ Global Market on June 30, 2012 was approximately
$956.9 million. In making such calculation, the registrant does not determine whether any director, officer or other holder of
common stock is an affiliate for any other purpose.

The number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock as of February 21, 2013:

Title of Class

Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value Per Share
Preferred Stock Purchase Rights

Shares Outstanding

53,104,565
—

The registrant intends to file a proxy statement pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year ended

December 31, 2012. Portions of such proxy statement are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

INSULET CORPORATION

Explanatory Note

PART I

Item 1. Business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 1A. Risk Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 2.

Item 3.

Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Legal Proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART II

Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases
of Equity Securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 6.

Selected Financial Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations . . . . .

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 8.

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure . . . . .

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 9B. Other Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 11. Executive Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder

Matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Signatures

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Page

1

13

34

34

35

35

36

39

40

60

60

61

61

62

64

64

64

65

65

65

66

EXPLANATORY NOTE

On February 28, 2013 we filed an Amendment to our Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended
December 31, 2011, which was originally filed on Form 10-K on February 28, 2012, to reflect a restatement of
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 and the quarterly periods ended June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2011.
Additionally, we filed Amendments to our Quarterly Reports on Forms 10-Q/A, which were originally filed on
Forms 10-Q on May 9, 2012, August 8, 2012 and November 8, 2012, to reflect a restatement of the quarterly
periods ended March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012. Form 10-K/A and Forms 10-Q/A are
known as the Amended Reports.

As discussed in Note 18 to our consolidated financial statements, subsequent to the issuance of the original
reports, we and our audit committee concluded that we should restate our consolidated balance sheets at June 30,
2011, September 30, 2011, December 31, 2011, March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012 and September 30, 2012, our
consolidated statements of operations for the three and six months ended June 30 2011, the nine months ended
September 30, 2011 and the year ended December 31, 2011, consolidated statements of cash flows for the six
months ended June 30, 2011, the nine months ended September 30, 2011 and the year ended December 31, 2011
and our consolidated changes in stockholders’ equity for the year ended December 31, 2011 to correct the
following errors:

In June 2011, we acquired all of the outstanding shares of privately-held Neighborhood Diabetes and
accounted for the acquisition as a business combination. In connection with the acquisition, we recognized net
deferred tax liabilities of $11.3 million. We also reduced our preexisting valuation allowance and goodwill,
accordingly, through purchase accounting. Upon subsequent review, we determined that the $11.3 million
reduction of our preexisting valuation allowance should have been reported as an income tax benefit and not as
an adjustment to goodwill. We have corrected our statement of operations with respect to the income tax benefit
generated as a result of the change in the valuation allowance.

In June 2011, we modified our outstanding convertible debt. Upon subsequent review, we determined that at

the date of the modification we should have recognized approximately $5.5 million in additional deferred tax
liability related to our debt. The recognition of this additional deferred tax liability would have resulted in a
corresponding reduction of our preexisting valuation allowance and therefore had no effect on our statement of
operations. We have corrected certain balance sheet amounts with respect to the presentation of our deferred tax
assets and liabilities.

For reasons discussed above, we filed these Amended Reports in order to amend our original reports to the

extent necessary to reflect the adjustments discussed above.

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements relate

to future events or our future financial performance. We generally identify forward looking statements by
terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “could,” “intends,” “targets,”
“projects,” “contemplates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these
terms or other similar words. These statements are only predictions. We have based these forward-looking
statements largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and financial trends that we
believe may affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. The outcome of the events
described in these forward-looking statements is subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors described in
“Risk Factors” in Part 1, Item 1A. of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Accordingly, you should not rely upon
forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. We cannot assure you that the events and
circumstances reflected in the forward-looking statements will be achieved or occur, and actual results could
differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements made
in this Annual Report on Form 10-K relate only to events as of the date on which the statements are made. We
undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date
on which the statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Overview

PART I

We are primarily engaged in the development, manufacturing and sale of our proprietary OmniPod Insulin
Management System (the “OmniPod System”), an innovative, discreet and easy-to-use insulin infusion system
for people with insulin-dependent diabetes. The OmniPod System is the only commercially-available insulin
infusion system of its kind. The OmniPod System features a unique disposable tubeless OmniPod which is worn
on the body for approximately three days at a time and our handheld, wireless Personal Diabetes Manager
(“PDM”). Conventional insulin pumps require people with insulin-dependent diabetes to learn to use, manage
and wear a number of cumbersome components, including up to 42 inches of tubing. In contrast, the OmniPod
System features only two discreet, easy-to-use devices that eliminate the need for a bulky pump, tubing and
separate blood glucose meter, provides for virtually pain-free automated cannula insertion, communicates
wirelessly and integrates a blood glucose meter. We believe that the OmniPod System’s unique proprietary
design offers significant lifestyle benefits to people with insulin-dependent diabetes.

To support our sales of the OmniPod System, in June 2011, we acquired Neighborhood Holdings, Inc. and
its wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, “Neighborhood Diabetes”) in order to expand our full suite diabetes
management product offerings and obtain access to a larger number of insulin dependent patients. Through
Neighborhood Diabetes, we are able to provide customers with blood glucose testing supplies, insulin pumps,
pump supplies and pharmaceuticals and have the ability to process claims as either durable medical equipment or
through pharmacy benefits.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approved the original OmniPod System in January 2005,

and we began commercial sale in the United States in October 2005. We received CE Mark approval for the
original OmniPod System in April 2009. Since the commercial launch of the OmniPod System, we have
progressively expanded our marketing efforts to provide availability of the OmniPod System to patients
throughout the entire United States. We have also expanded the availability of the OmniPod System
internationally through our partnerships with Ypsomed Distribution AG (“Ypsomed”) and GlaxoSmithKline Inc.
(“GSK”). In January 2010, we entered into a distribution agreement with Ypsomed pursuant to which Ypsomed
became the exclusive distributor of the OmniPod System in multiple countries. In February 2011, we entered into
a distribution agreement with GSK pursuant to which GSK became the exclusive distributor of the OmniPod
System in Canada. Under these distribution agreements, we supply OmniPods and PDMs to Ypsomed and GSK,
and they are responsible for the sale to the customer, including distribution, reimbursement and customer
support.

Our efforts throughout 2011 and 2012 largely focused on the development and regulatory approval of our
next generation OmniPod System. In August 2011 we received CE Mark approval, and in December 2012 we
received 510(k) clearance for the next generation OmniPod System by the FDA. The next generation OmniPod
System maintains all of the features of the original OmniPod System but is approximately one-third smaller in
size and one-quarter lighter in weight.

Insulet Corporation is a Delaware corporation formed in 2000. Our principal offices are located at
9 Oak Park Drive, Bedford, Massachusetts 01730, and our telephone number is (781) 457-5000. Our website
address is http://www.insulet.com. We make available, free of charge, on or through our website, our annual
reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements and any
amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with or
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission. The information on our website is not part of this Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012.

1

Our Market

Diabetes is a chronic, life-threatening disease for which there is no known cure. Diabetes is caused by the

body’s inability to produce or effectively utilize the hormone insulin. This inability prevents the body from
adequately regulating blood glucose levels. Glucose, the primary source of energy for cells, must be maintained
at certain concentrations in the blood in order to permit optimal cell function and health. In people with diabetes,
blood glucose levels fluctuate between very high levels, a condition known as hyperglycemia, and very low
levels, a condition called hypoglycemia. Hyperglycemia can lead to serious short-term complications, such as
confusion, vomiting, dehydration and loss of consciousness and long-term complications, such as blindness,
kidney disease, nervous system disease, occlusive vascular diseases, stroke and cardiovascular disease, or death.
Hypoglycemia can lead to confusion, loss of consciousness or death.

Diabetes is typically classified as either Type 1 or Type 2.

• Type 1 diabetes is characterized by the body’s nearly complete inability to produce insulin. It is

frequently diagnosed during childhood or adolescence. Individuals with Type 1 diabetes require daily
insulin therapy, typically administered via injections or continuous infusion through pump therapy, to
survive.

• Type 2 diabetes, the more common form of diabetes, is characterized by the body’s inability to either
properly utilize insulin or produce enough insulin. Historically, Type 2 diabetes has occurred in later
adulthood, but its incidence is increasing among the younger population, due primarily to increasing
childhood obesity. Initially, many people with Type 2 diabetes attempt to manage their diabetes with
improvements in diet, exercise and/or oral medications. As their diabetes advances, some patients
progress to multiple drug therapy, which often includes insulin therapy. Guidelines, including those
published by the American Diabetes Association in 2006, suggest more aggressive treatment for people
with Type 2 diabetes, including the early adoption of insulin therapy and more frequent testing. It is now
becoming more accepted for insulin therapy to be started earlier in people with Type 2 diabetes, and, in
some cases, as part of the initial treatment.

Throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we refer to both Type 1 diabetes and insulin-requiring Type

2 diabetes as insulin-dependent diabetes.

Managing Diabetes

Diabetes Management Challenges

Diabetes is often frustrating and difficult for patients to manage. Blood glucose levels can be affected by the
carbohydrate and fat content of meals, exercise, stress, illness or impending illness, hormonal releases, variability
in insulin absorption and changes in the effects of insulin on the body. For people with insulin-dependent
diabetes, many corrections, consisting of the administration of additional insulin or ingestion of additional
carbohydrates, are needed throughout the day in order to maintain blood glucose levels within normal ranges.
Achieving this result can be very difficult without multiple daily injections of insulin or the use of continuous
subcutaneous insulin infusion (“CSII”) therapy. Patients attempting to control their blood glucose levels tightly
to prevent the long-term complications associated with fluctuations in blood glucose levels are at greater risk for
overcorrection and the resultant hypoglycemia. As a result, many patients have difficulty managing their diabetes
optimally. Additionally, the time spent in managing diabetes, the swings in blood glucose levels and the fear of
hypoglycemia can all render diabetes management overwhelming to patients and their families.

Current Insulin Therapy

People with insulin-dependent diabetes need a continuous supply of insulin, known as basal insulin, to
provide for background metabolic needs. In addition to basal insulin, people with insulin-dependent diabetes
require supplemental insulin, known as bolus insulin, to compensate for carbohydrates ingested during meals or
snacks or for a high blood glucose level.

2

There are three primary types of insulin therapy practiced today: conventional therapy; multiple daily
injection (“MDI”) therapy using syringes or insulin pens; and CSII therapy using insulin pumps. Both MDI and
CSII therapies are considered intensive insulin management therapies.

Many healthcare professionals believe that intensive insulin management therapies are superior to
conventional therapies in delaying the onset and reducing the severity of diabetes-related complications. As a
result, we believe that the use of intensive insulin management therapies has significantly expanded over the past
decade, and that many Type 1 patients manage their diabetes using an intensive insulin management therapy. A
significantly smaller percentage of people with insulin-requiring Type 2 diabetes manage their diabetes using an
intensive insulin management therapy.

The OmniPod System

The OmniPod Insulin Management System was specifically designed to provide people with insulin-
dependent diabetes with a diabetes management solution which provides significant lifestyle and other benefits
and to expand the use of CSII therapy. We believe that the following are important contributors to the success of
our OmniPod System:

• Discreet, two-part design. Unlike conventional insulin pumps, the OmniPod System consists of just two
discreet, easy-to-use devices that communicate wirelessly: the OmniPod, a small, lightweight, disposable
insulin infusion device worn beneath clothing that integrates an infusion set, automated cannula insertion,
insulin reservoir, drive mechanism and batteries; and the PDM, a handheld device much like a personal
digital assistant that wirelessly programs the OmniPod with insulin delivery instructions, assists the
patient with diabetes management and integrates a blood glucose meter. The OmniPod will operate up to
72 hours (but no more than 80 hours) after it is first activated. We believe our innovative patented design
enables people with insulin-dependent diabetes to experience all of the lifestyle benefits and clinical
superiority of CSII therapy in a more discreet and convenient manner than possible with conventional
insulin pumps.

• No tubing. The OmniPod System’s innovative, proprietary design dramatically reduces the size of the

insulin delivery mechanism, thereby eliminating the need for the external tubing required by conventional
pumps. As a result of this design, the OmniPod can be worn discreetly beneath clothing and patients can
move, dress, bathe, sleep and exercise without the encumbrance of the up to 42 inches of tubing required
by conventional insulin pumps. In addition to untethering people with insulin-dependent diabetes, the
OmniPod System’s lack of tubing eliminates interruptions in insulin delivery resulting from kinking,
leaking or disconnecting, which leads to more consistent delivery of insulin.

• Virtually pain-free automated cannula insertion. The OmniPod is the only CSII therapy device to

feature a fully automated, hands-free cannula insertion system. This virtually pain-free insertion system
features the world’s fastest insertion and the smallest-gauge introducer needle available for insulin
infusion systems. Cannula insertion is activated wirelessly using the PDM, so the patient never sees or
handles an introducer needle, which we believe promotes consistent insertion, reduces patient anxiety and
increases the number of insertion sites available to patients. We believe that the OmniPod’s proprietary
insertion system is a significant differentiating factor for people with insulin-dependent diabetes who are
frustrated with the painful and cumbersome manual insertions required with existing conventional pumps
or frequent injections required by MDI therapy.

• Easy to train, learn and use. We have designed the OmniPod System to fit within the normal daily

routines of patients. The OmniPod System requires the fewest steps to start insulin delivery of all CSII
therapies on the market by automating much of the process. In addition, the OmniPod System consists of
just two devices, as opposed to up to seven for conventional insulin pumps. We have designed the PDM’s
user interface to be much more intuitive and user-friendly than those used in conventional insulin pumps.
As a result, the OmniPod System is easier for patients to use, which reduces the training burden on
healthcare professionals. We believe that the OmniPod System’s overall ease of use makes it very

3

attractive to those people with insulin-dependent diabetes. We also believe that the OmniPod System’s
ease of use and substantially lower training burden helps to redefine which diabetes patients are
appropriate for CSII therapy, enabling healthcare professionals to prescribe CSII therapy to a broader
pool of patients

• Low up-front cost and pay-as-you-go pricing structure. The OmniPod System’s unique patented design
and proprietary manufacturing process have enabled us to provide CSII therapy at a relatively low up-
front investment compared to conventional insulin pumps. While the ongoing cost of OmniPods is greater
than the ongoing costs of supplies for conventional insulin pumps, we believe that our pay-as-you-go
pricing model significantly reduces the risk of investing in CSII therapy for third-party payors and makes
CSII therapy much more accessible for people with insulin-dependent diabetes.

Sales and Marketing

Our sales and marketing effort for the OmniPod System is focused on continuing to generate demand and

acceptance of the OmniPod System among key diabetes practicioners, academic medical centers, clinics, people
with insulin-dependent diabetes, third-party payors, government agencies and third-party distributors. Our
marketing strategy is to build awareness of the benefits of the OmniPod System as well as our high-touch patient
model through a wide range of education programs, social networking, patient demonstration programs, support
materials, media advertisements, clinical research and events at the national, regional and local levels. We use
third-party distributors within the United States to improve our access to managed care and government
reimbursement programs, expand our commercial presence and provide access to additional potential customers.
Through both our core OmniPod business as well as our acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes, we serve more
than 100,000 clients with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes providing them with our proprietary OmniPod System,
blood glucose testing supplies, insulin pumps, pump supplies and pharmaceuticals, among other supplies. We
have built a strong infrastructure with our reimbursement and billing functions and can provide for adjudication
of claims as either durable medical equipment or through pharmacy benefits. Depending on the product sold, and
the insurance coverage maintained by the patient, claims are adjudicated under private insurers, Medicaid or
Medicare. Our distribution agreements with Ypsomed and GSK provide us with the ability to increase awareness
and expand availability of the OmniPod System internationally. Under these agreements, Ypsomed and GSK
work with the appropriate agencies to establish a distribution and reimbursement process in each of the countries
in which they sell the OmniPod System.

Healthcare professional focused initiatives. We believe that healthcare professionals play an important

role in selecting patients for CSII therapy and educating them about CSII technology options. Our marketing to
healthcare professionals focuses on positioning the OmniPod System as an innovative continuous insulin
delivery system that should be considered as an alternative to a conventional insulin pump. We augmented our
healthcare professional focused marketing efforts with market studies to assess various aspects of the OmniPod
System’s functionality and relative efficacy, which we believe assist us in generating additional patient demand
for the OmniPod System among the insulin-dependent diabetes population.

Patient focused initiatives. We sell the OmniPod System directly to patients through referrals from

healthcare professionals and through patient leads generated from our promotional activities and social
networking. Our marketing to patients focuses on positioning the OmniPod System as an innovative continuous
insulin delivery system that makes diabetes a smaller part of life and strongly promotes lifestyle benefits
provided to its users.

Advertising. We promote the OmniPod System and its benefits through targeted advertising in media

outlets directed at diabetic patients, including both internet and traditional media channels.

Marketing research.

In addition to our initiatives focused on healthcare professionals and patients, we also

evaluate the benefits of the OmniPod System through marketing research efforts to assess certain aspects of the
efficacy of the OmniPod System.

4

Distributor arrangements. Our distribution networks include relationships with third-party distributors in

order to increase market awareness, improve our access to managed care and government reimbursement
programs and provide access to additional potential patients both within and outside of the United States.

Training and Customer Support

Given the chronic nature of diabetes, we believe that thorough training and ongoing customer support are
important in developing a long-term relationship with the patient. We believe that it is crucial for patients to be
trained as the experts in the management of their diabetes. At the same time, we believe that providing reliable
and effective customer support reduces patients’ anxiety and contributes to overall product satisfaction. In order
to provide a complete training and customer support solution, we utilize a combination of live training in the
office of healthcare professionals, interactive media, as well as online and telephonic support that is available
24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Training. We believe that the amount of effort required for healthcare professional offices to train patients

to use CSII therapy has been a key barrier limiting penetration of this therapy. The OmniPod System was
designed to be easy to use and to significantly reduce the burden associated with training patients to use CSII
therapy.

Our training support for the OmniPod System for healthcare professional offices is tailored to the individual

needs of recommending offices. In some cases, we certify office-based healthcare professionals to train patients
on the OmniPod System through our Certified Pod Trainer (“CPT”) Program. In addition, we may assist them
with the first customer training as part of the process of transitioning the ongoing training responsibilities to these
healthcare professionals. In other cases, a member of our commercial team or CPT consultant group will conduct
the patient training for an office that does not have the capability or capacity to offer patient training. We have
established a network of CPTs who will conduct customer training at the healthcare site. We provide all CPTs
with a training kit that includes a methodology and documentation for training patients on effective use of the
OmniPod System. We believe the CPT Program is a valuable way for us to develop and maintain relationships
with key providers in the marketplace.

We also use a “high-touch” service model to supplement our product offering with education, training and

other support services. These services have been demonstrated to improve client adherence to their recommended
therapy regimens, resulting in fewer long term complications and reduced overall cost of care.

Customer Support. We seek to provide our customers with high quality customer support, from product
ordering to insurance investigation, fulfillment and ongoing support. We have integrated our customer support
systems with our sales, reimbursement and billing processes and also offer support by telephone and through our
website in order to provide customers with seamless and reliable customer support.

Our customer support staff is proactively involved with both healthcare professionals and patients. When a

customer initiates an order for our products, our customer support staff assists the customer with completing
order forms and collecting additional data as required by his or her insurance provider. Once the order forms are
complete, we investigate the customer’s insurance coverage and contact the customer to notify them regarding
the coverage available under his or her insurance. We believe it is important from a customer satisfaction
perspective, as well as a healthcare professional perspective, that we handle the insurance investigation process
accurately, efficiently and promptly, and that we, therefore, are capable of scaling our capacity to meet increasing
demand. We have built a strong infrastructure in our reimbursement, pharmacy and billing areas to provide for
accurate and efficient adjudication of claims as either durable medical equipment or through pharmacy benefits.
We believe that our customer support infrastructure enables us to effectively support the growing demand for our
product offerings.

Upon approval from the customer, the customer’s order is typically shipped to the customer’s home. A
customer support representative contacts customers to arrange and schedule subsequent shipments of OmniPods

5

or other supplies, which are typically shipped every month to every three months. In addition, certain patients can
be placed on automatic reorder for OmniPod supplies, simplifying the diabetes management process and
preventing patients from experiencing inadvertent supply shortages.

Our third-party distributors, including Ypsomed and GSK, manage and perform the training and customer

support activities for their sales of the OmniPod System.

Research and Development

Our current research and development efforts are primarily focused on our recently approved next

generation OmniPod System. The next generation OmniPod maintains the same functionality and features of the
original version in a smaller footprint. We are also working on the integration of our OmniPod System with the
LifeScan, Inc. (“LifeScan”) OneTouch® blood glucose monitoring technology, the feasibility of enhancing our
OmniPod System by incorporating continuous sensing technology into the pod, and the ability to use our
OmniPod System as a delivery platform for other pharmaceuticals.

We entered into a non-exclusive agreement with LifeScan to integrate LifeScan’s OneTouch® blood glucose
monitoring technology into our PDM. Under the terms of the agreement, LifeScan is responsible for providing its
glucose monitoring technology to us, and we are responsible for the development, design and regulatory approval
of the integrated device. We continue to work with LifeScan with the goal of submitting the OmniPod System
integrated with LifeScan’s OneTouch blood glucose monitoring technology for 510(k) clearance from the FDA
in 2013.

We believe that the potential uses of our proprietary OmniPod System technology are not limited to the
treatment of diabetes. We continue to pursue the use of the OmniPod System technology for the delivery of other
medications that may be administered subcutaneously in precise and varied doses over an extended period of
time. For instance, in June 2008, we announced an agreement with Ferring Pharmaceuticals (“Ferring”) of Saint
Prex, Switzerland, to develop the OmniPod System for the delivery of a Ferring drug. Under the terms of the
agreement, Ferring funded the development of a custom version of the PDM and, upon completion of the
development, agreed to purchase minimum quantities of this custom OmniPod System over a five-year period.
We received CE mark approval for this custom OmniPod System in September 2009 and began selling the
product to Ferring under this arrangement in 2010. To date, revenue under this arrangement has been minimal. In
June 2011, we entered into a development agreement with a U.S. based pharmaceutical company (the
“Development Agreement”). Under the Development Agreement, we are required to perform design,
development, regulatory and other services to support the pharmaceutical company as it works to obtain
regulatory approval to use our drug delivery technology as a delivery method for its pharmaceutical. Over the
term of the Development Agreement, we have invoiced and expect to continue to invoice amounts as we meet
certain defined deliverable milestones. We continue to work with additional partners on potential alternative uses
for our OmniPod System technology. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to adapt the
OmniPod System technology for further uses or successfully compete in new therapeutic areas.

Manufacturing and Quality Assurance

We believe a key contributing factor to the overall attractiveness of the OmniPod System is the disposable

OmniPod insulin infusion device. In order to manufacture sufficient volumes and achieve a lower per unit
production cost for the OmniPod, each of which is worn for up to three days and then replaced, we have designed
the OmniPod to be manufactured through a partially automated process.

We are currently producing the OmniPod on partially automated manufacturing lines at a facility in China,

operated by a subsidiary of Flextronics International Ltd. (“Flextronics”). We purchase complete OmniPods
pursuant to our agreement with Flextronics. Under the agreement, Flextronics has agreed to supply us with
OmniPods at agreed upon prices per unit pursuant to a rolling forecast that we provide. The current term of the
agreement expires in December 2017 and is automatically renewed for one-year terms subsequently. It may be

6

terminated by either party upon prior written notice given no less than a specified number of days prior to the
date of termination. The specified number of days is intended to provide the parties with sufficient time to make
alternative arrangements in the event of termination.

To achieve profitability, we seek to continue to increase manufacturing volumes and reduce the per unit

production cost for the OmniPod. By increasing production volumes of the OmniPod, we have been able to
reduce our per-unit raw material costs and improve absorption of manufacturing overhead costs. Our next
generation OmniPod was designed to lower the cost of the product further through component sourcing, volume
discounts and efficient manufacturing. The cost reductions are important as we strive to achieve profitability. We
believe our manufacturing capacity is sufficient to meet our expected 2013 demand for OmniPods.

We purchase certain other diabetes management supplies from manufacturers at contracted rates and supply these

products to our customers. Based on market penetration, payor plans and other factors, certain manufacturers provide
rebates based on product sold. We record these rebates as a reduction to cost of goods sold as they are earned.

We rely on outside vendors for most of the components, some sub-assemblies, and various services used in
the manufacture of the OmniPod System. Many of these suppliers are sole-source suppliers. To date, we have not
experienced significant disruption in the delivery of these components and services. For certain of these
components, arrangements with additional or replacement suppliers will take time and result in delays, in part
because of the vendor qualification process required under FDA regulations and because of the custom nature of
various parts we design.

Generally, all outside vendors produce the components to our specifications and in many instances to our
designs, and they are audited periodically by our Quality Assurance Department to ensure conformity with the
specifications, policies and procedures for our devices. Our Quality Assurance Department also inspects and tests
our devices at various steps in the manufacturing cycle to facilitate compliance with our devices’ stringent
specifications. We have received approval of our quality systems standards from DEKRA Certification B. V.,
Arnhem, The Netherlands, an accredited Notified Body for CE Marking and the International Standards
Organization (“ISO”). Certain processes utilized in the manufacture and test of our devices have been verified
and validated as required by the FDA and other regulatory bodies. As a medical device manufacturer and
distributor, our manufacturing facilities and the facilities of our suppliers and sterilizer are subject to periodic
inspection by the FDA, KEMA and certain corresponding state agencies.

Intellectual Property

We believe that to maintain a competitive advantage, we must develop and preserve the proprietary aspect

of our technologies. We rely on a combination of copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret and other intellectual
property laws, non-disclosure agreements and other measures to protect our proprietary rights. Currently, we
require our employees, consultants and advisors to execute non-disclosure agreements in connection with their
employment, consulting or advisory relationships with us, where appropriate. We also require our employees,
consultants and advisors who we expect to work on our current or future products to agree to disclose and assign
to us all inventions conceived during the work day, developed using our property or which relate to our business.
Despite any measures taken to protect our intellectual property, unauthorized parties may attempt to copy aspects
of the OmniPod System or to obtain and use information that we regard as proprietary.

Patents. As of December 31, 2012, we had obtained 13 issued United States patents, and had 6 additional

pending U.S. patent applications. We believe it will take up to four years, and possibly longer, for the most recent
of these U.S. patent applications to result in issued patents. Our issued U.S. patents expire between 2020 and
2022, assuming we pay all required maintenance fees. We are also seeking patent protection for our proprietary
technology in Europe, China, Japan, India and other countries and regions throughout the world. The issued
patents and pending patent applications cover, among other things:

• the basic architecture of the OmniPod System;

• the OmniPod shape memory alloy drive system;

7

• the OmniPod System cannula insertion system; and

• various novel aspects of the OmniPod System and potential next generation OmniPod Systems.

In a letter received in March 2007, Medtronic, Inc. (“Medtronic”) invited us to discuss our “taking a license to
certain Medtronic patents.” In October 2012, Medtronic MiniMed Inc., Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co. and
MiniMed Distribution Corp. (collectively, “Medtronic”) filed a lawsuit in United States District Court for the
Central District of California alleging that we have infringed the two patents referenced in their 2007 letter which
are owned by Medtronic MiniMed Inc. and licensed to Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co. and MiniMed
Distribution Corp. Medtronic seeks a declaration that we infringe its patents, equitable relief, including an
injunction that would enjoin us from infringing these patents and an unspecific award for monetary damages. The
patents referenced by this lawsuit relate to technology that is material to our business. We believe that the OmniPod
System does not infringe these patents. We believe we have meritorious defenses to this lawsuit; however, litigation
is inherently uncertain and there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome or effect of this action.

In August 2010, Becton, Dickinson and Company (“BD”) filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court
in the State of New Jersey against us alleging that the OmniPod System infringes three of its patents. BD seeks a
declaration that we have infringed its patents, equitable relief, including an injunction that would enjoin us from
infringing these patents, and an unspecified award for monetary damages. We believe that the OmniPod System
does not infringe these patents. We do not expect this litigation to have a material adverse impact on our financial
position or results of operations. We believe that we have meritorious defenses to this lawsuit; however, litigation
is inherently uncertain and there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome of effect of this action.

Trademarks. We have registered the trademarks INSULET, OMNIPOD and the OMNIPOD design with

the United States Patent and Trademark Office on the Principal Register.

Competition

The medical device industry is intensely competitive, subject to rapid change and is significantly affected by

new product introductions and other market activities of industry participants. The OmniPod System competes
with a number of existing insulin delivery devices as well as other methods for the treatment of diabetes.
Medtronic MiniMed, a division of Medtronic has been the market leader for many years and has the majority
share of the conventional insulin pump market in the United States. Other significant suppliers in the United
States are Animas Corporation, a division of Johnson & Johnson and Roche Diagnostics, a division of F.
Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd.

Neighborhood Diabetes is a distributor, operating in the diabetes testing supply and insulin pump and pump

supply market. Competition among distributors in this market is significant. Neighborhood Diabetes competes
with a wide variety of market participants, including national, regional and local distributors such as Liberty
Medical Supply Inc., CCS Medical, Simplex Healthcare, Inc. and Edgepark Medical Supplies (Assuramed).
Neighborhood Diabetes’ competitors include many profitable and well-established companies that have
significantly greater financial, marketing and other resources than we have.

Many of our competitors are large, well-capitalized companies with significantly more market share and
resources than we have. They are able to spend aggressively on product development, marketing, sales and other
product initiatives. Many of these competitors have:

• significantly greater name recognition;

• established relations with healthcare professionals, customers and third-party payors;

• larger and more established sales forces and distribution networks;

• greater experience in conducting research and development, manufacturing, clinical trials, marketing and

obtaining regulatory approval for products; and

• greater financial and human resources for product development, sales and marketing and patent litigation.

8

In addition to the established insulin pump competitors a number of companies (including current
competitors) are working to develop and market new insulin “patch” pumps. These companies are at various
stages of development. The companies working in this area of which we are aware include Medtronic, Roche
Diagnostics, Asante Solutions, Inc., Phluid Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Valeritas Inc., Cellnovo Limited,
Debiotech S.A., Novo Nordisk A/S and Abbott Laboratories.

The OmniPod System and conventional insulin pumps, both of which provide CSII therapy, also face
competition from conventional and MDI therapy, both of which are substantially less expensive than CSII
therapy, as well as from newer methods for the treatment of diabetes, such as inhaled insulin.

Government Regulation

The OmniPod System is a medical device subject to extensive and ongoing regulation by the FDA and other

regulatory bodies. FDA regulations govern product design and development, pre-clinical and clinical testing,
manufacturing, labeling, storage, pre-market clearance or approval, advertising and promotion, and sales and
distribution.

FDA’s Pre-Market Clearance and Approval Requirements. Unless an exemption applies, each medical
device we seek to commercially distribute in the United States will require either a prior 510(k) clearance or a
pre-market approval (“PMA”) from the FDA. We have obtained 510(k) clearance for the OmniPod System. Both
the 510(k) clearance and PMA processes can be expensive and lengthy and entail significant user fees, unless an
exemption is available.

In order to obtain pre-market approval and, in some cases, a 510(k) clearance, a product sponsor must

conduct well controlled clinical trials designed to test the safety and effectiveness of the product. Conducting
clinical trials generally entails a long, costly and uncertain process that is subject to delays and failure at any
stage. The data obtained from clinical trials may be inadequate to support approval or clearance of a submission.
In addition, the occurrence of unexpected findings in connection with clinical trials may prevent or delay
obtaining approval or clearance. If we conduct clinical trials, they may be delayed or halted, or be inadequate to
support approval or clearance.

• 510(k) Clearance. To obtain 510(k) clearance for any of our potential future devices (or for certain

modifications to devices that have received 510(k) clearance), we must submit a pre-market notification
demonstrating that the proposed device is substantially equivalent to a previously cleared 510(k) device
or a pre-amendment device that was in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976 for which the FDA
has not yet called for the submission of a PMA application. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance pathway
generally takes from three to twelve months from the date the application is completed, but can take
significantly longer. After a medical device receives 510(k) clearance, any modification that could
significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a significant change in its intended
use, requires a new 510(k) clearance.

• PMA. Devices deemed by the FDA to pose the greatest risk, such as life-sustaining, life-supporting or

implantable devices, or devices deemed not substantially equivalent to a previously cleared 510(k) device
or device in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976 for which PMAs have not been required,
generally require a PMA before they can be commercially distributed. A PMA application must be
supported by extensive data, including technical, pre-clinical, clinical trials, manufacturing and labeling
to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the device to the FDA’s satisfaction. After a PMA
application is complete, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the submitted information, which generally
takes between one and three years, but may take significantly longer. After any pre-market approval, a
new pre-market approval application or application supplement may be required in the event of
modifications to the device, its labeling, intended use or indication or its manufacturing process. In
addition, any PMA approval may be conditioned upon the manufacturer conducting post-market
surveillance and testing.

9

Ongoing Regulation by FDA. Even after a device receives clearance or approval and is placed on the

market, numerous regulatory requirements apply. These include:

• establishment registration and device listing;

• quality system regulation, which requires manufacturers, including third party manufacturers, to follow

stringent design, testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance procedures during all aspects
of the manufacturing process;

• labeling regulations and FDA prohibitions against the promotion of products for uncleared, unapproved

or “off-label” uses, and other requirements related to promotional activities;

• medical device reporting regulations, which require that manufacturers report to the FDA if their device
may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that would likely
cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if the malfunction were to recur;

• corrections and removals reporting regulations, which require that manufacturers report to the FDA field
corrections and product recalls or removals if undertaken to reduce a risk to health posed by the device or
to remedy a violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act that may present a risk to health; and

• post-market surveillance regulations, which apply when necessary to protect the public health or to

provide additional safety and effectiveness data for the device.

Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in enforcement actions by the FDA and

other regulatory agencies, which may include any of the following sanctions: fines, injunctions, civil or criminal
penalties, recall or seizure of our current or future products, operating restrictions, partial suspension or total
shutdown of production, refusing our request for 510(k) clearance or PMA approval of new products, rescinding
previously granted 510(k) clearances or withdrawing previously granted PMA approvals.

We are subject to announced and unannounced inspections by the FDA, and these inspections may include

the manufacturing facilities of our subcontractors. If, as a result of these inspections, the FDA determines that our
equipment, facilities, laboratories or processes do not comply with applicable FDA regulations and conditions of
product approval, the FDA may seek civil, criminal or administrative sanctions and/or remedies against us,
including the suspension of our manufacturing operations. Since approval of the OmniPod System, we have been
subject to FDA inspections of our facility on multiple occasions.

International sales of medical devices are subject to foreign government regulations, which may vary
substantially from country to country. The time required to obtain approval by a foreign country may be longer
or shorter than that required for FDA approval, and the requirements may differ. There is a trend towards
harmonization of quality system standards among the European Union, United States, Canada and various other
industrialized countries. In April 2009, we received CE Mark approval for the current version of our OmniPod
System, and in August 2011, we received CE Mark approval for our next generation product. The CE Mark gives
us authorization to distribute the OmniPod System throughout the European Union and in other countries that
recognize the CE Mark. In September 2009, we received Health Canada approval to distribute the current version
of the OmniPod System throughout Canada. We have been distributing the OmniPod System in certain countries
in Europe, through Ypsomed, since 2010, and in Canada, through GSK, since 2011.

Licensure. Several states require that durable medical equipment (“DME”) providers be licensed in order

to sell products to patients in that state. Certain of these states require that DME providers maintain an in-state
location. Although we believe we are in compliance with all applicable state regulations regarding licensure
requirements, if we were found to be noncompliant, we could lose our licensure in that state, which could
prohibit us from selling our current or future products to patients in that state. In addition, we are subject to
certain state laws regarding professional licensure. We believe that our certified diabetes educators are in
compliance with all such state laws. However, if our educators or we were to be found non-compliant in a given
state, we may need to modify our approach to providing education, clinical support and customer service.

10

Federal Anti-Kickback and Self-Referral Laws. The Federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits the knowing

and willful offer, payment, solicitation or receipt of any form of remuneration in return for, or to induce the:

• referral of a person;

• furnishing or arranging for the furnishing of items or services reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or

other governmental programs; or

• purchase, lease, or order of, or the arrangement or recommendation of the purchasing, leasing, or ordering

of any item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other governmental programs.

We provide the initial training to patients necessary for appropriate use of the OmniPod System either
through our own diabetes educators or by contracting with outside diabetes educators that have completed a
Certified Pod Trainer training course. Outside diabetes educators are reimbursed for their services at fair market
value. Although we believe that these arrangements do not violate the law, regulatory authorities may determine
otherwise, especially as enforcement of this law historically has been a high priority for the federal government.
In addition, because we may provide some coding and billing information to purchasers of the OmniPod System,
and because we cannot assure that the government will regard any billing errors that may be made as inadvertent,
the federal anti-kickback legislation may apply to us. Noncompliance with the federal anti-kickback legislation
can result in exclusion from Medicare, Medicaid or other governmental programs, restrictions on our ability to
operate in certain jurisdictions, as well as civil and criminal penalties, any of which could have an adverse effect
on our business and results of operations.

Federal law also includes a provision commonly known as the “Stark Law,” which prohibits a physician
from referring Medicare or Medicaid patients to an entity providing “designated health services,” including a
company that furnishes durable medical equipment, in which the physician has an ownership or investment
interest or with which the physician has entered into a compensation arrangement. Violation of the Stark Law
could result in denial of payment, disgorgement of reimbursements received under a noncompliant arrangement,
civil penalties, and exclusion from Medicare, Medicaid or other governmental programs. Although we believe
that we have structured our provider arrangements to comply with current Stark Law requirements, these
arrangements may not expressly meet the requirements for applicable exceptions from the law.

Additionally, as some of these laws are still evolving, we lack definitive guidance as to the application of

certain key aspects of these laws as they relate to our arrangements with providers with respect to patient
training. We cannot predict the final form that these regulations will take or the effect that the final regulations
will have on us. As a result, our provider and training arrangements may ultimately be found to be not in
compliance with applicable federal law.

Federal False Claims Act. The Federal False Claims Act provides, in part, that the federal government

may bring a lawsuit against any person whom it believes has knowingly presented, or caused to be presented, a
false or fraudulent request for payment from the federal government, or who has made a false statement or used a
false record to get a claim approved. In addition, amendments in 1986 to the Federal False Claims Act have made
it easier for private parties to bring “qui tam” whistleblower lawsuits against companies under the Federal False
Claims Act. Penalties include fines ranging from $5,500 to $11,000 for each false claim, plus three times the
amount of damages that the federal government sustained because of the act of that person. In any event, we
believe that we are in compliance with the federal government’s laws and regulations concerning the filing of
reimbursement claims.

Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The Federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law prohibits the offering or
transferring of remuneration to a Medicare or Medicaid beneficiary that the person knows or should know is
likely to influence the beneficiary’s selection of a particular supplier of Medicare or Medicaid payable items or
services. Noncompliance can result in civil money penalties of up to $10,000 for each wrongful act, assessment

11

of three times the amount claimed for each item or service and exclusion from the federal healthcare programs.
We believe that our arrangements comply with the requirements of the Federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law.

State Fraud and Abuse Provisions. Many states have also adopted some form of anti-kickback and anti-

referral laws and a false claims act. We believe that we are in conformance to such laws. Nevertheless, a
determination of liability under such laws could result in fines and penalties and restrictions on our ability to
operate in these jurisdictions.

Administrative Simplification of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. The
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) mandated the adoption of standards for
the exchange of electronic health information in an effort to encourage overall administrative simplification and
enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the healthcare industry. Ensuring privacy and security of patient
information is one of the key factors driving the legislation. We believe we are in substantial compliance with the
applicable HIPAA regulations.

Third-Party Reimbursement

In the United States, our products are generally reimbursed by third-party payors and we bill those payors

for products provided to patients. Our fulfillment and reimbursement systems are fully integrated such that
product is generally shipped only after confirmation of a physician’s valid statement of medical necessity and
current health insurance information. We maintain an insurance benefits investigation department which works to
simplify and expedite claims processing and to assist patients in obtaining third-party reimbursement.

We continue to work with third-party payors in the United States to establish coverage contracts for the

OmniPod System and other diabetes management supplies. Our coverage contracts with third-party payors
typically have a term of between one and three years and set coverage amounts during that term. Typically,
coverage contracts will automatically renew for specified incremental periods upon expiration, unless one of the
parties terminates the contract. Through Neighborhood Diabetes, we have the ability to adjudicate claims as
either durable medical equipment or through pharmacy benefits. Claims are adjudicated under private insurers,
Medicaid or Medicare. Neighborhood Diabetes’ business model requires collaboration with physicians, medical
device manufacturers, pharmaceutical distributors, private insurers and public insurers such as The Center for
Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”).

Third-party payors may decline to reimburse for procedures, supplies or services determined not to be
“medically necessary” or “reasonable.” In a limited number of cases, some third-party payors have declined to
reimburse us for a particular patient because such patient failed to meet its criteria, most often because the patient
already received reimbursement for an insulin pump from that payor within the warranty period, which is
generally four years, or because the patient did not meet their medical criteria for an insulin infusion device.
Common medical criteria for third-party payors approving reimbursement for CSII therapy include a patient
having elevated A1c levels, a history of recurring hypoglycemia, fluctuations in blood glucose levels prior to
meals or upon waking or severe glycemic variability. We try to deter and reverse decisions denying
reimbursement through education. Although our efforts are usually successful, such reimbursement may become
less likely in the future as pressure increases to lower healthcare costs, particularly near-term costs.

There is widespread concern that healthcare market initiatives in the United States may lead third-party
payors to decline or further limit reimbursement. The extent to which third-party payors may determine that use
of the OmniPod System will save costs or will at least be cost effective is highly uncertain, and it is possible,
especially for diabetes, that they will merely focus on the lower initial costs associated with injection therapy or
will otherwise limit reimbursement for insulin infusion systems or other products we develop. Because of
uncertainties regarding the possible healthcare reform measures that could be proposed in the future and
initiatives to reduce costs by private payors, we cannot predict whether reimbursement for our current or future
products will be affected or, if affected, the extent of any effect. The unavailability of third-party coverage or the
inadequacy of reimbursement for our current or future products would adversely affect our business, financial
condition and results of operations.

12

As part of our distribution agreement with Ypsomed, Ypsomed is establishing appropriate reimbursement
contracts with third-party payors in countries in which it distributes the OmniPod System prior to distributing the
OmniPod System in each country.

We are an approved Medicare provider and current Medicare coverage for CSII therapy does exist.

However, existing Medicare coverage for CSII therapy is based on the pricing structure developed for
conventional insulin pumps. We continue to seek appropriate coding verification for Medicare reimbursement.
As a result, we have decided to focus our principal efforts in establishing reimbursement for the OmniPod
System on negotiating coverage contracts with private insurers.

Neighborhood Diabetes derives a significant amount of its revenue from Medicare reimbursement.

Medicare reimbursement rates are reset annually by CMS and are typically subject to downward pressure. CMS
is able to reset reimbursement rates and terminate contracts at will. Participation in the Medicare program
requires strict compliance to a complex set of regulatory requirements. Neighborhood Diabetes has been subject
to in the past and continues to be subject to CMS audits to ensure compliance with these requirements.

Relative to our sales of certain diabetes testing supplies, the Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics,

Orthotics and Supplies Competitive Bid Program (“the Program”) provides for a phased-in program for competitive
bidding on durable medical equipment items, including certain mail-order diabetes testing supplies such as blood
glucose testing strips and lancets. In January 2013, as part of the Program, CMS announced new payment amounts,
resulting in an average reduction of approximately 72% from the current payment schedule amounts for such
diabetes testing supplies. It is expected that this new payment schedule will be effective on July 1, 2013. CMS is
expected to announce in spring 2013 the suppliers with whom it will contract to provide these products to Medicare
patients. It is unclear at this time if Neighborhood Diabetes will be awarded such a contract. If Neighborhood
Diabetes does not receive a contract, it will be unable to provide certain diabetes testing supplies to Medicare
patients after the effective date. The implementation of these new payment amounts is expected to negatively
impact our operating results in 2013.

Employees

As of December 31, 2012, we had 538 full-time employees. None of our employees are represented by a

collective bargaining agreement, and we have never experienced any work stoppage. We believe that our
employee relations are good.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

An investment in our common stock involves risks. You should consider carefully the risks described below
together with all of the other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This Annual Report on
Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements that contain risks and uncertainties. Please refer to the section
entitled “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” on page 1 of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K in connection with your consideration of the risk factors and other important factors that may affect
future results described below.

Risks Relating to Our Business

We have incurred significant operating losses since inception and cannot assure you that we will achieve
profitability.

Since our inception in 2000, we have incurred operating losses every quarter. We began commercial sales of

the OmniPod System in October 2005. Beginning in the second half of 2008, we have been able to manufacture
and sell the OmniPod System at a cost and in volumes sufficient to allow us to achieve a positive gross margin.
For the year ended December 31, 2012, our gross profit was $92.3 million. Although we have achieved a positive
gross margin, we still operate at a substantial net loss. Our net losses for the years ended December 31, 2012,

13

2011 and 2010 were $51.9 million, $45.8 million and $61.2 million, respectively. The extent of our future
operating losses and the timing of profitability are highly uncertain, and we may never achieve or sustain
profitability. We have incurred a significant net loss since our inception and, as of December 31, 2012, we had an
accumulated deficit of $481.6 million.

We currently rely on sales of the OmniPod System to generate most our revenue. The failure of the
OmniPod System to achieve and maintain significant market acceptance or any factors that negatively
impact sales of this product will adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our main product is the OmniPod System, which we introduced to the market in October 2005. We expect

to continue to derive a significant portion of our revenue from the sale of this product. Accordingly, our ability to
generate revenue is highly reliant on our ability to market and sell the devices that comprise the OmniPod
System. Our sales of the OmniPod System may be negatively impacted by many factors, including:

• the failure of the OmniPod System to achieve wide acceptance among opinion leaders in the diabetes
treatment community, insulin-prescribing physicians, third-party payors and people with insulin-
dependent diabetes;

• manufacturing problems;

• actual or perceived quality problems;

• changes in reimbursement rates or policies relating to the OmniPod System by third-party payors;

• claims that any portion of the OmniPod System infringes on patent rights or other intellectual property

rights owned by other parties;

• adverse regulatory or legal actions relating to the OmniPod System;

• damage, destruction or loss of any of our automated assembly units;

• conversion of patient referrals to actual sales of the OmniPod System;

• collection of receivables from our customers;

• attrition rates of customers who cease using the OmniPod System;

• competitive pricing and related factors; and

• results of clinical studies relating to the OmniPod System or our competitors’ products.

If any of these events occurs, our ability to generate revenue could be significantly reduced.

Our ability to achieve profitability from a current net loss level will depend on our ability to reduce the per
unit cost of producing the OmniPod by increasing customer orders, increasing manufacturing volume and
reducing raw material and overhead costs per OmniPod.

Currently, the gross profit from the sale of the OmniPod System is not sufficient to cover our operating
expenses. To achieve profitability, we need to, among other things, reduce the per unit cost of the OmniPod. This
can be achieved by increasing our manufacturing volume, which will allow for volume purchase discounts to
reduce our raw material costs and improve absorption of manufacturing overhead costs. If we are unable to
reduce raw material and manufacturing overhead costs through volume purchase discounts and increased
production capacity, our ability to achieve profitability will be severely constrained. Any increase in
manufacturing volumes must be supported by a concomitant increase in customer orders. In addition, we have
developed our next generation product and continue to focus on reducing its production cost. Each OmniPod
contains limited amounts of silver and other precious metals, the costs of which have risen over the recent past.
The occurrence of one or more factors that negatively impact the manufacturing or sales of the OmniPod System
or delay the introduction of our next generation product or increase our raw material costs may prevent us from
achieving our desired increase in manufacturing volume, which would prevent us from attaining profitability.

14

Adverse changes in general economic conditions in the United States could adversely affect us.

We are subject to the risks arising from adverse changes in general economic market conditions. The
U.S. economy remains sluggish as it seeks to recover from a severe recession and unprecedented turmoil. The
U.S. economy continues to suffer from market volatility, difficulties in the financial services sector, tight credit
markets, softness in the housing markets, concerns of inflation, increases in the cost of commodities such as
silver and gold, reduced corporate profits and capital spending, significant job losses, reduced consumer
spending, and continuing economic uncertainties. The economic turmoil and the uncertainty about future
economic conditions could negatively impact our current and prospective customers, adversely affect the
financial ability of health insurers to pay claims, adversely impact our expenses and ability to obtain financing of
our operations, cause delays or other problems with key suppliers and increase the risk of counterparty failures.
We cannot predict the strength or duration of this global economic downturn or the subsequent recovery.

Healthcare spending in the United States has been, and is expected to continue to be, negatively affected by
these recessionary trends. For example, patients who have lost their jobs or healthcare coverage may no longer be
covered by an employer-sponsored health insurance plan and patients reducing their overall spending may
eliminate purchases requiring co-payments. Since the sale of the OmniPod System to a new patient is generally
dependent on the availability of third-party reimbursement and normally requires the patient to make a
significant co-payment, the impacts of the recession on our potential customers may reduce the referrals
generated by our sales force and thereby reduce our customer orders. Similarly, the impacts of the recession on
our existing patients may cause some of them to cease purchasing the OmniPod System and to return to MDI or
other less-costly therapies, which would cause our attrition rate to increase. Any decline in new customer orders
or increase in our customer attrition rate will reduce our revenue, which in turn will make it more difficult to
achieve the per unit cost-savings which are attained in part through increases in our manufacturing volume.

The severe recession has impacted the financial stability of many private health insurers. As a result, it has

been reported that some insurers are scrutinizing claims more rigorously and delaying or denying reimbursement
more often. Since the sale of the OmniPod System is generally dependent on the availability of third-party
reimbursement, any delay or decline in such reimbursement will adversely affect our revenue.

Healthcare reform legislation could adversely affect our revenue and financial condition.

During the past several years, the U.S. healthcare industry has been subject to an increase in governmental

regulation at both the federal and state levels. Efforts to control healthcare costs, including prescription drug
costs, are underway at the federal and state government levels. There are provisions that provide for the creation
of a new public-private Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute tasked with identifying comparative
effectiveness research priorities, establishing a research project agenda and contracting with entities to conduct
the research in accordance with the agenda. Research findings published by this institute will be publicly
disseminated. It is difficult at this time to determine what impact the comparative effectiveness analysis will have
on the OmniPod System or our future financial results.

Beginning in 2013, sales of certain medical devices are subject to a 2.3% federal excise tax. We believe,
based on advice from our tax advisor, that the sales of our products are exempt from this excise tax. However, if
it is subsequently determined that sales of one or more of our products are subject to this excise tax, these tax
obligations could materially adversely affect our financial results.

The recently enacted healthcare reform legislation, along with associated proposed and interim final rule-

making, may have an adverse impact on Neighborhood Diabetes’ business. For example, the federal Retiree
Drug Subsidy is less valuable to Neighborhood Diabetes’ clients due to the change in tax treatment of the
subsidy. As a result, Neighborhood Diabetes’ clients may choose to drop or limit retiree prescription drug
coverage. Further, private plan sponsors may react to the new laws and the uncertainty surrounding them by
reducing, foregoing or delaying engaging Neighborhood Diabetes to distribute products. We cannot accurately

15

predict the complete impact of healthcare reform legislation, but it could lead to a decreased demand for
Neighborhood Diabetes’ distribution services and other outcomes that could adversely impact Neighborhood
Diabetes’ business and financial results, which in turn could materially and adversely impact our business and
financial results.

In addition, the healthcare reform legislation significantly increased regulation of managed care plans and

decreased reimbursement to Medicare managed care and fee-for-service programs. Some of these initiatives
purport to, among other things, require that health plan members have greater access to drugs not included on a
plan’s formulary. Moreover, to alleviate budget shortfalls, states have reduced or frozen payments to Medicaid
managed care plans.

There may in the future be additional changes in government policy, including additional modifications to
the recently-adopted healthcare reform bill, that could increase our cost of doing business and negatively impact
our ability to sell our products and achieve profitability.

We may need to raise additional funds in the future, and these funds may not be available on acceptable
terms or at all.

Our capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

• revenue generated by sales of the our current products and any other future products that we may develop;

• costs associated with adding further manufacturing capacity, including capacity to manufacture our next-

generation product;

• costs associated with expanding our sales and marketing efforts in the United States and internationally;

• expenses we incur in manufacturing and selling the OmniPod System and selling our products;

• costs of developing new products or technologies and enhancements to the OmniPod System;

• the cost of obtaining and maintaining FDA approval or clearance of our current or future products;

• costs associated with any expansion;

• the cost of complying with regulatory requirements;

• costs associated with capital expenditures;

• costs associated with litigation; and

• the number and timing of any acquisitions or other strategic transactions.

We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents, together with the cash to be generated from expected

product sales, will be sufficient to meet our projected operating requirements through at least the end of 2013.

We may in the future seek additional funds from public and private stock offerings, borrowings under credit

lines or other sources. In January 2013, we sold 4.7 million shares of our common stock at a price of $20.75 per
share, resulting in net proceeds to us of approximately $92.8 million. We are using a portion of the net proceeds
to fund sales and marketing activities associated with our next generation OmniPod System and to fund product
development. In addition, in June 2011 we issued $143.8 million of our 3.75% Convertible Senior Notes and
repurchased $70 million of our outstanding 5.375% Convertible Senior Notes. The 3.75% Convertible Senior
Notes will mature in June 2016 and the remaining 5.375% Senior Convertible Notes will mature in June 2013. If
we issue equity or debt securities to raise additional funds, our existing stockholders may experience dilution,
and the new equity or debt securities may have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of our existing
stockholders. In addition, if we raise additional funds through collaboration, licensing or other similar
arrangements, it may be necessary to relinquish valuable rights to our potential future products or proprietary
technologies, or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

16

Our ability to raise additional capital may be adversely impacted by current economic conditions, including
the effects of the continued disruptions to the credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide. As
a result of these and other factors, we do not know whether additional capital will be available when needed, or
that, if available, we will be able to obtain additional capital on terms favorable to us or our stockholders.

If we are unable to raise additional capital due to these or other factors, we may need to further manage our

operational expenses to reflect these external factors, including potentially curtailing our planned development
activities. If we cannot raise additional funds in the future on acceptable terms, we may not be able to develop
new products, execute our business plan, take advantage of future opportunities or respond to competitive
pressures or unanticipated customer requirements. If any of these events occur, it could adversely affect our
business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are dependent upon third-party suppliers, making us vulnerable to supply problems and price
fluctuations.

We rely on a number of suppliers who manufacture the components of the OmniPods and PDMs. For

example, we rely on Phillips Medisize Corporation to manufacture and supply a number of injection molded
components of the OmniPod and Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. to manufacture and supply the application
specific integrated circuit that is incorporated into the OmniPod. In addition, a subsidiary of Flextronics in China
provides the supply of complete OmniPods. We do not have long-term supply agreements with most of our
suppliers, and, in many cases, we make our purchases on a purchase order basis. In some other cases, where we
do have agreements in place, our agreements with our suppliers can be terminated by either party upon short
notice. Additionally, our suppliers may encounter problems during manufacturing for a variety of reasons,
including failure to follow specific protocols and procedures, failure to comply with applicable regulations,
equipment malfunction and environmental factors, any of which could delay or impede their ability to meet our
demand. Our reliance on these third-party suppliers also subjects us to other risks that could harm our business,
including:

• we are not a major customer of many of our suppliers, and these suppliers may therefore give other

customers’ needs higher priority than ours;

• we may not be able to obtain an adequate supply in a timely manner or on commercially reasonable

terms;

• our suppliers, especially new suppliers, may make errors in manufacturing that could negatively affect the

efficacy or safety of the OmniPod System or cause delays in shipment;

• we may have difficulty locating and qualifying alternative suppliers for our sole-source supplies;

• switching components may require product redesign and submission to the FDA of a 510(k) supplement;

• our suppliers manufacture products for a range of customers, and fluctuations in demand for the products

these suppliers manufacture for others may affect their ability to deliver products to us in a timely
manner;

• the occurrence of a fire, natural disaster or other catastrophe, impacting one or more of our suppliers, may

affect their ability to deliver products to us in a timely manner; and

• our suppliers may encounter financial hardships unrelated to our demand, which could inhibit their ability

to fulfill our orders and meet our requirements.

We may not be able to quickly establish additional or alternative suppliers, particularly for our sole-source

suppliers, in part because of the FDA approval process and because of the custom nature of various parts we
require. Any interruption or delay in obtaining products from our third-party suppliers, or our inability to obtain
products from alternate sources at acceptable prices in a timely manner, could impair our ability to meet the
demand of our customers and cause them to cancel orders or switch to competing products.

17

The implementation of a national mail-order competitive bid program by CMS could negatively affect
Neighborhood Diabetes’ operating results.

The Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics and Supplies Competitive Bid Program (“the
Program”) provides for a phased-in program for competitive bidding on durable medical equipment items,
including certain mail-order diabetes testing supplies such as blood glucose testing strips and lancets. In January
2013, as part of the Program, CMS announced new payment amounts, resulting in average reduction of
approximately 72% from the current payment schedule amounts for such diabetes testing supplies. It is expected
that this new payment schedule will be effective on July 1, 2013. CMS is expected to announce in spring 2013
the suppliers with whom it will contract to provide these products to Medicare patients. It is unclear at this time if
Neighborhood Diabetes will be awarded such a contract. If Neighborhood Diabetes does not receive a contract, it
will be unable to provide certain diabetes testing supplies to Medicare patients after the effective date. The
implementation of these new payment amounts is expected to negatively impact our operating results in 2013.

If Neighborhood Diabetes does not continue to earn and retain purchase discounts and rebates from
manufacturers at current levels, or if it is required to pay sales tax on sales of certain products, our results
of operations could be adversely affected.

Neighborhood Diabetes has contractual relationships with product device manufacturers, pharmaceutical

manufacturers and wholesalers that provide Neighborhood Diabetes with purchase discounts and rebates on
products distributed by Neighborhood Diabetes and drugs dispensed from Neighborhood Diabetes’ mail-order
pharmacies. These discounts and rebates are generally passed on to payors in the form of lower contracted
reimbursement rates. Manufacturer rebates often depend on Neighborhood Diabetes’ ability to meet contractual
market share or other requirements.

Neighborhood Diabetes’ payor partners often have contractual rights relating to their formulary structure,

and while Neighborhood Diabetes’ programs aim to maximize savings to payors, they are often making specific
choices regarding which products and drugs to place on their formularies. Neighborhood Diabetes’ profitability
may be impacted by these payor decisions. In addition, the pharmaceutical industry (both manufacturers of
brand-name drugs, as well as generic drugs) continues to consolidate and this may impact Neighborhood
Diabetes’ drug purchasing costs and profitability.

Changes in existing federal or state laws or regulations, or in their interpretation by courts and agencies or

the adoption of new laws or regulations (such as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act enacted on
March 23, 2010), relating to patent term extensions, purchase discount and rebate arrangements with
manufacturers, as well as some of the other services Neighborhood Diabetes provides to manufacturers, could
also reduce the discounts or rebates Neighborhood Diabetes receives and adversely impact its business, financial
condition, liquidity and operating results, which in turn could materially and adversely affect our business and
results of operations.

We believe that sales of most diabetes supplies are exempt from sales tax in most jurisdictions. However, if

it is subsequently determined that sales of one or more of our products are subject to sales tax in such
jurisdictions, our obligation to pay such sales taxes could materially adversely affect our financial results.

Neighborhood Diabetes’ business is dependent on its relationships with a limited number of suppliers and
health plans. As such, the loss of one or more of these relationships could significantly impact our ability to
sustain and/or improve our financial performance.

Neighborhood Diabetes derives a significant percentage of its net sales and profitability from its
relationships with a limited number of suppliers and payors. Neighborhood Diabetes’ agreements with its
suppliers and payors may be short-term and cancelable by either party without cause on 30 to 365 days prior
notice. These agreements may limit Neighborhood Diabetes’ ability to provide distribution services for

18

competing products during the term of the agreement and allow the supplier to distribute through channels other
than Neighborhood Diabetes. Further, certain of these agreements allow pricing and other terms of these
relationships to be periodically adjusted for changing market conditions or required service levels. A termination
or modification to any of these relationships could have a material adverse effect on Neighborhood Diabetes’
business, financial condition and results of operations, which in turn could have a material and adverse effect on
our business and results of operations.

Neighborhood Diabetes has received a significant percentage of its historical net sales from Medicare
reimbursement. Medicare reimbursement rates are reset annually by CMS and are typically subject to downward
pressure. Furthermore, CMS is able to reset reimbursement rates and terminate contracts at will. In addition,
participation in the Medicare program requires strict compliance to a complex set of regulatory requirements.
Failure by Neighborhood Diabetes to meet those requirements could result in the loss of the ability to participate
as a Medicare supplier, which could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our financial condition or results of operations may be adversely affected by international business risks.

In January 2010, we entered into a five-year distribution agreement with Ypsomed to become the exclusive

distributor of the OmniPod System in multiple countries including Germany, the United Kingdom, the
Netherlands, and Switzerland. We entered into an amendment to the distribution agreement with Ypsomed in
April 2012. The amendment expanded the agreement to include additional countries and extended the expiration
of the agreement for an additional year. Ypsomed’s introduction of the OmniPod System in certain countries has
been delayed due to a number of factors. Future delays would likely result in reduced purchases by Ypsomed,
which would adversely affect our revenue. In February 2011, we entered into a distribution agreement with GSK
to become the exclusive distributor of the OmniPod System in Canada. While these agreements will help us
expand our global footprint, we will now be exposed to fluctuations in product demand and sales productivity
outside the United States and will have to manage the risks associated with market acceptance of the OmniPod
System in foreign countries. Our efforts to introduce our current or future products into foreign markets may not
be successful, in which case we may have expended significant resources without realizing the expected benefit.
Ultimately, the investment required for expansion into foreign markets could exceed the results of operations
generated from this expansion. We do not have control over Ypsomed’s or GSK’s operational and financial
condition, and we will have increased foreign regulatory and export requirements.

In addition, in order to reduce our cost of goods sold and increase our production capacity, we increasingly

rely on third-party suppliers located outside the United States. For example, currently all of our OmniPods are
manufactured at a facility in China operated by Flextronics. As a result, our business is subject to risks associated
with doing business internationally, including:

• political instability and adverse economic conditions;

• trade protection measures, such as tariff increases, and import and export licensing and control

requirements;

• potentially negative consequences from changes in tax laws;

• difficulty in staffing and managing widespread operations;

• difficulties associated with foreign legal systems including increased costs associated with enforcing

contractual obligations in foreign jurisdictions;

• changes in foreign currency exchange rates;

• differing protection of intellectual property;

• unexpected changes in regulatory requirements;

19

• failure to fulfill foreign regulatory requirements on a timely basis or at all to market the OmniPod System

or other future products;

• availability of, and changes in, reimbursement within prevailing foreign health care payment systems;

• adapting to the differing laws and regulations, business and clinical practices, and patient preferences in

foreign markets;

• difficulties in managing foreign relationships and operations, including any relationships that we establish

with foreign partners, distributors or sales or marketing agents; and

• difficulty in collecting accounts receivable and longer collection periods.

In addition, expansion into foreign markets imposes additional burdens on our executive and administrative
personnel, research and sales departments and general management resources. Our future success will depend in
large part on our ability to anticipate and effectively manage these and other risks associated with doing business
outside of the United States. Any of these factors may have a material adverse effect on our production capacity
and, consequently, our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Failure to secure or retain adequate coverage or reimbursement for the OmniPod System by third-party
payors could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We expect that sales of the OmniPod System will be limited unless a substantial portion of the sales price of

the OmniPod System is paid for by third-party payors, including private insurance companies, health
maintenance organizations, preferred provider organizations and other managed care providers. We currently
have contracts establishing reimbursement for the OmniPod System with national and regional third-party payors
which provide reimbursement for patients residing in all 50 states. While we anticipate entering into additional
contracts with other third-party payors, we cannot assure you that we will be successful in doing so. In addition,
these contracts can generally be terminated by the third-party payor without cause. Also, healthcare market
initiatives in the United States may lead third-party payors to decline or reduce reimbursement for the OmniPod
System. Moreover, compliance with administrative procedures or requirements of third-party payors may result
in delays in processing approvals by those payors for patients to obtain coverage for the use of the OmniPod
System. We are an approved Medicare provider and current Medicare coverage for CSII therapy does exist.
However, existing Medicare coverage for CSII therapy is based on the pricing structure developed for
conventional insulin pumps. We believe that the coding verification for Medicare reimbursement of the OmniPod
System is inappropriate and we have been in the process for several years in seeking appropriate coding
verification. No assurance can be provided that we will ever obtain appropriate coding verification for Medicare
reimbursement of the OmniPod System. As a result, we have focused our efforts in establishing reimbursement
for the OmniPod System by negotiating contracts with private insurers. In addition, as we expand our sales and
marketing efforts outside of the United States, we face additional risks associated with obtaining and maintaining
reimbursement from foreign health care payment systems on a timely basis or at all. Failure to secure or retain
adequate coverage or reimbursement for the OmniPod System by third-party payors, including Medicare, could
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Failure to retain key payor partners and their members, either as a result of economic conditions, increased
competition or other factors, could result in significantly decreased revenues and decreased profitability of
the Neighborhood Diabetes business.

If several of Neighborhood Diabetes’ payor partners terminate, cancel or do not renew their agreements with
Neighborhood Diabetes or stop contracting with Neighborhood Diabetes for some of the products Neighborhood
Diabetes provides because they accept a competing proposal or for any other reason, and Neighborhood Diabetes
is not successful in generating new sales with comparable operating margins to replace the lost business,
Neighborhood Diabetes’ revenues and results of operations could suffer, which in turn could materially and
adversely affect our revenues and results of operations.

20

Certain revenues from diabetes testing supplies and Neighborhood Diabetes’ Medicare Part D offerings
expose Neighborhood Diabetes to increased billing, cash application and credit risks. Additionally, current
economic conditions may expose Neighborhood Diabetes to increased credit risk.

Net sales from Neighborhood Diabetes’ distribution of diabetes testing supplies depend on the continued

availability of reimbursement by government and private insurance plans. The government’s Medicare
regulations are complex and, as a result, the billing and collection process is time-consuming and typically
involves the submission of claims to multiple payors whose payment of such claims may be contingent upon the
payment of another payor. Because of the coordination with multiple payors and the complexity in determining
reimbursable amounts, these accounts receivable have higher risk in collecting the full amounts due and applying
the associated payments.

The Medicare Part D product offerings that Neighborhood Diabetes distributes require premium payments

from members for receipt of ongoing benefit, as well as amounts due from CMS. As a result of the demographics
of the consumers covered under these programs and the complexity of the calculations, as well as the potential
magnitude and timing of settlement for amounts due from CMS, these accounts receivable are subject to
heightened billing and realization risk

Additionally, Neighborhood Diabetes may be subject to increased credit risk associated with state and local

government agencies experiencing increased fiscal challenges. As a result of these aforementioned risks,
Neighborhood Diabetes may be required to record bad debt expenses, which could materially and adversely
affect our results of operations and liquidity.

We face competition from numerous competitors, most of whom have far greater resources than we have,
which may make it more difficult for us to achieve significant market penetration and which may allow
them to develop additional products for the treatment of diabetes that compete with the OmniPod System.
The medical device industry is intensely competitive, subject to rapid change and significantly affected by
new product introductions and other market activities of industry participants. The OmniPod System competes
with a number of existing insulin delivery devices as well as other methods for the treatment of diabetes.
Medtronic MiniMed, a division of Medtronic has been the market leader for many years and has the majority
share of the conventional insulin pump market in the United States. Other significant suppliers in the United
States include Animas Corporation, a division of Johnson & Johnson, and Roche Diagnostics, a division of F.
Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.

Many of our competitors are large, well-capitalized companies with significantly more market share and
resources than we have. As a consequence, they are able to spend more aggressively on product development,
marketing, sales and other product initiatives than we can. Many of these competitors have:

• significantly greater name recognition;
• established relations with healthcare professionals, customers and third-party payors;
• larger and more established distribution networks;
• greater experience in conducting research and development, manufacturing, clinical trials, marketing and

obtaining regulatory approval; and

• greater financial and human resources for product development, sales and marketing and patent litigation.

We also compete with MDI therapy, which is substantially less expensive than CSII therapy. MDI therapy

has been made more effective by the introduction of long-acting insulin analogs by both sanofi-aventis and Novo
Nordisk A/S. While we believe that CSII therapy, in general, and the OmniPod System, in particular, have
significant competitive and clinical advantages over traditional MDI therapy, improvements in the effectiveness
of MDI therapy may result in fewer people with insulin-dependent diabetes converting from MDI therapy to CSII
therapy than we expect and may result in negative price pressure.

In addition to the established insulin pump competitors, a number of companies (including current
competitors) are working to develop and market new insulin “patch” pumps. These companies are at various
stages of development. The companies of which we are aware working in this area include Medtronic, Roche
Diagnostics, Asante Solutions, Inc., Phluid Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Valeritas Inc., Cellnovo Limited,
Debiotech S.A., Novo Nordisk A/S and Abbott Laboratories.

21

Our current competitors or other companies may at any time develop additional products for the treatment
of diabetes. For example, other diabetes-focused pharmaceutical companies, including Abbott Laboratories, Eli
Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk A/S and Takeda Pharmaceuticals Company Limited, are developing similar
products. All of these competitors are large, well-capitalized companies with significantly greater product
development resources than us. If an existing or future competitor develops a product that competes with or is
superior to the OmniPod System, our revenue may decline. In addition, some of our competitors may compete by
changing their pricing model or by lowering the price of their insulin delivery systems or ancillary supplies. If
these competitors’ products were to gain acceptance by healthcare professionals, people with insulin-dependent
diabetes or third-party payors, a downward pressure on prices could result. If prices were to fall, we may not
improve our gross margins or sales growth sufficiently to achieve profitability.

Competition among distributors in the diabetes testing supply and insulin pump and pump supply market,
as well as the broader healthcare industry, is significant and could impair Neighborhood Diabetes’ ability to
attract and retain clients.

Competition among distributors in the diabetes testing supply and insulin pump and pump supply market,

which Neighborhood Diabetes serves, is significant. Neighborhood Diabetes competes with a wide variety of
market participants, including national, regional and local distributors such as Liberty Medical Supply Inc., CCS
Medical, Simplex Healthcare, Inc. and Edgepark Medical Supplies (Assuramed). Neighborhood Diabetes’
competitors include many profitable and well-established companies that have significantly greater financial,
marketing and other resources than we have.

Neighborhood Diabetes competes primarily on the basis of its high touch service model, which we believe
distinguishes it from other market participants. To attract new clients and retain existing clients, Neighborhood
Diabetes must continually provide quality services to its clients and assist healthcare providers and insurers with
managing their costs. We cannot be sure that Neighborhood Diabetes will continue to remain competitive, nor
can we be sure that we will be able to market Neighborhood Diabetes’ distribution capabilities and services to
clients successfully.

Part of Neighborhood Diabetes’ ability to remain profitably competitive in winning and retaining business
relies on its ability to maintain reimbursement rates and product supply costs in ranges that produce a positive sales
margin. Decreased competition among product manufacturers and payors may impact Neighborhood Diabetes’
ability to achieve favorable terms. Neighborhood Diabetes’ largest payor partner, the Medicare Program, represents
a significant portion of Neighborhood Diabetes’ net sales. Medicare reimbursement rates are reset annually by CMS
and are typically subject to downward pressure. Significant reimbursement decreases by Medicare without a
corresponding ability to secure lower supply costs could materially and adversely affect operations. Consolidation
of payor entities within the markets Neighborhood Diabetes serves, as well as the consolidation of competitors, or
suppliers could impair Neighborhood Diabetes’ ability to attract and retain clients.

In January 2013, as part of the Program, CMS announced new payment amounts, resulting in an average
reduction of approximately 72% from the current payment schedule amounts for such diabetes testing supplies. It
is expected that this new payment schedule will be effective on July 1, 2013. CMS is expected to announce in
spring 2013 the suppliers with whom it will contract to provide these products to Medicare patients. It is unclear
at this time if Neighborhood Diabetes will be awarded such a contract. If Neighborhood Diabetes does not
receive a contract, it will be unable to provide certain diabetes testing supplies to Medicare patients after the
effective date. The implementation of these new payment amounts is expected to negatively impact our operating
results in 2013.

Technological breakthroughs in diabetes monitoring, treatment or prevention could render the OmniPod
System obsolete.

The diabetes treatment market is subject to rapid technological change and product innovation. The
OmniPod System is based on our proprietary technology, but a number of companies, medical researchers and

22

existing pharmaceutical companies are pursuing new delivery devices, delivery technologies, sensing
technologies, procedures, drugs and other therapeutics for the monitoring, treatment and/or prevention of insulin-
dependent diabetes. For example, FDA approval of a commercially viable “closed-loop” system that combines
continuous “real-time” glucose sensing or monitoring and automatic continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in
a manner that delivers appropriate amounts of insulin on a timely basis without patient direction could have a
material adverse effect on our revenue and future profitability. Medtronic has developed an FDA-approved
product combining continuous glucose sensing and CSII therapy and if we fail to do so or are delayed in doing
so, we may be at a competitive disadvantage, which could negatively impact our business. In addition, the
National Institutes of Health and other supporters of diabetes research are continually seeking ways to prevent,
cure or improve the treatment of diabetes. Any technological breakthroughs in diabetes monitoring, treatment or
prevention could render the OmniPod System obsolete, which may have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.

If our existing license agreement with Abbott is terminated or we fail to enter into new license agreements
allowing us to incorporate a blood glucose meter into the OmniPod System, our business may be materially
adversely impacted.

Our rights to incorporate the FreeStyle blood glucose meter into the OmniPod System are governed by a
development and license agreement with Abbott as the successor to TheraSense, Inc. This agreement provides us
with a non-exclusive, fully paid, non-transferable and non-sublicensable license in the United States under
patents and other relevant technical information relating to the FreeStyle blood glucose meter during the term of
the agreement. As amended, this agreement runs through December 2014, with a one-year renewal option. The
license granted under the agreement covers the United States, Canada, and Israel and certain other countries and
Abbott is obligated to pay certain amounts over time to us for services performed in connection with each sale of
a PDM that includes an Abbott Discrete Blood Glucose Monitor to customers in most of these countries. The
agreement may be terminated by Abbott if it discontinues its FreeStyle blood glucose meter or test strips or by
either party if the other party is acquired by a competitor of the first party or materially breaches its obligations
under the agreement. Termination of this agreement could require us to either remove the blood glucose meter
from PDMs to be sold in the future, which would impair the functionality of the OmniPod System, or attempt to
incorporate an alternative blood glucose meter into the PDM, either of which would require significant
development and regulatory activities that might not be completed in time to prevent an interruption in the
availability of the OmniPod System to our customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.

We entered into a non-exclusive agreement with LifeScan, Inc. (“LifeScan”) to integrate LifeScan’s
OneTouch® blood glucose monitoring technology into our PDM. Under the terms of the agreement, LifeScan
will provide its glucose monitoring technology to us, and we are responsible for the development, design and
approval of the integrated device. The initial term of the agreement ends in 2017. The agreement also contains an
exclusivity option that may be exercised, at our discretion, upon commercialization of the integrated PDM. This
option would make LifeScan the exclusive blood glucose monitoring technology integrated into our PDM and
provide for additional compensation payments to be paid by LifeScan to us. However, if we are unable to
complete the development and regulatory process so that we can begin marketing and selling our PDM with an
integrated LifeScan meter before we are required to cease marketing and selling our PDM with an integrated
Abbott meter, there could be an interruption in the payments we receive related to the sale of our PDM with an
integrated blood glucose meter, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition
and results of operations.

In the future, we may need additional licenses to intellectual property owned by third parties in order to
commercialize new products. If we cannot obtain these additional licenses, we may not be able to develop or
commercialize these future products. Our rights to use technologies licensed to us by third parties are not entirely
within our control, and we may not be able to continue selling the OmniPod System or sell future products
without these technologies.

23

The patent rights on which we rely to protect the intellectual property underlying the OmniPod System may
not be adequate, which could enable third parties to use our technology and would harm our continued
ability to compete in the market.

Our success will depend in part on our continued ability to develop or acquire commercially-valuable patent

rights and to protect these rights adequately. Our patent position is generally uncertain and involves complex
legal and factual questions. The risks and uncertainties that we face with respect to our patents and other related
rights include the following:

• the pending patent applications we have filed or to which we have exclusive rights may not result in

issued patents or may take longer than we expect to result in issued patents;

• the claims of any patents that are issued may not provide meaningful protection;

• we may not be able to develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable; and

• other companies may design around technologies we have patented, licensed or developed.

We also may not be able to protect our patent rights effectively in some foreign countries. For a variety of
reasons, we may decide not to file for patent protection. Our patent rights underlying the OmniPod System may
not be adequate, and our competitors or customers may design around our proprietary technologies or
independently develop similar or alternative technologies or products that are equal or superior to ours without
infringing on any of our patent rights. In addition, the patents licensed or issued to us may not provide a
competitive advantage. The occurrence of any of these events may have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.

Other rights and measures we have taken to protect our intellectual property may not be adequate, which
would harm our ability to compete in the market.

In addition to patents, we rely on a combination of trade secrets, copyright and trademark laws,

confidentiality, non-disclosure and assignment of invention agreements and other contractual provisions and
technical measures to protect our intellectual property rights. Despite these measures, any of our intellectual
property rights could be challenged, invalidated, circumvented or misappropriated. While we currently require
employees, consultants and other third parties to enter into confidentiality, non-disclosure or assignment of
invention agreements, or a combination thereof where appropriate, any of the following could still occur:

• the agreements may be breached;

• we may have inadequate remedies for any breach;

• trade secrets and other proprietary information could be disclosed to our competitors; or

• others may independently develop substantially equivalent or superior proprietary information and

techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or disclose such technologies.

If, for any of the above reasons, our intellectual property is disclosed or misappropriated, it would harm our
ability to protect our rights and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations.

We may need to initiate lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents and other intellectual property rights,
which could be expensive and, if we lose, could cause us to lose some of our intellectual property rights,
which would harm our ability to compete in the market.

We rely on patents to protect a portion of our intellectual property and our competitive position. Patent law

relating to the scope of claims in the technology fields in which we operate is still evolving and, consequently,
patent positions in the medical device industry are generally uncertain. In order to protect or enforce our patent

24

rights, we may initiate patent litigation against third parties, such as infringement suits or interference
proceedings. Litigation may be necessary to:

• assert claims of infringement;

• enforce our patents;

• protect our trade secrets or know-how; or

• determine the enforceability, scope and validity of the proprietary rights of others.

Any lawsuits that we initiate could be expensive, take significant time and divert management’s attention

from other business concerns. Litigation also puts our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly
and our patent applications at risk of not issuing. Additionally, we may 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, if
any, may not be commercially valuable. The occurrence of any of these events may have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Claims that our current or future products infringe or misappropriate the proprietary rights of others could
adversely affect our ability to sell those products and cause us to incur additional costs.

Substantial litigation over intellectual property rights exists in the medical device industry. We expect that

we could be increasingly subject to third-party infringement claims as our revenue increases, the number of
competitors grows and the functionality of products and technology in different industry segments overlaps.
Third parties may currently have, or may eventually be issued, patents on which our current or future products or
technologies may infringe. For example, we are aware of certain patents and patent applications owned by our
competitors that cover different aspects of insulin infusion and the related devices. Any of these third parties
might make a claim of infringement against us.

In a letter received in March 2007, Medtronic, Inc. invited us to discuss our “taking a license to certain
Medtronic patents.” In October 2012, Medtronic MiniMed Inc., Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co. and
MiniMed Distribution Corp. (collectively, “Medtronic”) filed a lawsuit in United States District Court for the
Central District of California alleging that we have infringed the two patents referenced in their 2007 letter which
are owned by Medtronic MiniMed Inc. and licensed to Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co. and MiniMed
Distribution Corp. Medtronic seeks a declaration that we infringe its patents, equitable relief, including an
injunction that would enjoin us from infringing these patents and an unspecific award for monetary damages. The
patents referenced by this lawsuit relate to technology that is material to our business.

In addition, in August 2010, BD filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court in the State of New Jersey

against us alleging that the OmniPod System infringes three of its patents. BD seeks a declaration that we have
infringed its patents, equitable relief, including an injunction that would enjoin us from infringing these patents,
and an unspecified award for monetary damages.

This litigation, regardless of its outcome, will likely result in the expenditure of significant financial
resources and the diversion of management’s time and resources. In addition, this litigation may cause negative
publicity, adversely impact prospective customers, cause product shipment delays, prohibit us from
manufacturing, marketing or selling our current or future products, require us to develop non-infringing
technology, make substantial payments to third parties or enter into royalty or license agreements, which may not
be available on acceptable terms or at all. If a successful claim of infringement were made against us in this
litigation and we could not develop non-infringing technology or license the infringed or similar technology on a
timely and cost-effective basis, our revenue may decrease substantially and we could be exposed to significant
liability. A court could enter orders that temporarily, preliminarily or permanently enjoin us or our customers
from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing our current or future products, or could enter an order
mandating that we undertake certain remedial activities.

25

We are subject to extensive regulation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which could restrict the
sales and marketing of the OmniPod System and could cause us to incur significant costs. In addition, we
may become subject to additional foreign regulation as we increase our efforts to sell the OmniPod System
outside of the United States.

We sell medical devices that are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. These regulations relate to

manufacturing, labeling, sale, promotion, distribution and shipping. Before a new medical device, or a new use of or
claim for an existing product, can be marketed in the United States, it must first receive either 510(k) clearance or
pre-market approval from the FDA, unless an exemption applies. We may be required to obtain a new 510(k)
clearance or pre-market approval for significant post-market modifications to the OmniPod System. In December
2012 we received 510(k) clearance for our next generation OmniPod System. Obtaining 510(k) clearance or pre-
market approval for medical devices can be expensive and lengthy, and entail significant user fees, unless an
exemption is available. The FDA’s process for obtaining 510(k) clearance usually takes three to twelve months, but
it can last longer. The process for obtaining pre-market approval is much more costly and uncertain and it generally
takes from one to three years, or longer, from the time the application is filed with the FDA.

Medical devices may be marketed only for the indications for which they are approved or cleared. We have
obtained 510(k) clearance for the current clinical applications for which we market our OmniPod System, which
includes the use of U-100, which is a common form of insulin. However, our clearances can be revoked if safety or
effectiveness problems develop. Further, we may not be able to obtain additional 510(k) clearances or pre-market
approvals for new products or for modifications to, or additional indications for, the OmniPod System in a timely
fashion or at all. Delays in obtaining future clearances would adversely affect our ability to introduce new or
enhanced products in a timely manner which in turn would harm our revenue and future profitability. We have
made modifications to our devices in the past and may make additional modifications in the future that we believe
do not or will not require additional clearances or approvals. If the FDA disagrees, and requires new clearances or
approvals for the modifications, we may be required to recall and to stop marketing the modified devices.

We also are subject to numerous post-marketing regulatory requirements, which include quality system

regulations related to the manufacturing of our devices, labeling regulations and medical device reporting
regulations, which require us to report to the FDA if our devices cause or contribute to a death or serious injury, or
malfunction in a way that would likely cause or contribute to a death or serious injury. In addition, these regulatory
requirements may change in the future in a way that adversely affects us. For instance, the FDA is in the process of
reviewing the 510(k) approval process and criteria and has announced initiatives to improve the current pre-market
and post-market regulatory processes and requirements associated with infusion pumps and other home use medical
devices. As part of this effort, the FDA is reviewing the adverse event reporting and recall processes for insulin
pumps. If we fail to comply with present or future regulatory requirements that are applicable to us, we may be
subject to enforcement action by the FDA, which may include any of the following sanctions:

• untitled letters, warning letters, fines, injunctions, consent decrees and civil penalties;

• customer notification, or orders for repair, replacement or refunds;

• voluntary or mandatory recall or seizure of our current or future products;

• administrative detention by the FDA of medical devices believed to be adulterated or misbranded;

• imposing operating restrictions, suspension or shutdown of production;

• refusing our requests for 510(k) clearance or pre-market approval of new products, new intended uses or

modifications to the OmniPod System;

• rescinding 510(k) clearance or suspending or withdrawing pre-market approvals that have already been

granted; and

• criminal prosecution.

The occurrence of any of these events may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial

condition and results of operations.

26

We entered into a distribution agreement with Ypsomed in January 2010, pursuant to which Ypsomed
became the exclusive distributor of the OmniPod System in certain countries. In addition, in February 2011, we
entered into a distribution agreement with GSK pursuant to which GSK became the exclusive distributor of the
OmniPod System in Canada. By distributing our product outside of the United States we may be required to
comply with additional foreign regulatory requirements. For example, in April 2009, we received CE Mark
approval for our OmniPod System and in August 2011, we received CE Mark approval of our next generation
OmniPod System. The CE Mark gives us authorization to distribute the OmniPod System throughout the
European Union and in other countries that recognize the CE Mark. Additionally, in September 2009, we
received Health Canada approval to distribute the OmniPod System throughout Canada. As we expand our sales
efforts internationally, we may need to obtain additional foreign approval certifications.

If we, our contract manufacturers or our component suppliers fail to comply with the FDA’s quality system
regulations, the manufacturing and distribution of our devices could be interrupted, and our product sales
and operating results could suffer.

We, our contract manufacturers and our component suppliers are required to comply with the FDA’s quality

system regulations, which is a complex regulatory framework that covers the procedures and documentation of
the design, testing, production, control, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, sterilization, storage and shipping
of our devices. The FDA enforces its quality system regulations through periodic unannounced inspections. We
cannot assure you that our facilities or our contract manufacturers’ or component suppliers’ facilities would pass
any future quality system inspection. If our or any of our contract manufacturers’ or component suppliers’
facilities fails a quality system inspection, the manufacturing or distribution of our devices could be interrupted
and our operations disrupted. Failure to take adequate and timely corrective action in response to an adverse
quality system inspection could force a suspension or shutdown of our packaging and labeling operations or the
manufacturing operations of our contract manufacturers, or a recall of our devices. If any of these events occurs,
we may not be able to provide our customers with the quantity of OmniPods they require on a timely basis, our
reputation could be harmed and we could lose customers, any or all of which may have a material adverse effect
on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our current or future products are subject to recalls even after receiving FDA clearance or approval, which
would harm our reputation, business and financial results.

The FDA and similar governmental bodies in other countries have the authority to require the recall of our
current or future products if we or our contract manufacturers fail to comply with relevant regulations pertaining
to manufacturing practices, labeling, advertising or promotional activities, or if new information is obtained
concerning the safety or efficacy of these products. A government-mandated recall could occur if the FDA finds
that there is a reasonable probability that the device would cause serious, adverse health consequences or death.
A voluntary recall by us could occur as a result of manufacturing defects, labeling deficiencies, packaging
defects or other failures to comply with applicable regulations. Any recall would divert management attention
and financial resources and harm our reputation with customers. A recall involving the OmniPod System would
be particularly harmful to our business, financial condition and results of operations because it is currently our
principal product.

We are subject to federal and state laws prohibiting “kickbacks” and false or fraudulent claims, which, if
violated, could subject us to substantial penalties. Additionally, any challenge to or investigation into our
practices under these laws could cause adverse publicity and be costly to respond to, and thus could harm
our business.

The federal anti-kickback statute and several similar state laws, prohibit payments that are intended to induce
physicians or others either to refer patients or to acquire or arrange for or recommend the acquisition of healthcare
products or services and impose civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance that can be substantial. These laws
constrain our sales, marketing and other promotional activities by limiting the kinds of financial arrangements,
including sales programs, we may have with hospitals, physicians or other potential purchasers of medical devices.

27

We conduct various marketing and product training activities that involve making payments to healthcare providers
and entities. While we believe that our activities are compliant with all applicable laws, even an unsuccessful
challenge or investigation into our practices could cause adverse publicity, and be costly to respond to, and thus
could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We participate in federal and state programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, under which we are subject to

numerous state and federal laws and regulations regulating reimbursement and intended to prevent fraud and
abuse. Medicare and Medicaid regulations are complex and may require management’s interpretation. Our
compliance with Medicare and Medicaid regulations may be reviewed by federal or state agencies, including the
United States Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”), CMS, and
the Department of Justice. To ensure compliance with Medicare, Medicaid and other regulations, government
agencies conduct periodic audits of us to ensure compliance with various supplier standards and billing
requirements.

If we are found to have violated laws protecting the confidentiality of patient health information, we could
be subject to civil or criminal penalties, which could increase our liabilities and harm our reputation or our
business.

There are a number of federal and state laws protecting the confidentiality of certain patient health
information, including patient records, and restricting the use and disclosure of that protected information. In
particular, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services promulgated patient privacy rules under HIPAA.
These privacy rules protect medical records and other personal health information by limiting their use and
disclosure, giving individuals the right to access, amend and seek accounting of their own health information and
limiting most use and disclosures of health information to the minimum amount reasonably necessary to
accomplish the intended purpose. If we are found to be in violation of the privacy rules under HIPAA, we could
be subject to civil or criminal penalties, which could increase our liabilities, harm our reputation and have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Product liability suits, whether or not meritorious, could be brought against us due to an alleged defective
product or for the misuse of our devices. These suits could result in expensive and time-consuming
litigation, payment of substantial damages, and an increase in our insurance rates.

If our current or future products are defectively designed or manufactured, contain defective components or are

misused, or if someone claims any of the foregoing, whether or not meritorious, we may become subject to
substantial and costly litigation. Misusing our devices or failing to adhere to the operating guidelines of the
OmniPod System could cause significant harm to patients, including death. In addition, if our operating guidelines
are found to be inadequate, we may be subject to liability. Product liability claims could divert management’s
attention from our core business, be expensive to defend and result in sizable damage awards against us. While we
believe that we are reasonably insured against these risks, we may not have sufficient insurance coverage for all
future claims. Any product liability claims brought against us, with or without merit, could increase our product
liability insurance rates or prevent us from securing continuing coverage, could harm our reputation in the industry
and could reduce revenue. Product liability claims in excess of our insurance coverage would be paid out of cash
reserves harming our financial condition and adversely affecting our results of operations.

Our ability to grow our revenue depends in part on our retaining a high percentage of our customer base.

A key to driving our revenue growth is the retention of a high percentage of our customers. We have
developed retention programs aimed at both the healthcare professionals and the patients, which include appeals
assistance, patient training, customer support and an automatic re-order program for patients. We have had a
satisfactory customer retention rate; however, we cannot assure you that we will maintain this retention rate in
the future. Current uncertainty in global economic conditions, rising unemployment and negative financial news
may negatively affect product demand and other related matters. If demand for our products fluctuates as a result
of economic conditions or otherwise, our ability to attract and retain customers could be harmed. The failure to

28

retain a high percentage of our customers would negatively impact our revenue growth and may have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We have sponsored, and expect to continue to sponsor market studies seeking to demonstrate certain aspects
of the efficacy of the OmniPod System, which may fail to produce favorable results.

To help improve, market and sell the OmniPod System, we have sponsored, and expect to continue to sponsor

market studies to assess various aspects of the OmniPod System’s functionality and its relative efficacy. The data
obtained from the studies may be unfavorable to the OmniPod System or may be inadequate to support satisfactory
conclusions. In addition, in the future we may sponsor clinical trials to assess certain aspects of the efficacy of the
OmniPod System. If future clinical trials fail to support the efficacy of our current or future products, our sales may
be adversely affected and we may lose an opportunity to secure clinical preference from prescribing clinicians,
which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If future clinical studies or other articles are published, or diabetes associations or other organizations
announce positions that are unfavorable to the OmniPod System, our sales efforts and revenue may be
negatively affected.

Future clinical studies or other articles regarding our existing products or any competing products may be

published that either support a claim, or are perceived to support a claim, that a competitor’s product is clinically
more effective or easier to use than the OmniPod System or that the OmniPod System is not as effective or easy
to use as we claim. Additionally, diabetes associations or other organizations that may be viewed as authoritative
could endorse products or methods that compete with the OmniPod System or otherwise announce positions that
are unfavorable to the OmniPod System. Any of these events may negatively affect our sales efforts and result in
decreased revenue.

Substantially all of our operations related to the OmniPod System are conducted at a single location and
substantially all of our OmniPod System inventory is held at a single location. Any disruption at either of
these locations could increase our expenses.

Substantially all of our manufacturing of complete OmniPods is currently conducted at a single location on
manufacturing lines owned by us at a facility located in China, operated by a subsidiary of Flextronics. We take
precautions to ensure that Flextronics safeguards our assets, including insurance and health and safety protocols.
However, a natural or other disaster, such as a fire or flood, could cause substantial delays in our operations,
damage or destroy our manufacturing equipment, and cause us to incur additional expenses. The insurance we
maintain may not be adequate to cover our losses in any particular case. With or without insurance, damage to
our manufacturing equipment, or to any of our suppliers, may have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, substantially all of our OmniPod System inventory is held at a single location in Billerica,
Massachusetts. We take precautions to safeguard our facility, including insurance, health and safety protocols
and off-site storage of computer data. However, a natural or other disaster, such as a fire or flood, could cause
substantial delays in our operations, damage or destroy our inventory, and cause us to incur additional expenses.
The insurance we maintain against fires, floods and other natural disasters may not be adequate to cover our
losses in any particular case. With or without insurance, damage to our facility or our other property, due to fire,
flood or other natural disaster or casualty event may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations.

Our success will depend on our ability to attract and retain personnel.

We have benefited substantially from the leadership and performance of our senior management. Our success

will depend on our ability to retain our current management and to attract and retain qualified personnel in the
future, including clinicians, engineers and other highly skilled personnel. Competition for senior management
personnel, as well as clinicians and engineers, is intense and there can be no assurances that we will be able to retain

29

our personnel. The loss of the services of certain members of our senior management, clinicians or engineers could
prevent or delay the implementation and completion of our objectives, or divert management’s attention to seeking
a qualified replacement.

Additionally, the sale and after-sale support of the OmniPod System is logistically complex, requiring us to

maintain an extensive infrastructure of field sales personnel, diabetes educators, customer support, insurance
specialists, and billing and collections personnel. We face considerable challenges in recruiting, training,
managing, motivating and retaining these teams, including managing geographically dispersed efforts. If we fail
to maintain and grow an adequate pool of trained and motivated personnel, our reputation could suffer and our
financial position could be adversely affected.

If we do not effectively manage our growth, our business resources may become strained, we may not be
able to deliver the OmniPod System in a timely manner and our results of operations may be adversely
affected.

Since the commercial launch of the OmniPod System, we have progressively expanded our marketing efforts

to cover the entire United States. In addition, in 2010 we entered into a distribution agreement with Ypsomed to
distribute the OmniPod System in certain countries. In February 2011, we entered into a distribution agreement with
GSK to distribute the OmniPod System in Canada. As we continue to expand our sales internationally, we will need
to obtain regulatory approvals and reimbursement agreements with government agencies or private third-party
payors in those countries. Failure to obtain such agreements would limit our ability to successfully penetrate those
foreign markets. In addition, the geographic expansion of our business will require additional manufacturing
capacity to supply those markets as well as additional sales and marketing resources.

We expect to continue to increase our manufacturing capacity, our personnel and the scope of our U.S. and
international sales and marketing efforts. This growth, as well as any other growth that we may experience in the
future, will provide challenges to our organization and may strain our management and operations. In order to
manage future growth, we will be required to improve existing, and implement new, management systems, sales
and marketing efforts and distribution channels. We will need to manage our relationship with Flextronics going
forward. We may also need to partner with additional third-party suppliers to manufacture certain components of
the OmniPod System and complete additional manufacturing lines in the future. A transition to new suppliers
may result in additional costs or delays. We may misjudge the amount of time or resources that will be required
to effectively manage any anticipated or unanticipated growth in our business or we may not be able to
manufacture sufficient inventory or attract, hire and retain sufficient personnel to meet our needs. If we cannot
scale our business appropriately, maintain control over expenses or otherwise adapt to anticipated and
unanticipated growth, our business resources may become strained, we may not be able to deliver the OmniPod
System in a timely manner and our results of operations may be adversely affected.

We may experience significant fluctuations in our quarterly results of operations.

The fluctuations in our quarterly results of operations have resulted, and will continue to result, from

numerous factors, including:

• delays in shipping due to capacity constraints;

• practices of health insurance companies and other third-party payors with respect to reimbursement for

our current or future products;

• market acceptance of the OmniPod System;

• our ability to manufacture the OmniPod efficiently;

• timing of regulatory approvals and clearances;

• new product introductions;

• competition; and

• timing of research and development expenditures.

30

These factors, some of which are not within our control, may cause the price of our stock to fluctuate
substantially. In particular, if our quarterly results of operations fail to meet or exceed the expectations of
securities analysts or investors, our stock price could drop suddenly and significantly. We believe the quarterly
comparisons of our financial results are not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied upon as an indication
of our future performance.

If we choose to acquire or invest in new businesses, products or technologies, instead of developing them
ourselves, these acquisitions or investments could disrupt our business and could result in the use of
significant amounts of equity, cash or a combination of both.

From time to time we may seek to acquire or invest in new businesses, products or technologies, instead of

developing them ourselves. Acquisitions and investments involve numerous risks, including:

• the inability to complete the acquisition or investment;

• disruption of our ongoing businesses and diversion of management attention;

• difficulties in integrating the acquired entities, products or technologies;

• risks associated with acquiring intellectual property;

• difficulties in operating the acquired business profitably;

• the inability to achieve anticipated synergies, cost savings or growth;

• potential loss of key employees, particularly those of the acquired business;

• difficulties in transitioning and maintaining key customer, distributor and supplier relationships;

• risks associated with entering markets in which we have no or limited prior experience; and

• unanticipated costs.

In addition, any future acquisitions or investments may result in one or more of the following:

• dilutive issuances of equity securities, which may be sold at a discount to market price;

• the use of significant amounts of cash;

• the incurrence of debt;

• the assumption of significant liabilities;

• increased operating costs or reduced earnings;

• financing obtained on unfavorable terms;

• large one-time expenses; and

• the creation of certain intangible assets, including goodwill, the write-down of which in future periods

may result in significant charges to earnings.

Any of these factors could materially harm our stock price, business, financial condition and results of

operations.

We may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service all of our indebtedness, which currently consists of
our 5.375% Convertible Senior Notes due June 15, 2013 and our 3.75% Convertible Senior Notes due
June 15, 2016. We may be forced to take other actions to satisfy our obligations under our indebtedness or
we may experience a financial failure.

Our ability to make scheduled payments or to refinance our debt obligations depends on our financial and

operating performance, which is subject to prevailing economic and competitive conditions and to certain
financial, business and other factors beyond our control. We cannot assure you that we will maintain a level of

31

cash flows from operating activities sufficient to permit us to pay the principal, premium, if any, and interest on
our indebtedness. If our cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we
may be forced to reduce or delay capital expenditures, sell assets or operations, seek additional capital or
restructure or refinance our indebtedness, including the 5.375% Convertible Senior Notes and the 3.75%
Convertible Senior Notes. We cannot assure you that we would be able to take any of these actions, that these
actions would be successful and permit us to meet our scheduled debt service obligations or that these actions
would be permitted under the terms of our future debt agreements. In the absence of sufficient operating results
and resources, we could face substantial liquidity problems and might be required to dispose of material assets or
operations to meet our debt service and other obligations. We may not be able to consummate those dispositions
or obtain sufficient proceeds from those dispositions to meet our debt service and other obligations then due.

We need to expand our distribution network to maintain and grow our business and revenue. If we fail to
expand and maintain an effective sales force or successfully develop our relationship with distributors, our
business, prospects and brand may be materially and adversely affected.

We currently promote, market and sell the majority of our OmniPod Systems through our own direct sales
force. We currently utilize a limited number of domestic distributors to augment our sales efforts. In addition, in
January 2010 we entered into an exclusive distribution agreement with Ypsomed to promote, advertise, distribute
and sell the OmniPod System in certain countries, and in February 2011, we entered into an exclusive
distribution agreement with GSK to promote, advertise, distribute and sell the OmniPod System in Canada. We
cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully develop our relationships with third-party distributors. If
we fail to do so, our sales could fail to grow or could decline, and our ability to grow our business could be
adversely affected. Distributors that are in the business of selling other medical products may not devote a
sufficient level of resources and support required to generate awareness of our products and grow or maintain
product sales. If our distributors are unwilling or unable to market and sell our products, or if they do not perform
to our expectations, we could experience delayed or reduced market acceptance and sales of our products.

If we are unable to successfully maintain effective internal control over financial reporting, investors may
lose confidence in our reported financial information and our stock price and our business may be
adversely impacted.

As a public company, we are required to maintain internal control over financial reporting and our

management is required to evaluate the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of the end
of each fiscal year. Additionally, we are required to disclose in our Annual Reports on Form 10-K our
management’s assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and a registered
public accounting firm’s attestation report on this assessment. If we are not successful in maintaining effective
internal control over financial reporting, there could be inaccuracies or omissions in the consolidated financial
information we are required to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Additionally, even if there are
no inaccuracies or omissions, we will be required to publicly disclose the conclusion of our management that our
internal control over financial reporting or disclosure controls and procedures are not effective. These events
could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, adversely impact our stock price,
result in increased costs to remediate any deficiencies, attract regulatory scrutiny or lawsuits that could be costly
to resolve and distract management’s attention, limit our ability to access the capital markets or cause our stock
to be delisted from The NASDAQ Global Market or any other securities exchange on which it is then listed.

The price of our common stock may be volatile.

There has been a public market for our common stock only since our initial public offering in May 2007.

The market price of our common stock is affected by a number of factors, including:

• failure to maintain and increase production capacity and reduce per unit production costs;

• changes in the availability of third-party reimbursement in the United States or other countries;

• volume and timing of orders for the OmniPod System;

32

• developments in administrative proceedings or litigation related to intellectual property rights;

• issuance of patents to us or our competitors;

• the announcement of new products or product enhancements by us or our competitors;

• the announcement of technological or medical innovations in the treatment or diagnosis of diabetes;

• changes in governmental regulations or in the status of our regulatory approvals or applications;

• developments in our industry;

• publication of clinical studies relating to the OmniPod System or a competitor’s product;

• quarterly variations in our or our competitors’ results of operations;

• changes in earnings estimates or recommendations by securities analysts; and

• general market conditions and other factors, including factors unrelated to our operating performance or

the operating performance of our competitors.

At times, the fluctuations in the market price of our common stock have been unrelated or disproportionate
to our operating performance. These forces reached unprecedented levels in the second half of 2008, resulting in
the bankruptcy or acquisition of, or government assistance to, several major domestic and international financial
institutions and a material decline in economic conditions. In particular, the U.S. equity markets experienced
significant price and volume fluctuations that have affected the market prices of equity securities of many
technology companies. Broad market and industry factors such as these could materially and adversely affect the
market price of our stock, regardless of our actual operating performance.

Future sales of shares of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that such sales may
occur, may depress our stock price.

We have been a public company only since May 2007. Since becoming a public company, the average daily

trading volume of our common stock on The NASDAQ Global Market has been approximately 300,000 shares.

In addition to our outstanding shares of common stock, we issued $143.8 million of 3.75% Convertible

Senior Notes in June 2011. Additionally, there are $15 million of our 5.375% Convertible Senior Notes
outstanding. A substantial number of shares of our common stock could potentially be issued upon the
conversion of these Convertible Senior Notes. The issuance of substantial amounts of common stock underlying
the Convertible Senior Notes, or the perception that such issuance may occur, could adversely affect the market
price of our common stock.

Furthermore, the price of our common stock also could be affected by possible sales of our common stock
by investors who view the Convertible Senior Notes as a more attractive means of equity participation in us and
by hedging or arbitrage trading activity that we expect will develop involving our common stock. A decline in
the price of shares of our common stock might impede our ability to raise capital through the issuance of
additional shares of our common stock or other equity securities.

Conversion of any of our 3.75% Convertible Senior Notes or 5.375% Convertible Senior Notes may dilute
the ownership interest of existing stockholders.

The conversion of some or all of the 3.75% Convertible Senior Notes or the 5.375% Convertible Senior

Notes may dilute the ownership interests of existing stockholders. Any sales in the public market of any of our
common stock issuable upon such conversion could adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common
stock. In addition, the anticipated conversion of the Convertible Senior Notes into a combination of cash and
shares of our common stock could depress the price of our common stock.

33

Our ability to use net operating loss carryforwards may be subject to limitation.

Section 382 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, imposes an annual limit on the amount
of net operating loss carryforwards that may be used to offset taxable income when a corporation has undergone
significant changes in its stock ownership or equity structure. Our ability to use net operating losses may be
limited by prior changes in our ownership, and may be further limited by the issuance of common stock in
connection with the conversion of our Convertible Senior Notes, or by the consummation of other transactions.
As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use net operating loss carryforwards to offset U.S.
federal taxable income may become subject to limitations, which could potentially result in increased future tax
liabilities for we have.

Anti-takeover provisions in our organizational documents, our shareholder rights plan and Delaware law
may discourage or prevent a change of control, even if an acquisition would be beneficial to our
stockholders, which could affect our stock price adversely and prevent attempts by our stockholders to
replace or remove our current management.

Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws contain provisions that could delay or prevent a change of
control of our company or changes in our board of directors that our stockholders might consider favorable.
Some of these provisions:

• authorize the issuance of preferred stock which can be created and issued by the board of directors

without prior stockholder approval, with rights senior to those of our common stock;

• provide for a classified board of directors, with each director serving a staggered three-year term;

• prohibit our stockholders from filling board vacancies, calling special stockholder meetings or taking

action by written consent;

• provide for the removal of a director only with cause and by the affirmative vote of the holders of 75% or

more of the shares then entitled to vote at an election of our directors; and

• require advance written notice of stockholder proposals and director nominations.

We are subject to the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which may
prohibit certain business combinations with stockholders owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock.
These and other provisions in our certificate of incorporation, bylaws and Delaware law could make it more
difficult for stockholders or potential acquirers to obtain control of our board of directors or initiate actions that
are opposed by our then-current board of directors, including a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving
our company. Any delay or prevention of a change of control transaction or changes in our board of directors
could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

In addition, in November 2008, our board of directors adopted a shareholder rights plan, implementing what is
commonly known as a “poison pill.” This poison pill significantly increases the costs that would be incurred by an
unwanted third party acquirer if such party owns or announces its intent to commence a tender offer for more than
15% of our outstanding common stock or otherwise “triggers” the poison pill by exceeding the applicable stock
ownership threshold. The existence of this poison pill could delay, deter or prevent a takeover of us.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

We lease approximately 79,500 square feet of manufacturing, laboratory and office space in Bedford,

Massachusetts under leases expiring in 2014. Additionally, we lease approximately 14,000 square feet of
warehousing and manufacturing space in Billerica, Massachusetts under a lease expiring in 2014. In connection

34

with our acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes, we acquired leases of facilities in Massachusetts of
approximately 21,000 square feet, New York of approximately 5,500 square feet and Florida of approximately
1,300 square feet, expiring in June 2013, April 2015 and December 2013, respectively.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

In August 2010, Becton, Dickinson and Company (“BD”) filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court
in the State of New Jersey against us alleging that the OmniPod System infringes three of its patents. BD seeks a
declaration that we have infringed its patents, equitable relief, including an injunction that would enjoin us from
infringing these patents, and an unspecified award for monetary damages. We believe that the OmniPod System
does not infringe these patents. We do not expect this litigation to have a material adverse impact on our financial
position or results of operations. We believe we have meritorious defenses to this lawsuit; however, litigation is
inherently uncertain and there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome or effect of this action. We do not
believe we have any material financial exposure at December 31, 2012.

In a letter received in March 2007, Medtronic, Inc. invited us to discuss our “taking a license to certain
Medtronic patents.” In October 2012, Medtronic MiniMed Inc., Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co. and
MiniMed Distribution Corp. (collectively, “Medtronic”) filed a lawsuit in United States District Court for the
Central District of California alleging that we have infringed the two patents referenced in their 2007 letter which
are owned by Medtronic MiniMed Inc. and licensed to Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co. and MiniMed
Distribution Corp. Medtronic seeks a declaration that we infringe its patents, equitable relief, including an
injunction that would enjoin us from infringing these patents and an unspecific award for monetary damages. The
patents referenced by this lawsuit relate to technology that is material to our business. We believe that the
OmniPod System does not infringe these patents. We believe we have meritorious defenses to this lawsuit;
however, litigation is inherently uncertain and there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome or effect of
this action. We do not believe we have any material financial exposure at December 31, 2012.

We are, from time to time, involved in the normal course of business in various legal proceedings, including

intellectual property, contract employment and product liability suits. Although we are unable to quantify the
exact financial impact of any of these matters, we believe that none of these currently pending matters will have
an outcome material to our financial condition or business.

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not Applicable.

35

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON STOCK, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

Market Information

Our common stock has been listed on The NASDAQ Global Market under the trading symbol “PODD”

since our initial public offering on May 15, 2007. The following table sets forth the high and low closing sales
prices of our common stock, as reported by The NASDAQ Global Market, for each of the periods listed.

Fiscal Year 2011
First Quarter
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Second Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Third Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fourth Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fiscal Year 2012
First Quarter
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Second Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Third Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fourth Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

High

Low

$21.09
$22.17
$23.04
$18.98

$20.98
$21.37
$22.14
$22.15

$15.76
$18.30
$14.85
$14.29

$18.16
$16.93
$18.72
$19.13

As of February 21, 2013, there were approximately 17 registered holders of record of our common stock.

The number of beneficial stockholders of our shares is greater than the number of stockholders of record.

36

Performance Graph

The chart set forth below shows the value of an investment of $100 on May 15, 2007 in each of Insulet

Corporation common stock, the NASDAQ Composite Index, and the NASDAQ Health Care Index. All values
assume reinvestment of the pre-tax value of dividends paid by companies included in these indices and are
calculated as of December 31, 2012. The historical stock price performance of our common stock shown in the
performance graph below is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance.

COMPARISON OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
Among insulet Corp., the NASDAQ Composite index,
and the NASDAQ Health Care Index

Insulet Corp.

NASDAQ Composite

NASDAQ Health Care

$220

$200

$180

$160

$140

$120

$100

$80

$60

$40

$20

$0

12/07

12/08

12/09

12/10

12/11

12/12

* $100 invested on 12/31/07 in stock or index, including reinvestment of dividends. Fiscal year ending

December 31.

Insulet Corp.

NASDAQ Composite

NASDAQ Health Care

12/07

100.00

100.00

100.00

12/08

32.88

59.03

80.81

12/09

60.82

82.25

95.16

12/10

12/11

66.01

97.32

80.20

98.63

12/12

90.37

110.78

105.21

113.73

138.96

The material in this performance graph is not soliciting material, is not deemed filed with the Securities and

Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and is not incorporated by reference in any filing of Insulet Corporation under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) or the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether
made on, before or after the date of this filing and irrespective of any general incorporation language in such
filing.

Dividend Policy

We currently intend to retain future earnings for the development, operation and expansion of our business

and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

37

Securities Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

The following table sets forth information regarding securities authorized for issuance under our equity

compensation plans as of December 31, 2012.

Plan Category

Equity compensation plans approved by

security holders(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity compensation plans not approved by
security holders(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total(4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of securities to be
issued upon exercise of
outstanding options,
warrants and rights
(a)

Weighted average
exercise price of
outstanding options,
warrants and rights
(b)

Number of securities
remaining available for
future issuance under
equity compensation plans
(excluding securities
reflected in column (a))
(c)

3,200,010

190,000

3,390,010

$10.33

$ 7.12

$10.15

4,189,332

—

4,189,332(3)

(1)

Includes our Amended and Restated 2007 Stock Option and Incentive Plan and our 2000 Stock Option and
Incentive Plan. Outstanding restricted stock units convert to common stock without the payment of
consideration. As of December 31, 2012 825,068 restricted stock units were outstanding. The weighted-
average exercise price of outstanding options and warrants, excluding restricted stock units was $13.92.

(2) Consists of two inducement grants of 180,000 shares each to Brian Roberts and Peter Devlin (110,000 of

which were exercised during the year ended December 31, 2012 and 60,000 of which were exercised during
the year ended December 31, 2011) upon being hired by us in March 2009 and August 2009, respectively.
These non-qualified stock option awards were granted outside of our Amended and Restated 2007 Stock
Option and Incentive Plan in compliance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5635, but have similar vesting terms to
those stock option awards typically granted under our Amended and Restated 2007 Stock Option and
Incentive Plan.

(3) The maximum number of shares of our common stock that remain available for future issuance under our
2007 Stock Option and Incentive Plan as of December 31, 2012 is 4,189,332 shares, which includes a
further increase of 725,000 on January 1, 2012. The amount was increased in May 2012 by 3,775,000
additional shares.

(4) As of December 31, 2012 825,068 restricted stock units were outstanding. The weighted-average exercise

price of outstanding options and warrants, excluding restricted stock units was $13.41.

For more information relating to our equity compensation plans, see Footnote 14 to our consolidated

financial statements.

Issuer Repurchases of Equity Securities

We did not repurchase any of our equity securities during the quarter ended December 31, 2012, nor issue

any securities that were not registered under Securities Act.

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers

None.

38

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011(4)(5)

(Restated)

2010

2009

2008

(In thousands, except share and per share data)

Consolidated Statements of Operations

Data:

Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Cost of revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

211,369 $
119,033

152,255 $
85,543

96,966 $
53,240

66,032 $
47,735

Gross profit (loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

92,336

66,712

43,726

18,297

Operating expenses:

Research and development
. . . . . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restructuring and impairment of

assets(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

24,359
51,240
52,708

21,863
44,083
43,233

—

—

Total operating expenses . . . . . . . . . .

128,307

109,179

Operating loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Other expense, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
Income tax benefit (expense)

(35,971)

(15,684)
(212)

(42,467)

(14,576)
11,212

16,566
26,667
34,695

4,431

82,359

(38,633)

(22,526)
—

13,231
26,842
37,583

—

77,656

(59,359)

(12,985)
—

36,059
40,643

(4,584)

13,104
23,750
39,734

8,170

84,758

(89,342)

(5,429)
—

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $

(51,867) $

(45,831) $

(61,159) $

(72,344) $

(94,771)

Net loss per share basic and diluted . . . . . $

(1.08) $

(0.98) $

(1.54) $

(2.43) $

(3.43)

Weighted-average number of shares used

in calculating net loss per share(1) . . . .

47,924,324

46,689,880

39,607,899

29,727,106

27,611,003

2012

2011(4)(5)

(Restated)

As of December 31,

2010

2009

2008

(In thousands)

Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Working capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Current portion of long-term debt . . . . . . . $
Long-term debt(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . $

57,293 $
61,650 $
198,059 $
14,429 $
103,730 $
1,867 $
44,176 $

93,955 $
104,640 $
221,322 $
— $
108,540 $
2,052 $
82,735 $

113,274 $
123,507 $
156,233 $
— $
69,433 $
1,619 $
66,231 $

127,996 $
134,491 $
172,858 $
— $
89,136 $
1,999 $
61,910 $

56,663
71,531
108,233
—
60,172
2,987
28,106

(1)

(2)

In October 2009, we sold 6.9 million shares of common stock to the public. In December 2010, we sold
3.5 million shares of common stock to the public. In June 2011, we issued 1.2 million shares in connection
with the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes. See Footnote 14 to our consolidated financial statements
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

In the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded an $8.2 million charge of which $7.4 million related to
the write-down of certain manufacturing equipment which had no future use and $0.8 million in workforce
reduction and related charges. In the year ended December 31, 2010, we recorded a $4.4 million non-cash
charge related to the write-down of certain manufacturing equipment which had no future use.

(3)

In June 2008, we sold $85.0 million principal amount of 5.375% Convertible Senior Notes due June 2013 in
a private placement to qualified institutional buyers pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933,

39

as amended. In March 2009, we entered into a Facility Agreement of up to $60 million with certain
institutional accredited investors (the “Facility Agreement”). We repaid all amounts outstanding under the
Facility Agreement in December 2010. In June 2011, we issued $143.8 million of 3.75% Convertible Notes
due June 2016 and repurchased $70 million in principal of the 5.375% Notes. See Footnote 4 to our
consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

(4) On June 1, 2011, we completed the acquisition of Neighborhood Holdings, Inc. and its wholly-owned
subsidiaries (collectively, “Neighborhood Diabetes”), a leading durable medical equipment distributor,
specializing in direct to consumer sales of diabetes supplies for an aggregate purchase price of
approximately $37.9 million in cash and $24.4 million in common stock. Neighborhood Diabetes supplies
its customers with blood glucose testing supplies, insulin pumps, pump supplies, pharmaceuticals, and other
products for the management and treatment of diabetes. See Footnote 3 to our consolidated financial
statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

(5) Amounts were restated to correct errors in the accounting for income taxes as described in Footnote 18 to

our consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial
statements and accompanying notes and the other financial information appearing elsewhere in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K. This discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks,
uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these
forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including those discussed below and elsewhere in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K, particularly under the heading “Risk Factors.”

Restatement of Previously Issued Financial Statements

Financial data when presented throughout the MD&A includes the effect of the restatement, as described in
Notes 2, 3, 16, 17 and 18 to our consolidated financial statements, of our results for the year ended December 31,
2011, and for the quarterly periods ended June 30, 2011, September 30, 2011, December 31, 2011, March 31,
2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012.

The following tables summarize the effect of the restatement by major financial statement line item for the

three and six months ended June 30, 2011, the nine months ended September 30, 2011 and the year ended
December 31, 2011 (in thousands). The restatement resulted in an increase in current deferred tax assets (which
are presented as a component of prepaid expenses and other current assets) of $1.2 million at June 30, 2011 and
September 30, 2011 and an increase of $0.9 million at December 31, 2011, an increase in goodwill of $11.3
million at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2011 and $10.9 million at December 31, 2011, and an increase to
non-current deferred tax liabilities (which are presented as a component of other long-term liabilities) of $1.2
million at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2011 and $0.4 million at December 31, 2011. The restatement
resulted in an increase in tax benefit of $11.3 million in the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, the nine
months ended September 30, 2011 and the year ended December 31, 2011. The restatement had no effect on any
amounts reported in periods prior to the quarter ended June 30, 2011.

40

Consolidated Balance Sheet

Prepaid expenses and other current

assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goodwill
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated deficit
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities and stockholders’

June 30, 2011

September 30, 2011

December 31, 2011

As Previously
Reported

As Restated

As Previously
Reported

As Restated

As Previously
Reported

As Restated

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

$

4,770
147,834
26,727
226,190
1,303
132,091
(413,122)
94,099

$

5,991
149,055
38,066
238,750
2,524
133,312
(401,783)
105,438

$

3,653
137,857
26,164
215,780
1,260
132,340
(426,684)
83,440

$

4,874
139,078
37,503
228,340
2,481
133,561
(415,345)
94,779

$

2,802
131,785
26,647
209,583
1,652
138,187
(441,023)
71,396

$

3,652
132,635
37,536
221,322
2,052
138,587
(429,684)
82,735

equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

226,190

238,750

215,780

228,340

209,583

221,322

Consolidated Statement of Operations

Three Months Ended
June 30, 2011

Six Months Ended
June 30, 2011

Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2011

Year Ended
December 31, 2011

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

Income tax benefit

(expense) . . . . . . . . . . . . $

— $11,339 $

— $ 11,339 $

— $ 11,339 $

(19,423)

(8,084)

(29,269)

(17,930)

(42,831)

(31,492)

(127) $11,212
(57,170) (45,831)

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss per share basic

and diluted . . . . . . . . . .

(0.42)

(0.17)

(0.64)

(0.39)

(0.92)

(0.68)

(1.22)

(0.98)

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows

Six Months Ended
June 30, 2011

Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2011

Year Ended
December 31, 2011

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

$(29,269)
—

$(17,930)
(11,339)

$(42,831)
—

$(31,492)
(11,339)

$(57,170)
—

$(45,831)
(11,289)

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax provision . . . . . . . . . . .
Changes in operating assets and

liabilities:
Prepaid expenses and other

current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . .

(434)
(316)

(1,655)
905

851
(359)

(370)
862

1,703
(417)

853
383

The restatement had no effect on the previously reported amounts of operating, investing, and financing
cash flows in our consolidated statement of cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2011, the nine months
ended September 30, 2011, and the year end December 31, 2011.

The following tables summarize the effect of the restatement by major financial statement line item at
March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012 (in thousands). The restatement resulted in an increase
in current deferred tax assets (which are presented as a component of prepaid expenses and other current assets)
of $0.9 million at March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012, an increase in goodwill of $10.9
million at March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012 and an increase in non-current deferred tax
liabilities (which are presented as a component of other long-term liabilities) of $0.4 million at March 31,
2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012. The restatement had no effect on the consolidated statement of
operations during these periods.

41

Consolidated Balance Sheet

March 31, 2012

June 30, 2012

September 30, 2012

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

Prepaid expenses and other current

assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $

3,463 $

4,313 $

3,454 $

4,304 $

4,717 $

Total current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goodwill
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated deficit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities and stockholders’

127,369
26,647
203,942
1,640
145,064
(455,803)
58,878

128,219
37,536
215,681
2,040
145,464
(444,464)
70,217

115,615
26,647
191,940
1,668
144,190
(470,279)
47,750

116,465
37,536
203,679
2,068
144,590
(458,940)
59,089

113,394
26,647
191,642
1,670
152,529
(482,696)
39,113

5,567
114,244
37,536
203,381
2,070
152,929
(471,357)
50,452

equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

203,942

215,681

191,940

203,679

191,642

203,381

Overview

We are primarily engaged in the development, manufacturing and sale of our proprietary OmniPod Insulin
Management System (the “OmniPod System”), an innovative, discreet and easy-to-use insulin infusion system
for people with insulin-dependent diabetes. The OmniPod System is the only commercially-available insulin
infusion system of its kind. The OmniPod System features a unique disposable tubeless OmniPod which is worn
on the body for approximately three days at a time and our handheld, wireless Personal Diabetes Manager
(“PDM”). Conventional insulin pumps require people with insulin-dependent diabetes to learn to use, manage
and wear a number of cumbersome components, including up to 42 inches of tubing. In contrast, the OmniPod
System features only two discreet, easy-to-use devices that eliminate the need for a bulky pump, tubing and
separate blood glucose meter, provides for virtually pain-free automated cannula insertion, communicates
wirelessly and integrates a blood glucose meter. We believe that the OmniPod System’s unique proprietary
design offers significant lifestyle benefits to people with insulin-dependent diabetes.

To support our sales of the OmniPod System, in June 2011, we acquired Neighborhood Holdings, Inc. and
its wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, “Neighborhood Diabetes”) in order to expand our full suite diabetes
management product offerings and obtain access to a larger number of insulin dependent patients. Through
Neighborhood Diabetes, we are able to provide customers with blood glucose testing supplies, traditional insulin
pumps, pump supplies and pharmaceuticals and have the ability to process claims as either durable medical
equipment or through pharmacy benefits.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approved the original OmniPod System in January 2005,

and we began commercial sale in the United States in October 2005. We received CE Mark approval for the
original OmniPod System in April 2009. Since the commercial launch of the OmniPod System, we have
progressively expanded our marketing efforts to provide availability of the OmniPod System in the entire United
States. We have also expanded the availability of the OmniPod System internationally through our partnerships
with Ypsomed Distribution AG (“Ypsomed”) and GlaxoSmithKline Inc. (“GSK”). In January 2010, we entered
into a distribution agreement with Ypsomed pursuant to which Ypsomed became the exclusive distributor of the
OmniPod System in multiple countries. In February 2011, we entered into a distribution agreement with GSK
pursuant to which GSK became the exclusive distributor of the OmniPod System in Canada. Under these
distribution agreements, we supply OmniPods and PDMs to Ypsomed and GSK, and they are responsible for the
sale to the customer, including distribution, reimbursement and customer support. In August 2011, we received
CE Mark approval, and in December 2012, we received 510(k) clearance for our next generation OmniPod
System by the FDA.

We sell our proprietary OmniPod System as well as blood glucose testing supplies, traditional insulin

pumps, pump supplies, pharmaceuticals and other products for the management and treatment of diabetes to

42

people with diabetes. Through our infrastructure in the reimbursement, billing and collection areas, we are able
to provide for adjudication of claims as either durable medical equipment or through pharmacy benefits. Claims
are adjudicated under private insurers, Medicaid or Medicare. We are aligning third-party payor contracts to be
able to better leverage our cross-selling initiatives. As we expand our sales and marketing focus, increase our
manufacturing capacity, expand to additional international markets and broaden our high-touch patient model,
we will need to maintain and expand available reimbursement for our product offerings.

Our sales and marketing effort is focused on generating demand and acceptance of the OmniPod System
among key diabetes practitioners, academic medical centers, clinics, people with insulin-dependent diabetes,
third-party payors, government agencies, and third-party distributors. Our marketing strategy is to build
awareness for the benefits of the OmniPod System as well as our high-touch patient model through a wide range
of education programs, social networking, patient demonstration programs, support materials, media
advertisements and events at the national, regional and local levels. We use third-party distributors to improve
our access to managed care and government reimbursement programs, expand our commercial presence and
provide access to additional potential patients. Our total revenue was $211.4 million, $152.3 million and
$97.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

As a medical device manufacturer and distributor, reimbursement from third-party payors is an important
element of our success. If patients are not adequately reimbursed for the costs of using the OmniPod System or
our other diabetes supplies, it will be much more difficult for us to penetrate the market. We continue to
negotiate contracts establishing reimbursement for the OmniPod System with national and regional third-party
payors. As part of the integration of Neighborhood Diabetes, we are aligning third-party payor contracts, both
ours and those of Neighborhood Diabetes, to be able to better leverage our cross-selling initiatives. As we expand
our sales and marketing focus, increase our manufacturing capacity, expand to international markets and leverage
the Neighborhood Diabetes model, we will need to maintain and expand available reimbursement for our product
offerings.

We currently produce the OmniPod System on partially automated manufacturing lines at a facility in China

operated by a subsidiary of Flextronics International Ltd. (“Flextronics”). We purchase complete OmniPods
pursuant to our agreement with Flextronics. Under the agreement, Flextronics has agreed to supply us with
OmniPods at agreed upon prices per unit pursuant to a rolling forecast that we provide. The current term of the
agreement expires in December 2017 and is automatically renewed for one-year terms subsequently. It may be
terminated upon prior written notice given no less than a specified number of days prior to the date of
termination. The specified number of days is intended to provide the parties with sufficient time to make
alternative arrangements in the event of termination.

To achieve profitability, we continue to seek to increase manufacturing volume and reduce the per-unit
production cost for the OmniPod. By increasing production volumes of the OmniPod, we have been able to
reduce our per-unit raw material costs and improve absorption of manufacturing overhead costs. Our next
generation OmniPod was designed to lower the cost of the product further through component sourcing, volume
discounts and efficient manufacturing. The cost reductions are important as we strive to achieve profitability. We
believe our current manufacturing capacity is sufficient to meet our expected 2013 demand for OmniPods.

We purchase certain other diabetes management supplies from manufacturers at contracted rates and supply

these products to our customers. Based on market penetration, payor plans and other factors, certain
manufacturers provide rebates based on product sold. We record these rebates as a reduction to cost of goods sold
as they are earned.

Since our inception in 2000, we have incurred losses every quarter. In the years ended December 31, 2012,

2011 and 2010, we incurred net losses of $51.9 million, $45.8 million and $61.2 million, respectively. As of
December 31, 2012, we had an accumulated deficit of $481.6 million. We have financed our operations through
private placements of debt and equity securities, public offerings of our common stock, issuances of convertible

43

debt and borrowings under certain other debt agreements. As of December 31, 2012, we had $158.8 million of
convertible debt outstanding. Of the $158.8 million of convertible debt outstanding, $15.0 million matures in
June 2013 and approximately $143.8 million matures in June 2016. Since our inception, we have received net
proceeds of $597.0 million from the issuance of redeemable convertible preferred stock, common stock and debt.

Our long-term financial objective is to achieve and sustain profitable growth. Our efforts in the beginning of

2013 will be focused primarily on the production and commercial launch of our next generation OmniPod
System as well as the expansion of our customer base in the United States and internationally. We also plan to
focus on development projects such as the integration of our OmniPod System with the LifeScan, Inc.
(“LifeScan”) OneTouch® blood glucose monitoring technology, the feasibility of enhancing our OmniPod
System to incorporate continuous sensing technology into the OmniPod System, and the ability to use our
OmniPod System as a delivery platform for other pharmaceuticals. Achieving these objectives and increasing our
penetration in the United States and international markets is expected to require additional investments in certain
personnel and initiatives. We believe that we will continue to incur net losses in the near term in order to achieve
these objectives. However, we believe that the accomplishment of our near term objectives will have a positive
impact on our financial condition in the future.

In January 2013, we sold 4.7 million shares of our common stock at a price of $20.75 per share, resulting in

net proceeds to us of $92.8 million. We believe that our cash and cash equivalents, together with the cash to be
generated from expected product sales, will be sufficient to meet our projected operating and debt service
requirements for the next twelve months.

Acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes

On June 1, 2011, we acquired all of the outstanding shares of Neighborhood Diabetes, a durable medical
equipment distributor specializing in direct to consumer sales of diabetes supplies, including pharmaceuticals,
and support services. Neighborhood Diabetes serves more than 60,000 customers with Type 1 and Type 2
diabetes primarily in the northeast and southeast regions of the United States with blood glucose testing supplies,
traditional insulin pumps, pump supplies, pharmaceuticals, as well as other products for the management and
treatment of diabetes. Neighborhood Diabetes is based in Massachusetts, with additional offices in New York
and Florida. At the time of the acquisition, Neighborhood Diabetes employed approximately 200 people across
its three locations. The acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes provides us with full suite diabetes management
product offerings, accelerates our sales force expansion, strengthens our back office support capabilities, expands
our access to insulin dependent patients, and provides pharmacy adjudication capabilities to drive incremental
sales higher. The aggregate purchase price of approximately $62.4 million consisted of approximately
$37.9 million in cash paid at closing, 1,197,631 shares of our common stock valued at approximately
$24.4 million, or $20.40 per share based on the closing price of our common stock on the acquisition date, and
contingent consideration with a fair value of approximately $0.1 million. Of the $37.9 million of cash,
$6.6 million is being held in an escrow account to reimburse us and our affiliates for certain claims for which we
are entitled to be indemnified pursuant to the terms of the agreement and plan of merger with Neighborhood
Diabetes.

We have accounted for the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes as a business combination. Under business

combination accounting, the assets and liabilities of Neighborhood Diabetes were recorded as of the acquisition
date, at their respective fair values, and consolidated with our results. The excess of the purchase price over the
fair value of net assets acquired was recorded as goodwill. The operating results of Neighborhood Diabetes have
been included in the consolidated financial statements since June 2011, the period in which the acquisition was
completed. The purchase price allocation, including an independent appraisal for intangible assets, has been
prepared based on the information that was available to management at the time the consolidated financial
statements were prepared. The allocation of the purchase price was finalized during the year ended December 31,
2011.

44

The purchase price (restated) has been allocated as follows (in thousands):

Cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Common stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contingent consideration obligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$37,855
24,432
61

Total allocable purchase price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$62,348

Allocation of purchase price:

Accounts receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Inventories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prepaid expenses and other current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Property and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Customer relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tradenames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goodwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accounts payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5,897
2,336
242
391
30,100
2,800
37,536
253
4,109
1,700
11,339
59

$62,348

In connection with the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes, we incurred transaction costs of

approximately $3.2 million, which consisted primarily of banking, legal, accounting and other administrative
fees. These costs have been recorded as general and administrative expense in the year ended December 31,
2011.

Financial Operations Overview

Revenue. We derive most of our revenue from the sale of the OmniPod System and other diabetes related

products including blood glucose testing supplies, traditional insulin pumps, pump supplies and other
pharmaceuticals to customers and third-party distributors who resell the product to customers. The OmniPod
System is comprised of two devices: the OmniPod, a disposable insulin infusion device that the patient wears for
up to three days and then replaces; and the PDM, a handheld device much like a personal digital assistant that
wirelessly programs the OmniPod with insulin delivery instructions, assists the patient with diabetes management
and incorporates a blood glucose meter. We received FDA approval for the original OmniPod System in January
2005 and began commercial sale in the U.S. in October 2005. We received CE Mark approval for the original
OmniPod System in April 2009. We are currently selling our OmniPod System through our partnership with
Ypsomed in multiple countries in Europe and through our partnership with GSK in Canada. In August 2011 we
received CE Mark approval and in December 2012 we received 510(k) clearance for the next generation
OmniPod System by the FDA.

In June 2011, we entered into a development agreement with a U.S. based pharmaceutical company (the

“Development Agreement”). Under the Development Agreement, we are required to perform design,
development, regulatory, and other services to support the pharmaceutical company as it works to obtain
regulatory approval to use our drug delivery technology as a delivery method for its pharmaceutical. Over the
term of the Development Agreement, we have and expect to continue to invoice amounts as we meet certain
defined deliverable milestones. Revenue on the development agreement is recognized using a proportional
performance methodology based on efforts incurred and total payments under the agreement.

As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, we had deferred revenue of $5.4 million and $2.7 million, respectively.
These amounts primarily include product-related revenue and unrecognized amounts related to the development
agreement. For the year ending December 31, 2013, we expect our revenue to continue to increase as we
introduce our next generation OmniPod System, leverage our high touch patient model to gain new customers in

45

the United States and continue expansion in Europe, Canada, and certain other international markets. Increased
revenue will be dependent upon the success of our sales efforts, our ability to produce our next generation
OmniPods in sufficient volumes as our patient base grows, the successful launch and transition to our next
generation OmniPod System, the impact of competitive bidding on certain durable medical equipment items
including mail-order diabetes testing supplies, and other risks and uncertainties.

Cost of revenue. Cost of revenue consists primarily of raw material, labor, warranty and overhead costs

such as freight, depreciation, and packaging costs, related to the OmniPod System, the cost of products we
acquire from third party suppliers, and costs incurred related to the development agreement. Cost of revenue will
continue to increase in line with an increase in revenues.

Research and development. Research and development expenses consist primarily of personnel costs
within our product development, regulatory and clinical functions, and the costs of market studies and product
development projects. We expense all research and development costs as incurred. For the year ending
December 31, 2013, we expect overall research and development spending to remain consistent with our 2012
spend as we drive cost efficiencies in our next generation OmniPod, work with LifeScan to develop and gain
regulatory approval on our PDM integrating LifeScan’s OneTouch blood glucose monitoring technology,
determine the feasibility of incorporating continuous sensing technology into the pod, and identify uses of our
OmniPod System as a delivery platform for other pharmaceuticals.

General and administrative. General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and other

related costs for personnel serving the executive, finance, information technology and human resource functions,
as well as legal fees, accounting fees, insurance costs, bad debt expenses, shipping, handling and facilities-related
costs. We expect general and administrative expenses to increase slightly in the year ending December 31, 2013
as compared to 2012 to support our overall growth.

Sales and marketing. Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of personnel costs within our sales,
marketing, reimbursement support, customer support and training functions, sales commissions paid to our sales
representatives and costs associated with participation in medical conferences, physician symposia and
promotional activities, including distribution of units used in our demonstration kit programs. We expect sales
and marketing expenses to increase in the year ending December 31, 2013 as compared to 2012 as we continue
expansion of our sales force to enhance the growth of our existing business as we introduce our next generation
product to new and existing customers.

Restructuring and impairments of assets.

In connection with our efforts to pursue improved gross margins,
leverage operational efficiencies and better pursue opportunities for low-cost supplier sourcing of asset costs, we
periodically perform an evaluation of our manufacturing processes and review the carrying value of our property
and equipment to assess the recoverability of these assets and determine whether impairment may have occurred.
As part of this assessment, we review the planned use of the assets as well as the future undiscounted operating
cash flows expected to be generated by those assets. If impairment is indicated through this review, the carrying
amount of the asset would be reduced to its estimated fair value. This review of manufacturing processes and
equipment can result in an impairment of assets based on current net book value and potential future use of the
assets.

Restructuring and impairment of assets is typically based on a review of our manufacturing processes and

equipment and may include the difference between the net book value of an asset and the asset’s fair value based
on our expectation of its potential future use. In addition, restructuring expense may also include workforce
reduction and related costs for one-time termination benefits provided to employees who are involuntarily
terminated under the terms of a one-time benefit arrangement. Estimates of related costs such as taxes and
outplacement services may be provided under the plan. If changes in these estimated services occur, we may be
required to record or reverse restructuring expenses associated with these workforce reduction and related costs.

46

Results of Operations for the Fiscal Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

The following table presents certain statement of operations information for the years ended December 31,

2012, 2011 and 2010:

Year Ended December 31,

Year Ended December 31,

2011

2012

(Restated) % Change

2011
(Restated)

2010

% Change

(Dollar amounts in thousands)

Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $211,369
119,033
Cost of revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$152,255
85,543

39% $152,255
85,543
39%

$ 96,966
53,240

Gross profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Operating expenses:

Research and development . . . . . . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restructuring and impairment of

92,336

66,712

38%

66,712

43,726

24,359
51,240
52,708

21,863
44,083
43,233

11%
16%
22%

21,863
44,083
43,233

16,566
26,667
34,695

assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

—

—

—

4,431

Total operating expenses . . . . . . . . . . .

128,307

109,179

18%

109,179

82,359

Operating loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other expense, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income tax benefit (expense) . . . . . . . . . . .

(35,971)
(15,684)
(212)

(42,467)
(14,576)
11,212

15%
8%
102%

(42,467)
(14,576)
11,212

(38,633)
(22,526)
—

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ (51,867) $ (45,831)

13% $ (45,831) $(61,159)

57%
61%

53%

32%
65%
25%

100%

33%

10%
35%
100%

25%

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011

Revenue

Our total revenue was $211.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, as compared to $152.3 million
for the year ended December 31, 2011. The increase in revenue is mainly due to additional revenues generated by
our Neighborhood Diabetes business which was acquired in June 2011 and continued adoption of the OmniPod
System by patients in the United States and internationally.

Cost of Revenue

Cost of revenue was $119.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, as compared to $85.5 million for

the year ended December 31, 2011. The increase is due to higher sales volume in the United States and
internationally and higher costs related to lower margin sales by our Neighborhood Diabetes business. These
increases were partially offset by lower per-unit costs on the OmniPod System resulting from cost savings on raw
materials, volume discounts from our suppliers and increased absorption of manufacturing overhead driven by
production volumes.

Research and Development

Research and development expense increased $2.5 million, or 11.4%, to $24.4 million for the year ended

December 31, 2012, as compared to $21.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2011. This increase was
primarily related to an additional $1.9 million of employee related expenses including stock-based compensation
and $1.5 million of consulting and other services in connection with development and regulatory approval of the
next generation OmniPod System. These increases were offset in part by a $0.8 million reduction in products
used for research and development projects.

47

General and Administrative

General and administrative expense increased $7.1 million, or 16.2%, to $51.2 million for the year ended

December 31, 2012, as compared to $44.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2011. The increase was
largely due to an additional $2.3 million of employee related expenses including stock-based compensation, a
$2.1 million increase in amortization expense on the customer relationship and tradename assets related to the
June 2011 acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes, a $2.6 million increase in administrative and consulting
services, a $1.6 million increase in product shipping expenses due to higher shipment volumes and a $1.3 million
increase related to sales and use tax compliance. These increases were offset in part by $3.2 million of
transaction costs related to the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes in June 2011.

Sales and Marketing

Sales and marketing expense increased $9.5 million, or 21.9%, to $52.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2012, as compared to $43.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2011. This increase was
largely due to an increase of $8.8 million in employee related expenses including stock-based compensation as a
result of the on-going expansion of our sales force and the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes, a $1.0 million
increase for convention fees, and a $0.5 million increase in additional outside services costs primarily for
customer support functions.

Other Expense, Net

Other expense, net mainly consists of interest income and expense. Net interest expense was $15.7 million
for the year ended December 31, 2012, compared to $14.6 million for the same period in 2011. The increase in
net interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2012, is primarily the result of additional interest expense
due to an increase in outstanding indebtedness resulting from the issuance of $143.8 million in principal amount
of the 3.75% Notes (as defined below) in June 2011, offset in part by the repurchase of $70 million in principal
amount of the 5.375% Notes (as defined below) in June 2011.

Income Tax Benefit (Expense)

Income tax expense was $0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 as compared to an income tax
benefit of $11.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2011. Income tax expense is comprised of a current and
deferred portion. The current portion in 2012 and 2011 was primarily related to state, local, and foreign taxes and
the deferred portion in 2012 primarily related to U.S. Federal and State tax amounts. Income tax benefit in 2011
was generated as a result of the deferred tax liabilities acquired with the Neighborhood Diabetes acquisition.
These deferred tax liabilities were used to offset our preexisting deferred tax assets reducing the amount of the
valuation allowance required in that period.

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010

Revenue

Our total revenue was $152.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, as compared to $97.0 million

for the year ended December 31, 2010. The increase in revenue is due to continued adoption of the OmniPod
System by patients in the United States and internationally, as well as $35.3 million of revenue related to
pharmacy, testing supplies, insulin pumps and pump supplies serviced by Neighborhood Diabetes.

Cost of Revenue

Cost of revenue was $85.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, as compared to $53.2 million for
the year ended December 31, 2010. The increase is due to higher sales volume and higher costs related to lower
margin sales by our Neighborhood Diabetes business. These increases were partially offset by lower per-unit
costs on the OmniPod System resulting from cost savings on raw materials, volume discounts from our suppliers
and increased production volumes.

48

Research and Development

Research and development expense increased $5.3 million, or 32.0%, to $21.9 million for the year ended

December 31, 2011, as compared to $16.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2010. The increase was
primarily related to an increase of $2.3 million in labor expenses including stock-based compensation, $1.6
million for products used for research and development purposes, $0.7 million for depreciation of engineering
equipment, and $0.5 million of outside services in connection with development and regulatory approval of the
next generation OmniPod System.

General and Administrative

General and administrative expense increased $17.4 million, or 65.3%, to $44.1 million for the year ended

December 31, 2011, as compared to $26.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2010. The increase was
largely due to an increase of $6.6 million of employee related expenses including stock-based compensation. Of
the $6.6 million of increased employee related expenses, $2.8 million relates to Neighborhood Diabetes.
Additionally, we incurred $3.9 million of amortization expense related to the customer relationship and
tradename assets acquired from Neighborhood Diabetes, $3.2 million of transaction costs related to the
acquisition, $0.9 million of additional bad debt expense related to Neighborhood Diabetes’ receivables and $0.9
million for other administrative and consulting services related to the Neighborhood Diabetes business. We also
recorded $1.7 million of additional legal fees mainly related to the BD patent infringement lawsuit.

Sales and Marketing

Sales and marketing expense increased $8.5 million, or 24.6%, to $43.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2011, as compared to $34.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2010. The increase was
largely due to an increase of $5.9 million in employee related expenses including stock-based compensation. Of
the $5.9 million of increased employee related expenses, $4.5 million relates to Neighborhood Diabetes.
Additionally we incurred $1.1 million of additional outside services costs primarily for customer support
functions and $0.4 million of additional employee travel.

Restructuring and Impairment of Assets

For the year ended December 31, 2010, we recorded a total of $4.4 million of impairment charges on certain

assets. During the year ended December 31, 2010 we determined that certain amounts related to manufacturing
equipment for our next generation OmniPod System would not be used in our final product and recorded an
impairment charge of approximately $1.0 million. In addition, we terminated certain other projects related to our
existing OmniPod System as we focused primarily on the introduction of our next generation product. As a
result, we recorded an impairment charge of approximately $3.4 million related to this manufacturing equipment
and construction in process. We had no restructuring or impairment activity in the year ended December 31,
2011.

Other Expense, Net

Other expense, net mainly consists of interest income and expense. Net interest expense was $14.6 million
for the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to $22.5 million for the same period in 2010. The decrease in
net interest expense is related primarily to the repayment of the Facility Agreement (as defined below) in 2010.
We recorded interest expense of $12.9 million related to the Facility Agreement in 2010, including
approximately $7.0 million for the write off of the debt discount and deferred financing costs. The reduction in
interest related to the Facility Agreement was offset by additional cash and non-cash interest expense due to the
increase in outstanding indebtedness resulting from the issuance of the $143.8 million in principal amount 3.75%
Notes in June 2011, offset in part by the repurchase of $70 million in principal amount of the 5.375% Notes in
June 2011.

49

Income Tax Benefit (Expense)

Income tax benefit was $11.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2011. Income tax benefit was

generated as a result of deferred tax liabilities acquired with the Neighborhood Diabetes acquisition. These
deferred tax liabilities were used to offset our preexisting deferred tax assets reducing the amount of the
valuation allowance required in that period. No income tax benefit or expense was recorded in the year ended
December 31, 2010.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

We commenced operations in 2000 and to date we have financed our operations primarily through private

placements of common and preferred stock, secured indebtedness, public offerings of our common stock and
issuances of convertible debt. In June 2011, we acquired all of the outstanding shares of Neighborhood Diabetes.
The aggregate purchase price of approximately $62.4 million included approximately $37.9 million in cash paid
at closing. As of December 31, 2012, we had $57.3 million in cash and cash equivalents. Additionally, in January
2013, we sold 4.7 million shares of our common stock at a price of $20.75 per share, resulting in net proceeds to
us of $92.8 million. We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents, together with the cash expected to be
generated from sales, will be sufficient to meet our projected operating and debt service requirements for at least
the next twelve months.

Equity

In December 2010, we issued and sold 3,450,000 shares of our common stock at a price of $13.27 per share.

In connection with the offering, we received total gross proceeds of $47.8 million, or approximately
$45.4 million in net proceeds after deducting underwriting discounts and offering expenses. Approximately
$33.3 million of the proceeds was used to repay all amounts outstanding under our Facility Agreement with
certain institutional accredited investors.

In June 2011, in connection with the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes, we issued 1,197,631 shares of

our common stock with a value of $20.40 per share on the issuance date, as partial consideration for the
acquisition.

In January 2013, in a public offering, we issued and sold 4,715,000 shares of our common stock at a price of

$20.75 per share. In connection with the offering, we received total gross proceeds of $97.8 million, or
approximately $92.8 million in net proceeds after deducting underwriting discounts and offering expenses.

Debt

At December 31, 2012 and 2011, we had convertible debt and related deferred financing costs on our

balance sheet as follows (in thousands):

As of December 31,

2012

2011

Principal amount of the 5.375% Convertible Senior Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Principal amount of the 3.75% Convertible Senior Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unamortized discount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 15,000
143,750
(40,591)

$ 15,000
143,750
(50,210)

Total debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Current portion of long-term debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

118,159
14,429

108,540
—

Long-term debt

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$103,730

$108,540

Deferred financing costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

2,004

$

2,597

50

Interest expense related to the 5.375% Senior Notes (as defined below), the 3.75% Senior Notes (as defined

below) and the Facility Agreement (as defined below) was included in interest expense on the consolidated
statements of operations as follows (in thousands):

Contractual coupon interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accretion of debt discount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other interest payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amortization of debt issuance costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 6,197
9,619
—
593

$ 5,383
7,213
1,991
532

$ 7,203
13,247
650
1,780

Total interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$16,409

$15,119

$22,880

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

5.375% Convertible Senior Notes

In June 2008, we sold $85.0 million principal amount of 5.375% Convertible Senior Notes due June 15,
2013 (the “5.375% Notes”) in a private placement to qualified institutional buyers pursuant to Rule 144A under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The interest rate on the notes is 5.375% per annum on the principal
amount from June 16, 2008, payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on December 15 and June 15 of each year.
The 5.375% Notes are convertible into our common stock at an initial conversion rate of 46.8467 shares of
common stock per $1,000 principal amount of the 5.375% Notes, which is equivalent to a conversion price of
approximately $21.35 per share, representing a conversion premium of 34% to the last reported sale price of our
common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market on June 10, 2008, subject to adjustment under certain
circumstances, at any time beginning on March 15, 2013 or under certain other circumstances and prior to the
close of business on the business day immediately preceding the final maturity date of the notes. The 5.375%
Notes will be convertible for cash up to their principal amount and shares of our common stock for the remainder
of the conversion value in excess of the principal amount.

If a fundamental change, as defined in the Indenture for the 5.375% Notes, occurs at any time prior to
maturity, holders of the 5.375% Notes may require us to repurchase their notes in whole or in part for cash equal
to 100% of the principal amount of the notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest, including any
additional interest to, but excluding, the date of repurchase. If a holder elects to convert their 5.375% Notes upon
the occurrence of a make-whole fundamental change, as defined in the Indenture for the 5.375% Notes, the
holder may be entitled to receive an additional number of shares of common stock on the conversion date. These
additional shares are intended to compensate the holders for the loss of the time value of the conversion option
and are set forth in the Indenture to the 5.375% Notes. In no event will the number of shares issuable upon
conversion of a note exceed 62.7746 per $1,000 principal amount (subject to adjustment as described in the
Indenture for the 5.375% Notes).

We recorded a debt discount of $26.9 million to equity to reflect the value of our nonconvertible debt
borrowing rate of 14.5% per annum. This debt discount is being amortized as interest expense over the five-year
term of the 5.375% Notes. We incurred deferred financing costs related to this offering of approximately
$3.5 million, of which $1.1 million has been reclassified as an offset to the value of the amount allocated to
equity. The remainder is recorded as other assets in the consolidated balance sheet and is being amortized as a
component of interest expense over the five-year term of the 5.375% Notes.

In June 2011, in connection with the issuance of $143.8 million in principal amount of 3.75% Convertible

Notes due June 2016 (the “3.75% Notes”), we repurchased $70 million in principal amount of the 5.375% Notes
for $85.1 million, a 21.5% premium on the principal amount. The investors that held the $70 million in principal
amount of repurchased 5.375% Notes purchased $59.5 million in principal amount of the 3.75% Notes and
retained approximately $13.5 million in principal amount of the remaining 5.375% Notes. The investors’
combined $73.0 million in principal amount of convertible debt ($13.5 million of 5.375% Notes and
$59.5 million of 3.75% Notes) was considered to be a modification of a portion of the 5.375% Notes. See the
section entitled “3.75% Convertible Senior Notes” below.

51

Cash interest expense related to the 5.375% Notes was $0.8 million, $2.7 million, and $4.6 million for the

years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.

As of December 31, 2012, we included approximately $14.4 million on our balance sheet in the current

portion of long-term debt related to the 5.375% Notes. As of December 31, 2012 the 5.375% Notes have a
remaining term of 6 months.

3.75% Convertible Senior Notes

In June 2011, we sold $143.8 million principal amount of 3.75% Notes. The interest rate on the notes is

3.75% per annum, payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on December 15 and June 15 of each year. The
3.75% Notes are convertible into our common stock at an initial conversion rate of 38.1749 shares of common
stock per $1,000 principal amount of the 3.75% Notes, which is equivalent to a conversion price of
approximately $26.20 per share, subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. The 3.75% Notes are
convertible prior to March 15, 2016 only upon the occurrence of certain circumstances. On and after March 15,
2016 and prior to the close of business on the second scheduled trading day immediately preceding the final
maturity date of the 3.75% Notes, the notes may be converted without regard to the occurrence of any such
circumstances. The 3.75% Notes and any unpaid interest will be convertible at our option for cash, shares of our
common stock or a combination of cash and shares of our common stock for the principal amount. We intend to
settle the principal in cash.

We may not redeem the 3.75% Notes prior to June 20, 2014. From June 20, 2014 to June 20, 2015, we may

redeem the 3.75% Notes, at our option, in whole or in part only if the last reported sale price per share of our
common stock has been at least 130% of the conversion price then in effect for at least 20 trading days during a
period of 30 consecutive trading days. On and after June 25, 2015, we may redeem the 3.75% Notes, at our
option (without regard to such sale price condition), in whole or in part. If a fundamental change, as defined in
the Indenture for the 3.75% Notes, occurs at any time prior to maturity, holders of the 3.75% Notes may require
us to repurchase their notes in whole or in part for cash equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes to be
repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest. If a holder elects to convert its 3.75% Notes upon the occurrence
of a make-whole fundamental change, as defined in the Indenture for the 3.75% Notes, the holder may be entitled
to receive an additional number of shares of our common stock on the conversion date. These additional shares
are intended to compensate the holders for the loss of the time value of the conversion option and are set forth in
the Indenture to the 3.75% Notes. In no event will the number of shares issuable upon conversion of a 3.75%
Note exceed 50.5816 per $1,000 principal amount (subject to adjustment as described in the Indenture for the
3.75% Notes). The 3.75% Notes are unsecured and are equal in right of payment to the 5.375% Notes.

In connection with the issuance of the 3.75% Notes, we repurchased $70 million in principal amount of the

5.375% Notes for $85.1 million, a 21.5% premium on the principal amount. The investors that held the
$70 million in principal amount of repurchased 5.375% Notes purchased $59.5 million in principal amount of the
3.75% Notes and retained approximately $13.5 million in principal amount of the remaining 5.375% Notes. This
transaction was treated as a modification of the existing 5.375% Notes. We accounted for this modification of a
portion of the 5.375% Notes separately from the issuance of the remainder of the 3.75% Notes.

Prior to the transaction, the $70 million principal of repurchased 5.375% Notes had a debt discount of
$10.5 million. This amount remained in debt discount related to the $73 million in principal amount of modified
debt. We recorded additional debt discount of $15.1 million related to the premium payment in connection with
the repurchase and $0.2 million related to the increase in the value of the conversion feature. The offset to the
debt discount related to the value of the conversion feature was recorded as additional paid-in capital. The total
debt discount of $25.8 million related to the modified debt is being amortized as interest expense at the effective
rate of 16.5% over the five-year term of the modified debt. We paid transaction fees of approximately
$2.0 million related to the modification, which were recorded as interest expense at the time of the modification.

52

Of the $143.8 million in principal amount of 3.75% Notes issued in June 2011, $84.3 million in principal
amount was considered to be an issuance of new debt. We recorded a debt discount of $26.6 million related to
the $84.3 million in principal amount of 3.75% Notes. The debt discount was recorded as additional paid-in
capital to reflect the value of our nonconvertible debt borrowing rate of 12.4% per annum. This debt discount is
being amortized as interest expense over the five-year term of the 3.75% Notes. We incurred deferred financing
costs related to this offering of approximately $2.8 million, of which $0.9 million has been recorded as an offset
to the value of the amount allocated to equity. The remainder is recorded as other assets in the consolidated
balance sheet and is being amortized as a component of interest expense over the five-year term of the 3.75%
Notes.

Cash interest expense related to the $143.8 million in principal amount of 3.75% Notes was $5.4 million and

$2.7 million in the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. No cash interest was recorded on the
3.75% Notes in the year ended December 31, 2010.

As of December 31, 2012, we included $103.7 million on our balance sheet in long-term debt related to the

3.75% Notes. As of December 31, 2012, the 3.75% Notes have a remaining term of three and a half years.

Facility Agreement and Common Stock Warrants

In March 2009, we entered into a facility agreement with certain institutional accredited investors (the
“Facility Agreement”), pursuant to which the investors agreed to loan us up to $60 million, subject to the terms
and conditions set forth in the Facility Agreement. Total financing costs, including the transaction fee, were
$3.0 million and were amortized as interest expense over the 42 months of the Facility Agreement. In
September 2009, we entered into an amendment to the Facility Agreement whereby we repaid the $27.5 million
originally drawn and promptly drew down the remaining $32.5 million available under the Facility Agreement.
The annual interest rate was 8.5%, payable quarterly in arrears. In connection with the amendment to the Facility
Agreement, we entered into a securities purchase agreement with the institutional accredited investors whereby
we sold 2,855,659 shares of our common stock to the lenders at $9.63 per share, a $1.9 million discount based on
the closing price of our common stock of $10.28 on that date. We recorded the $1.9 million as a debt discount,
which was amortized as interest expense over the remaining term of the loan. We received aggregate proceeds of
$27.5 million in connection with the sale of our shares.

In connection with the execution of the Facility Agreement, we issued to the investors fully exercisable
warrants to purchase an aggregate of 3.75 million shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $3.13 per
share. The warrants qualified for permanent treatment as equity, and their relative fair value of $6.1 million on
the issuance date was recorded as additional paid-in capital and debt discount. The debt discount was amortized
as non-cash interest expense over the term of the loan. As of December 31, 2012, all warrants to acquire
3.75 million shares of our common stock issued in connection with the Facility Agreement were exercised.

In December 2010, we paid $33.3 million to the lenders, of which $32.5 million related to principal and
$0.8 million related to interest and prepayment fees, to extinguish this debt. We recorded a non-cash interest
charge of $7.0 million in 2010 related to the write-off of the remaining debt discounts and financing costs
included in other assets which were being amortized to interest expense over the term of the debt. At
December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, there were no amounts related to the Facility Agreement included
on our balance sheet.

53

Operating Activities

The following table sets forth the amounts of cash used in operating activities and net loss for each of the

periods indicated:

Year Ended December 31,

Cash used in operating activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$(29,059)
$(51,867)

2012

2011
(Restated)

(In thousands)
$(25,452)
$(45,831)

2010

$(35,625)
$(61,159)

Net cash used in operating activities in the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, primarily
represents amounts utilized to fund operating losses. The increase of $3.6 million of cash used in operating
activities for the year ended December 31, 2012 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2011 was primarily
a result of our net loss of $51.9 million offset by non-cash expenses of $34.6 million. Non-cash expenses include
non-cash interest, depreciation and amortization, stock-based compensation and bad debt expense. Cash used in
operating activities in the year ended December 31, 2012 includes an increase in net accounts receivable of $13.5
million and an increase of $3.0 million in inventory. These increases were offset in part by an increase of $3.0
million in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities and a $2.9 million increase in deferred
revenue.

The decrease of $10.2 million of cash used in operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2011
compared to the year ended December 31, 2010 was due primarily due to the increase in revenue combined with
our ability to maintain lower gross margins as well as cost containment initiatives. Cash used in operating
activities in the year ended December 31, 2011 was primarily a result of our net loss of $45.8 million offset by
non-cash expenses of $17.8 million. Non-cash expenses include non-cash interest, depreciation and amortization,
stock-based compensation, deferred tax provision and bad debt expense. Cash used in operating activities in the
year ended December 31, 2011 includes an increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses of $4.7 million, an
increase in net accounts receivable of $3.6 million and a reduction of deferred revenue of $1.7 million. These
increases are mainly attributable to our acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes and were offset by a decrease in
inventory of $1.9 million.

Investing and Financing Activities

The following table sets forth the amounts of cash used in investing activities and cash provided by

financing activities for each of the periods indicated:

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

Cash used in investing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash provided by financing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$(10,991)
$ 3,388

(In thousands)
$(48,969)
$ 55,102

$ (6,549)
$27,452

Cash used in investing activities in the year ended December 31, 2012 was primarily related to purchases of
property and equipment, of which the majority related to the purchase of manufacturing equipment for use in the
production of our next generation product. Cash used in investing activities in the year ended December 31, 2011
was primarily related to the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes for which we paid $37.9 million in cash and
$24.4 million in shares of our common stock. In addition, we used approximately $9.0 million for the purchase of
property and equipment primarily related to manufacturing equipment for use in the production of our next
generation product. Cash used in investing activities in the year ended December 31, 2010 mainly related to the
purchase of property and equipment.

In the year ended December 31, 2012 cash provided by financing activities is mainly related to the net
proceeds from the issuance of common stock in connection with the exercise of employee stock options. In the

54

year ended December 31, 2011 cash provided by financing activities related to the net proceeds from the issuance
of the 3.75% Notes, offset by the repurchase of $70 million in principal amount of the 5.375% Notes for
$85.1 million. Cash provided by financing activities in the year ended December 31, 2010 was primarily the
result of the sale of 3,450,000 shares of common stock at a price of $13.27 per share in December 2010 and the
exercise of warrants to purchase 3,750,000 shares of common stock at a price of $3.13 per share, offset by the
repayment of all amounts owed under the Facility Agreement.

We lease our facilities in Massachusetts, New York, Florida, and Singapore. These leases are accounted for

as operating leases. The leases generally provide for a base rent plus real estate taxes and certain operating
expenses related to the leases. We have extended the leases for our facilities in Bedford and Billerica,
Massachusetts. Following the extensions, these leases expire in September 2014. The leases for Bedford contain
a five-year renewal option and escalating payments over the life of the lease. The leases in Woburn, Singapore,
Florida, and New York expire in June 2013, July 2013, December 2013, and April 2015, respectively.

During the year ended December 31, 2012, we terminated a lease for one of our corporate offices spaces in
Bedford, Massachusetts. The lease termination resulted in no material impact to the financial statements for the
year ended December 31, 2012. During the same period, we entered into a new lease agreement for an additional
26,500 square feet in Bedford, Massachusetts. The lease expires in September 2014 and includes escalating rent
payments over its term. Furthermore, during the year ended December 31, 2012, we renewed our lease for our
Florida property. The lease expires in December 2013.

Certain of our operating lease agreements contain scheduled rent increases, which are being amortized over

the terms of the agreement using the straight-line method and are included in other liabilities in the
accompanying balance sheet. We expect to pay rent of $1.5 million in 2013 and $1.0 million in 2014.

As a result of the issuance of the 3.75% Notes and the repurchase of $70 million of the 5.375% Notes in
June 2011, we expect to pay cash interest of $5.8 million in 2013, $5.4 million in each of 2014 and 2015 and
$2.5 million in 2016. Additionally we expect to repay the $15 million of the 5.375% Notes in 2013 and the
$143.8 million of the 3.75% Notes in 2016.

During the year ending December 31, 2013, we will be using funds in connection with the development and

production of our next generation OmniPod System, expansion of our commercial organization and continued
initiatives to increase sales of the OmniPod System in the United States and internationally.

Shareholder Rights Plan

In November 2008, our Board of Directors adopted a shareholder rights plan (the “Shareholder’s Rights
Plan”), as set forth in the Shareholder Rights Agreement between us and the rights agent, the purpose of which is,
among other things, to enhance the ability of the Board of Directors to protect shareholder interests and to ensure
that shareholders receive fair treatment in the event any coercive takeover attempt of us is made in the future.
The Shareholder Rights Plan could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire, or could discourage a third
party from acquiring, us or a large block of our common stock.

In connection with the adoption of the Shareholder Rights Plan, our Board of Directors declared a dividend

distribution of one preferred stock purchase right (a “Right”) for each outstanding share of common stock to
stockholders of record as of the close of business on November 15, 2008. In addition, one Right will
automatically attach to each share of common stock issued between November 15, 2008 and the distribution date.
The Rights currently are not exercisable and are attached to and trade with the outstanding shares of common
stock. Under the Shareholder Rights Plan, the Rights become exercisable if a person or group becomes an
“acquiring person” by acquiring 15% or more of the outstanding shares of common stock or if a person or group
commences a tender offer that would result in that person or group owning 15% or more of the common stock. If
a person or group becomes an “acquiring person,” each holder of a Right (other than the acquiring person) would

55

be entitled to purchase, at the then-current exercise price, such number of shares of our preferred stock which are
equivalent to shares of common stock having a value of twice the exercise price of the Right. If we are acquired
in a merger or other business combination transaction after any such event, each holder of a Right would then be
entitled to purchase, at the then-current exercise price, shares of the acquiring company’s common stock having a
value of twice the exercise price of the Right.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

As of December 31, 2012, we did not have any off-balance sheet financing arrangements.

Contractual Obligations

The following table summarizes our principal contractual obligations as of December 31, 2012. Amounts in

thousands:

Payments Due in

Contractual Obligations

Total

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017 Later

Operating lease obligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Long-term debt obligations(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Purchase obligations for production

$

2,521
177,793

$ 1,511
20,790

$ 965
5,391

$

45
5,391

$

— $— —
146,221 — —

components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5,206

5,206

Purchase obligations for capital

expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1,616

1,616

—

—

—

—

— —

— —

Total contractual obligations . . . . . . . . . . . .

$187,136

$29,123

$6,356

$5,436

$146,221

$— $—

(1) The interest rate on the convertible debt is 5.375% and 3.75% per annum. We have included future

payments of interest on the long-term debt in our obligations.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

Our financial statements are based on the selection and application of generally accepted accounting

principles, which require us to make estimates and assumptions about future events that affect the amounts
reported in our financial statements and the accompanying notes. Future events and their effects cannot be
determined with certainty. Therefore, the determination of estimates requires the exercise of judgment. Actual
results could differ from those estimates, and any such differences may be material to our financial statements.
We believe that the policies set forth below involve a higher degree of judgment and complexity in their
application than our other accounting policies and represent the critical accounting policies and estimates used in
the preparation of our financial statements. If different assumptions or conditions were to prevail, the results
could be materially different from our reported results.

Revenue Recognition

We generate nearly all of our revenue from sales of our OmniPod Insulin Management System and other

diabetes related products including blood glucose testing supplies, insulin pumps, pump supplies and
pharmaceuticals to customers and third-party distributors who resell the products to patients with diabetes.

Revenue recognition requires that persuasive evidence of a sales arrangement exists, delivery of goods
occurs through transfer of title and risk and rewards of ownership, the selling price is fixed or determinable and
collectibility is reasonably assured. With respect to these criteria:

• The evidence of an arrangement generally consists of a physician order form, a patient information form

and, if applicable, third-party insurance approval for sales directly to patients or a purchase order for sales
to a third-party distributor.

56

• Transfer of title and risk and rewards of ownership are typically passed to the patient or third-party

distributor upon shipment of the products.

• The selling prices for all sales are fixed and agreed with the patient or third-party distributor, and if

applicable, the patient’s third-party insurance provider(s) prior to shipment and are based on established
list prices or, in the case of certain third-party insurers, contractually agreed upon prices. Provisions for
discounts and rebates to customers are established as a reduction to revenue in the same period the related
sales are recorded.

We offer a 45-day right of return for our OmniPod Insulin System sales to new patients, and we defer
revenue to reflect estimated sales returns in the same period that the related product sales are recorded. Returns
are estimated through a comparison of our historical return data to our related sales. Historical rates of return are
adjusted for known or expected changes in the marketplace when appropriate. Historically, sales returns have
amounted to approximately 3% of gross product sales. When doubt exists about reasonable assuredness of
collectibility from specific customers, we defer revenue from sales of products to those customers until payment
is received.

In June 2011, we entered into a development agreement with a U.S. based pharmaceutical company (“the

Development Agreement”). Under the Development Agreement, we are required to perform design,
development, regulatory, and other services to support the pharmaceutical company as it works to obtain
regulatory approval to use our drug delivery technology as a delivery method for its pharmaceutical. Over the
term of the Development Agreement, we have invoiced and expect to continue to invoice amounts based upon
meeting certain defined deliverable milestones. Revenue on the development agreement is recognized using a
proportional performance methodology based on efforts incurred and total payments under the agreement.

We had deferred revenue of $5.4 million as of December 31, 2012. The deferred revenue recorded as of
December 31, 2012 was primarily comprised of product-related revenue and unrecognized amounts related to the
development agreement.

Restructuring Expense and Impairment of Assets

In connection with our efforts to pursue improved gross margins, leverage operational efficiencies and

better pursue opportunities for low-cost supplier sourcing, we periodically perform an evaluation of our
manufacturing processes and review the carrying value of our property and equipment to assess the
recoverability of these assets whenever events indicate that impairment may have occurred. As part of this
assessment, we review the planned use of the assets as well as the future undiscounted operating cash flows
expected to be generated by those assets. If impairment is indicated through this review, the carrying amount of
the asset would be reduced to its estimated fair value. This review of manufacturing processes and equipment can
result in restructuring activity or an impairment of assets based on current net book value and potential future use
of the assets.

Our restructuring expenses may also include workforce reduction and related costs for one-time termination

benefits provided to employees who are involuntarily terminated under the terms of a one-time benefit
arrangement. We record these one-time termination benefits upon incurring the liability, provided that the
employees are notified, the plan is approved by the appropriate level of management, the employees to be
terminated and the expected completion date are identified and the benefits the identified employees will be paid
are established. Significant changes to the plan are not expected when we record the costs. In recording the
workforce reduction and related costs, we estimate related costs such as taxes and outplacement services which
may be provided under the plan. If changes in these estimated services occur, we may be required to record or
reverse restructuring expenses associated with these workforce reduction and related costs.

57

Asset Valuation

Asset valuation includes assessing the recorded value of certain assets, including accounts receivable,
inventory and fixed assets. We use a variety of factors to assess valuation, depending upon the asset. Actual
results may differ materially from our estimates. Inventories are held at the lower of their cost or market value.
We periodically review inventories for potential impairment based on quantities on hand and expectations of
future use. Property and equipment is stated at cost and depreciated using the straight-line method over the
estimated useful lives of the respective assets. Leasehold improvements are amortized over their useful life or the
life of the lease, whichever is shorter. We review long-lived assets, including property and equipment and
intangibles, for impairment whenever events or changes in business circumstances indicate that the carrying
amount of the assets may not be fully recoverable. We also review assets under construction to ensure certainty
of their future installation and integration into the manufacturing process. An impairment loss would be
recognized when estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of the asset and its
eventual disposition is less than its carrying amount. Impairment, if any, is measured as the amount by which the
carrying amount of a long-lived asset exceeds its fair value. We consider various valuation factors, principally
planned use of the assets and discounted cash flows, to assess the fair values of long-lived assets.

Income Taxes

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between the financial reporting and

tax bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates that will be in effect in the years in
which the differences are expected to reverse. A valuation allowance is required to reduce the deferred tax assets
reported if, based on the weight of the evidence, it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred
tax assets will not be realized. We review our deferred tax assets for recoverability considering historical
profitability, projected future taxable income, and the expected timing of the reversals of existing temporary
differences and tax planning strategies.

We follow the provisions of FASB ASC 740-10, Income Taxes (“ASC 740-10”) on accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes recognized in our financial statements. ASC 740-10 prescribes a recognition
threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position
taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. In addition, ASC 740-10 provides guidance on derecognition,
classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition. As of December 31,
2012 we had $0.1 million of unrecognized tax benefits recorded.

We file federal, state and foreign tax returns. These returns are generally open to examination by the

relevant tax authorities from three to four years from the date they are filed. The tax filings relating to our federal
and state tax returns are currently open to examination for tax years 2009 through 2011 and 2008 through 2011,
respectively. In addition, we have generated tax losses since our inception in 2000. These years may be subject to
examination if the losses are carried forward and utilized in future years.

For the year ended December 31, 2012, income tax expense was $212,000 and was comprised of $121,000
for the current portion and $91,000 for the deferred portion. The current portion primarily relates to state, local,
and foreign taxes as well as benefit realized for the release of certain reserves. The deferred portion primarily
relates to U.S. Federal and State tax amounts.

Stock-Based Compensation

We account for stock-based compensation under the provisions of FASB ASC 718-10, Compensation —

Stock Compensation (“ASC 718-10”). ASC 718-10 requires that all share-based payments to employees,
including grants of employee stock options, be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values.

We use the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the weighted-average fair value of options
granted. We determine the intrinsic value of restricted stock and restricted stock units based on the closing price
of our common stock on the date of grant. We recognize the compensation expense of share-based awards on a
straight-line basis over the vesting period of the award.

58

The determination of the fair value of share-based payment awards utilizing the Black-Scholes model is
affected by the stock price and a number of assumptions, including expected volatility, expected life, risk-free
interest rate and expected dividends. The expected life of the awards is estimated based on the midpoint between
the vesting date and the end of the contractual term. The risk-free interest rate assumption is based on observed
interest rates appropriate for the terms of the awards. The dividend yield assumption is based on company history
and the expectation that we will not pay dividends. Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and revised, if
necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. Stock-based compensation
expense recognized in the financial statements is based on awards that are ultimately expected to vest. We
evaluate the assumptions used to value the awards on a quarterly basis and if factors change and different
assumptions are utilized, stock-based compensation expense may differ significantly from what has been
recorded in the past. If there are any modifications or cancellations of the underlying unvested securities, we may
be required to accelerate, increase or cancel any remaining unearned stock-based compensation expense.

In the year ended December 31, 2012 we recorded $9.9 million of stock-based compensation expense.

Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

Accounts receivable consist of amounts due from third-party payors, patients, third-party distributors, and
government agencies. The allowance for doubtful accounts is recorded at the time the potential collection risk is
identified. We estimate our allowance based on historical experience, assessment of specific risk, discussions
with individual customers or various assumptions and estimates that are believed to be reasonable under the
circumstances. At December 31, 2012 the allowance for doubtful accounts was $6.6 million. We believe the
reserve is adequate to mitigate current collection risk.

Intangibles and Other Long-Lived Assets

Our finite-lived intangible assets are stated at cost less accumulated amortization. We assess our intangible

and other long-lived assets for impairment, whenever events or changes in circumstances suggest that the
carrying value of an asset may not be recoverable. We assess the need for an impairment of intangibles and other
long-lived assets if the carrying amount of the asset is not recoverable based on its undiscounted future cash
flows. Any such impairment loss is measured as the difference between the carrying amount and the fair value of
the asset. The estimation of useful lives and expected cash flows requires us to make significant judgments
regarding future periods that are subject to some factors outside our control. Changes in these estimates can result
in significant revisions to the carrying value of these assets and may result in material charges to the results of
operations. The estimated life of the acquired tradename is 15 years. The estimated life of the acquired customer
relationships asset is ten years. Intangible assets with determinable estimated lives are amortized over these lives.
At December 31, 2012 intangible assets related to the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes consisted of $20.5
million of customer relationships and $2.5 million of tradenames.

Goodwill

Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of the acquired Neighborhood Diabetes business over the fair
value of identifiable net assets acquired. We perform an assessment of our goodwill for impairment on at least an
annual basis or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate there might be impairment.

Goodwill is evaluated at the reporting unit level. To test for impairment, we compare the carrying value of

the reporting unit to its fair value using a discounted cash flow analysis. If the reporting unit’s carrying value
exceeds its fair value, we record an impairment loss to the extent that the carrying value of goodwill exceeds its
implied fair value. We completed our goodwill analysis as of October 1, 2012 and noted no impairment.

Warranty

We provide a four-year warranty on our PDMs and may replace any OmniPods that do not function in

accordance with product specifications. We estimate our warranty at the time the product is shipped based on

59

historical experience and the estimated cost to service the claims. Cost to service the claims reflects the current
product cost which has been decreasing over time. As these estimates are based on historical experience, and we
continue to introduce new versions of existing products, we also consider the anticipated performance of the
product over its warranty period in estimating warranty reserves. At December 31, 2012 the warranty reserve was
$2.0 million.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04 Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value

Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs (“ASU No. 2011-04”). ASU No. 2011-04
clarifies existing concepts regarding existing fair value principles. The amendments will be effective in fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2011. We adopted the guidance in the first quarter of 2012. The adoption of
these amendments did not have a material impact on our financial statements.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08 Testing Goodwill for Impairment (“ASU No. 2011-08”).
ASU No. 2011-08 provides guidance on simplifying the impairment testing for goodwill. A company may first assess
the qualitative factors to determine whether it is more-likely-than-not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than
its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test
on the reporting unit. The amendments will be effective in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011, and we
adopted the guidance in the first quarter of 2012. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our
financial statements.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities.
ASU 2011-11 will require disclosure of information about offsetting and related arrangements to enable users of
our financial statements to understand the effect of those arrangements on our financial position. The guidance is
effective in fiscal years beginning after January 1, 2013. We believe the adoption of ASU No. 2011-11 will have
no material impact on our financial statements.

In July 2012, the FASB issued ASU No. 2012-12 Intangibles — Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing

Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment (“ASU No. 2012-12”). ASU No. 2012-12 gives a company the
option to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely-than-not that the indefinitely-lived
intangible is impaired. Qualitative factors include related events and circumstances that could affect the
significant inputs used in determining the fair value of the indefinite-lived intangible asset. The guidance is
effective in fiscal years beginning after September 12, 2012. We believe the adoption of ASU No. 2012-12 will
have no material impact on our financial statements.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

We do not use derivative financial instruments in our investment portfolio and have no foreign exchange

contracts. Our financial instruments consist of cash, cash equivalents, short-term investments, accounts
receivable, accounts payable, accrued expenses and long-term obligations. We consider investments that, when
purchased, have a remaining maturity of 90 days or less to be cash equivalents. The primary objectives of our
investment strategy are to preserve principal, maintain proper liquidity to meet operating needs and maximize
yields. To minimize our exposure to an adverse shift in interest rates, we invest mainly in cash equivalents and
maintain an average maturity of six months or less. We do not believe that a 10% change in interest rates would
have a material impact on the fair value of our investment portfolio or our interest income.

On December 31, 2012, we had outstanding debt recorded at $15 million related to our 5.375% Notes and

outstanding debt recorded at $143.8 million related to our 3.75% Notes.

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

The consolidated financial statements and supplementary data of the Company required in this item are set

forth beginning on page F-1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

60

ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

None.

ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Our management, with the participation of our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, evaluated

the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2012. The term “disclosure
controls and procedures,” as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) means controls and other procedures of a company that are designed to
ensure that information required to be disclosed by a company in the reports that it files or submits under the
Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the
Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without
limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by a company in
the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to the company’s
management, including its principal executive and principal financial officers, as appropriate to allow timely
decisions regarding required disclosure. Management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how
well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives and management
necessarily applies its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.
Based on the evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2012, our chief executive
officer and chief financial officer concluded that, as of such date, our disclosure controls and procedures were not
effective at a reasonable assurance level. Specifically, our processes and procedures did not provide for adequate
and timely analysis of the appropriate income tax accounting related to our acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes
and our modification of convertible debt in 2011.

Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the three months ended
December 31, 2012 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
control over financial reporting

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial
reporting as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a — 15(f). Our internal control system was designed to
provide reasonable assurance to our management and the Board of Directors regarding the preparation and fair
presentation of published financial statements. All internal control systems, no matter how well designed have
inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable
assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation. Our management assessed the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012. In making this assessment,
our management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (“COSO”) in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (the COSO criteria).

In our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, filed on February 28, 2012,
management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2011.
Subsequently, we became aware of a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting; namely,
that we did not maintain effective internal controls over the accuracy of our accounting for income taxes.
Specifically, our processes and procedures did not provide for adequate and timely analysis of appropriate
income tax accounting related to our acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes and our modification of convertible
debt in 2011.

61

This material weakness resulted in the amendment to our Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended

December 31, 2011, in order to restate the financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2011, and to
restate the financial information for the second, third and fourth quarters of 2011 and the amendments to our
Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q/A to restate the financial information for the first, second and third quarters of
2012. As we have not yet remediated this material weakness, our management has also concluded that our
internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2012.

The effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012 has been audited
by Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears
below.

ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION

None.

62

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Insulet Corporation

We have audited Insulet Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012,
based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). Insulet Corporation’s management is
responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Annual
Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance
about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our
audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a
material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based
on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We
believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting
includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail,
accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable
assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made
only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable
assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the
company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect
misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that
controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the
policies or procedures may deteriorate.

A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial

reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the company’s annual or
interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. The following material weakness
has been identified and included in management’s assessment. Management has identified a material weakness in
controls related to the company’s accounting for income taxes. We also have audited, in accordance with the
standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of
Insulet Corporation as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2012. This
material weakness was considered in determining the nature, timing and extent of audit tests applied in our audit
of the 2012 consolidated financial statements, and this report does not affect our report dated February 28, 2013,
which expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements.

In our opinion, because of the effect of the material weakness described above on the achievement of the

objectives of the control criteria, Insulet Corporation has not maintained effective internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2012, based on the COSO criteria.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
February 28, 2013

63

PART III

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Certain information required by this Item 10 relating to our directors, executive officers and corporate

governance is incorporated by reference herein from our proxy statement in connection with our 2013 annual
meeting of stockholders, which proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
“SEC”) not later than 120 days after the close of our year ended December 31, 2012.

Audit Committee Financial Expert

The audit committee of our board of directors currently consists of Steven Sobieski (Chairman), Regina
Sommer and Daniel Levangie. Our board of directors has determined that each member of the audit committee is
“independent” as that term is defined in the rules of the SEC and the applicable Nasdaq rules. Our board of
directors has determined that both Mr. Sobieski and Ms. Sommer qualify as an “audit committee financial
expert” as such term is defined in the rules of the SEC. In making its determination, our board of directors
considered the nature and scope of the experiences and responsibilities these members have previously had with
reporting companies. Stockholders should understand that this designation is a disclosure requirement of the SEC
related to the experience and understanding of the members of the audit committee with respect to certain
accounting and auditing matters. The designation does not impose upon any duties, obligations or liability upon
the members of the audit committee that are greater than are generally imposed on other members of the audit
committee and our board of directors and designation as an audit committee financial expert pursuant to this SEC
requirement does not affect the duties, obligations or liability of any other member of the audit committee or the
board of directors.

Code of Ethics

We have adopted a “code of ethics,” as defined by regulations promulgated under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended, that applies to all of our directors and
employees worldwide, including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting
officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions. A current copy of the Code of Business Conduct
and Ethics is available at the Corporate Governance section of our website at http://www.insulet.com. A copy of
the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics may also be obtained, free of charge, upon a request directed to: 9 Oak
Park Drive, Bedford, Massachusetts 01730, Attention: Secretary. We intend to disclose any amendment to or
waiver of a provision of the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to our principal executive officer,
principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions, by
posting such information on our website available at http://www.insulet.com.

For more corporate governance information, you are invited to access the Corporate Governance section of

our website available at http://www.insulet.com.

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Certain information required by this Item 11 relating to remuneration of directors and executive officers and

other transactions involving management is incorporated by reference herein from our proxy statement in
connection with our 2013 annual meeting of stockholders, which proxy statement will be filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission not later than 120 days after the close of our year ended December 31, 2012.

ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND

RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

Certain information required by this Item 12 relating to security ownership of certain beneficial owners and

management is incorporated by reference herein from our proxy statement in connection with our 2013 annual
meeting of stockholders, which proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission not

64

later than 120 days after the close of our fiscal year ended December 31, 2012. For information on securities
authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans, see the section entitled “Market for Registrant’s
Common Equity, Related Stockholders Matters, and issuer Purchases of Equity Securities “ in Part II, Item 5. in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR

INDEPENDENCE

Certain information required by this Item 13 relating to certain relationships and related transactions, and

director independence is incorporated by reference herein from our proxy statement in connection with our 2013
annual meeting of stockholders, which proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission not later than 120 days after the close of our year ended December 31, 2012.

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

Certain information required by this Item 14 regarding principal accounting fees and services is set forth

under “Principal Accounting Fees and Services” in our proxy statement in connection with our 2013 annual
meeting of stockholders, which proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission not
later than 120 days after the close of our year ended December 31, 2012.

ITEM 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

The following documents are filed as part of this Form 10-K:

PART IV

1. Financial Statements: Financial Statements are included in “Financial Statements and Supplementary

Data” in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

2. Index to Financial Statement Schedules: Financial Statement Schedules are included in “Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data” in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Schedules not listed
therein are omitted because they are not required or because the required information is given in the consolidated
financial statements or notes thereto.

3. Exhibits: Exhibits are as set forth in the section entitled “Exhibit Index” which follows the section
entitled “Signatures” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Exhibits which are incorporated herein by reference
can be inspected and copied at the public reference rooms maintained by the SEC in Washington, D.C.,
New York, New York, and Chicago, Illinois. Please call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for further information on
the public reference rooms. SEC filings are also available to the public from commercial document retrieval
services and at the Website maintained by the SEC at http://www.sec.gov.

65

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant

has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

SIGNATURES

INSULET CORPORATION
(Registrant)

/s/ Duane DeSisto

Duane DeSisto
President and Chief Executive Officer

/s/ Brian Roberts

Brian Roberts
Chief Financial Officer

Date: February 28, 2013

Date: February 28, 2013

POWER OF ATTORNEY AND SIGNATURES

We, the undersigned officers and directors of Insulet Corporation hereby severally constitute and appoint

Duane DeSisto and Brian Roberts, and each of them singly, our true and lawful attorneys, with full power to
them and each of them singly, to sign for us in our names in the capacities indicated below, on all amendments to
this Report, and generally to do all things in our names and on our behalf in such capacities to enable Insulet
Corporation to comply with the provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and all
requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has been signed below by

the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities on February 28, 2013.

Signature

Title

/s/ Duane DeSisto

Duane DeSisto

/s/ Brian Roberts
Brian Roberts

/s/ Charles Liamos
Charles Liamos

/s/ Sally Crawford

Sally Crawford

/s/

John Fallon

John Fallon

/s/ Daniel Levangie

Daniel Levangie

President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)

Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

Chief Operating Officer and Director

Director

Director

Director

66

Signature

/s/ W. Mark Lortz

W. Mark Lortz

/s/ Steven Sobieski

Steven Sobieski

/s/ Regina Sommer

Regina Sommer

/s/

Joseph Zakrzewski

Joseph Zakrzewski

Title

Director

Director

Director

Director

67

Listed and indexed below are all Exhibits filed as part of this report.

EXHIBIT INDEX

Number

2.1(20)

3.1(4)

3.2(4)

4.1(1)

4.2(8)

4.3(8)

4.4(10)

Description

Merger Agreement by and among Insulet Corporation, Nectar Acquisition I Corporation, a
Delaware corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Insulet Corporation, and Neighborhood
Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and its subsidiaries dated as of June 1, 2011

Eighth Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant

Amended and Restated By-laws of the Registrant

Specimen Stock Certificate

Indenture, dated June 16, 2008, between Insulet Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of June 16, 2008, among Insulet Corporation, J.P. Morgan
Securities Inc. and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated.

Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of a Series of Preferred Stock of Insulet
Corporation classifying and designating the Series A Junior Participating Cumulative Preferred
Stock

4.5(10)

Shareholder Rights Agreement, dated as of November 14, 2008, between Insulet Corporation and
Registrar and Transfer Company, as Rights Agent

4.6(11)

Form of Warrant to purchase shares of common stock of Insulet Corporation

4.7(12)

Amendment, dated September 25, 2009, to Shareholder Rights Agreement, dated as of
November 14, 2008, between Insulet Corporation and Computershare Trust Company, As Rights
Agent

4.8(21)

Indenture, dated as of June 29, 2011, between Insulet Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank National
Association, as Trustee

4.9(22)

Form of 3.75% Convertible Senior Note due 2016

10.1(2)+ Development and License Agreement between TheraSense, Inc. and Insulet Corporation, dated

January 23, 2002

10.2(3)

Lease between William J. Callahan and Insulet Corporation, dated July 15, 2004

10.3(1)

Insulet Corporation 2000 Stock Option and Incentive Plan

10.4(1)

10.5(1)

Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement for Employees under the 2007 Stock Option and Incentive
Plan

Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement for Non-Employee Directors under the 2007 Stock Option
and Incentive Plan

10.6(1)

Restricted Stock Award Agreement under the 2007 Stock Option and Incentive Plan

10.7(1)

Incentive Stock Option Agreement under the 2007 Stock Option and Incentive Plan

10.8(1)

Employment Agreement between Duane DeSisto and Insulet Corporation, dated May 4, 2005

10.9(1)

10.10(3)

Employment Agreement between Ruthann DePietro and Insulet Corporation, dated February 8,
2006

Form of Employee Non-Competition and Non-Solicitation Agreement by and between Insulet
Corporation and each of its executive officers

10.11(5)+ Master Supply Agreement between Insulet Corporation and Flextronic Marketing (L) Ltd., dated

January 3, 2007

68

Number

10.12(5)+

10.13(6)+

10.14(7)

10.15(9)

Description

Addendum to Master Supply Agreement between Insulet Corporation and Flextronic Marketing
(L) Ltd., dated October 4, 2007

Amendment No. 1 to Development and License Agreement, dated as of March 3, 2008, by and
between Abbott Diabetes Care, Inc. (ADC), formerly known as TheraSense, Inc., and Insulet
Corporation.

Executive Severance Plan

Amended and Restated 2007 Stock Option and Incentive Plan

10.16(13)

Offer Letter by and between Insulet Corporation and Brian Roberts, dated March 2, 2009

10.17(11)

10.18(11)

10.19(14)

Registration Rights Agreement, dated March 13, 2009, by and among Insulet Corporation and the
investors named therein

Security Agreement, dated March 13, 2009, by and among Insulet Corporation and the secured
parties named therein

Securities Purchase Agreement, dated September 25, 2009, by and between Insulet Corporation
and certain investors named therein

10.20(15)

Offer Letter by and between Insulet Corporation and Peter Devlin, dated July 16, 2009

10.21(16)

Insulet Corporation Amended and Restated 2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan

10.22(17)

10.23(18)+

10.24(19)+

Second Amendment to Facility Agreement, dated June 17, 2010, by and between Insulet
Corporation and the lenders named therein.

Distribution Agreement dated January 4, 2010 by and between Insulet Corporation and Ypsomed
Distribution AG

Amendment No. 2 to Development and License Agreement, dated as of June 30, 2010, by and
between ADC formerly known as TheraSense, Inc., and Insulet Corporation

10.25(23)

Offer Letter by and between Insulet Corporation and Paul Lucidi, dated May 11, 2010

10.26(24)

Offer Letter by and between Insulet Corporation and Charles Liamos

10.26(25)

10.26(25)

10.26(25)

10.26(26)

Amendment No. 1 to Distribution Agreement dated April 10, 2012 by and between Insulet
Corporation and Ypsomed Distribution AG

Amendment No. 3 to Development and License Agreement, dated as of April 5, 2011 by and
between ADC and Insulet Coproration

Amendment No. 4 to Development and License Agreement, dated as of March 29, 2012 by and
between ADC and Insulet Coproration

Amendment No. 5 to Development and License Agreement, dated as of June 21, 2012 by and
between ADC and Insulet Coproration

12.1(27)

Insulet Corporation Statement Regarding Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges

21.1

23.1

24.1

31.1

31.2

Subsidiaries of the Registrant

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (Ernst & Young LLP)

Power of Attorney (included on signature page)

Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 by Chief Executive
Officer.

Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 by Chief Financial
Officer.

69

Number

32.1*

101**

Description

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, by Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer.

The following materials from Insulet Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2012 formatted in XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language): (i) the
Consolidated Balance Sheets; (ii) the Consolidated Statements of Operations; (iii) the Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity; (iv) the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

*

This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that Section, nor shall it be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
** As provided in Rule 406T of Regulation S-T, this information is furnished and not filed for purposes of

+
(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)
(5)

Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 18 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended.
Confidential treatment granted as to certain portions of this exhibit.
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 2 to our Registration Statement on Form S-1
(File No. 333-140694) filed April 25, 2007
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 3 to our Registration Statement on Form S-1
(File No. 333-140694) filed May 8, 2007
Incorporated by reference to our Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-140694) filed
February 14, 2007
Incorporated by reference to our Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-144636) filed July 17, 2007
Incorporated by reference to our Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-146810) filed
October 19, 2007
Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed March 5, 2008
Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed May 14, 2008
Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed June 20, 2008
Incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed November 13, 2008

(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10) Incorporated by reference to our Form 8-A, filed November 20, 2008
(11) Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed March 16, 2009
(12) Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-A/A, filed September 28, 2009
(13) Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed March 5, 2009
(14) Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed September 28, 2009
(15) Incorporated by reference to our Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed March 9, 2009
(16) Incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed May 7, 2010
(17) Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed June 21, 2010
(18) Incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A, filed November 19, 2010
(19) Incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A, filed November 19, 2010
(20) Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed June 7, 2011
(21) Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed July 5, 2011
(22) Incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed August 8, 2009
(23) Incorporated by reference to our Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed March 10, 2011
(24) Incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed January 10, 2011
(25) Incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed May 9, 2012
(26) Incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report Form 10-Q, filed August 8, 2012
(27) Incorporated by reference to our Registration Statement on Form S-3, filed June 22, 2011

70

Index to Consolidated Financial Statements

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and

Page

F-2
F-3
F-4

2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 . . . . . . .
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Supporting Financial Statement Schedule:
Schedule II — Valuation and Qualifying Accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-36

F-5
F-6
F-7

F-1

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Insulet Corporation

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Insulet Corporation as of December 31,

2012 and 2011, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2012. Our audits also included the financial statement
schedule listed in the Index at Item 15(a). These financial statements and schedule are the responsibility of the
Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and schedule
based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance
about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating
the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the
consolidated financial position of Insulet Corporation at December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the consolidated
results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2012, in
conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the related financial
statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly
in all material respects the information set forth therein.

As discussed in Note 18 to the consolidated financial statements, the accompanying consolidated balance
sheet as of December 31, 2011, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholder’s equity, and
cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2011 have been restated to correct errors in the accounting for
income taxes.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(United States), Insulet Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012, based on
criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 28, 2013, expressed an adverse
opinion thereon.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
February 28, 2013

F-2

INSULET CORPORATION

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

ASSETS
Current Assets
Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accounts receivable, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Inventories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prepaid expenses and other current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Property and equipment, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intangible assets, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goodwill
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

As of
December 31,
2012

As of
December 31,
2011
(Restated)

(In thousands, except share and
per share data)

$ 57,293
33,294
14,867
4,482

109,936
25,422
22,963
37,536
2,202

$ 93,955
23,190
11,838
3,652

132,635
19,422
29,002
37,536
2,727

Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 198,059

$ 221,322

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Current Liabilities
Accounts payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Current portion of long-term debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other current liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total current liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Long-term debt
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

9,361
19,026
5,445
14,429
25

48,286
103,730
1,867

153,883

$ 11,418
13,064
2,582
—
931

27,995
108,540
2,052

138,587

Commitment and contingencies (Note 13)
Stockholders’ Equity
Preferred stock, $.001 par value:

Authorized: 5,000,000 shares at December 31, 2012 and 2011.
Issued and outstanding: zero shares at December 31, 2012 and 2011. . . . . . . . . . .

—

—

Common stock, $.001 par value:

Authorized: 100,000,000 shares at December 31, 2012 and 2011.
Issued and outstanding: 48,359,063 and 47,504,131 shares at December 31, 2012
and 2011. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Additional paid-in capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated deficit

48
525,679
(481,551)

48
512,371
(429,684)

Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

44,176

82,735

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 198,059

$ 221,322

See accompanying notes

F-3

INSULET CORPORATION

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011
(Restated)

2010

Total operating expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

128,307

109,179

Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cost of revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gross profit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Operating expenses:

Research and development
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restructuring and impairment of assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Operating loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Interest income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Other expense, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Loss before income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income tax benefit (expense)

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Net loss per share basic and diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Weighted-average number of shares used in calculating net loss per

(In thousands, except share and per share data)
96,966
$
53,240

211,369
119,033

152,255
85,543

$

$

92,336

66,712

43,726

24,359
51,240
52,708
—

21,863
44,083
43,233
—

(35,971)

110
(15,794)

(15,684)

(51,655)
(212)

(42,467)

139
(14,715)

(14,576)

(57,043)
11,212

16,566
26,667
34,695
4,431

82,359

(38,633)

168
(22,694)

(22,526)

(61,159)
—

$

$

(51,867) $

(45,831) $

(61,159)

(1.08) $

(0.98) $

(1.54)

share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

47,924,324

46,689,880

39,607,899

See accompanying notes

F-4

INSULET CORPORATION

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
(In thousands, except share data)

Common Stock

Shares

Amount

Additional
Paid-in
Capital

Accumulated
Deficit

Total
Stockholders’
Equity

Balance at December 31, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37,755,254

$39

$384,565

$(322,694)

$ 61,910

Exercise of options to purchase common

stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance for employee stock purchase plan . . . .
Stock-based compensation expense . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance of common stock, net of offering costs
of $2.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Exercise of warrants to purchase common

470,561
15,024
—

3,450,000

stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3,750,000
—

—
—
—

3

3
—

3,040
229
5,025

45,446

11,734
—

—
—
—

—

3,040
229
5,025

45,449

—
(61,159)

11,737
(61,159)

Balance at December 31, 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

45,440,839

$45

$450,039

$(383,853)

$ 66,231

Exercise of options to purchase common

stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance for employee stock purchase plan . . . .
Stock-based compensation expense . . . . . . . . . .
Restricted stock units vested, net of shares

743,341
12,429
—

withheld for taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

109,891

Issuance of common stock for acquisition, net

of transaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1,197,631

Allocation of fair value of convertible debt to

equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss (Restated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

—
—

1
—
—

—

2

—
—

5,241
253
7,683

(946)

24,186

25,915
—

—
—
—

—

—

5,242
253
7,683

(946)

24,188

—
(45,831)

25,915
(45,831)

Balance at December 31, 2011 (Restated) . . . . . . .

47,504,131

$48

$512,371

$(429,684)

$ 82,735

Exercise of options to purchase common

stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance for employee stock purchase plan . . . .
Stock-based compensation expense . . . . . . . . . .
Restricted stock units vested, net of shares

withheld for taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

676,819
18,346
—

159,767
—

—
—
—

—
—

4,592
392
9,862

—
—
—

4,592
392
9,862

(1,538)
—

—
(51,867)

(1,538)
(51,867)

Balance at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

48,359,063

$48

$525,679

$(481,551)

$ 44,176

See accompanying notes

F-5

INSULET CORPORATION

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011
(Restated)

(In thousands)

2010

$(51,867) $ (45,831) $ (61,159)

8,503
11,030
9,736
10,212
7,734
9,920
3,165
3,409
—
—
— (11,289)

5,077
15,044
5,064
3,317
4,432
—

(5,196)
(1,343)
277
381
(1,139)
(380)

Cash flows from operating activities

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities

Depreciation and amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Non-cash interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Provision for bad debts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restructuring and impairment of assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:

Accounts receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Inventories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prepaid expenses and other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accounts payable, accrued expenses, and other liabilities . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(13,513)
(3,029)
2,863
(898)
2,999
(185)

(3,617)
1,879
(1,665)
853
4,697
383

Net cash used in operating activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(29,059)

(25,452)

(35,625)

Cash flows from investing activities

Purchases of property and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(10,991)

(11,114)
— (37,855)

Net cash used in investing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(10,991)

(48,969)

(6,549)
—

(6,549)

Cash flows from financing activities

Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Payment of transaction fees related to the credit facility amendment
. . . . . .
Payments to retire long-term debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from exercise of warrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from issuance of common stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Payment of withholding taxes in connection with vesting of restricted stock
units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

— 138,783
—
—
— (88,195)
—
—
5,460
4,927

—
(468)
(32,500)
11,737
48,683

(1,539)

(946)

—

Net cash provided by financing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3,388

55,102

27,452

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(36,662)
93,955

(19,319)
113,274

(14,722)
127,996

Cash and cash equivalents, end of year

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 57,293

$ 93,955

$113,274

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information
Cash paid for interest
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash paid for taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Non-cash financing activities
Issuance of common stock for the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes . . . .

$ 6,197
11
$

$
$

5,173
263

$

— $ 24,432

$
$

$

8,087
11

—

See accompanying notes

F-6

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010

1. Nature of the Business

The Company is primarily engaged in the development, manufacturing and sale of its proprietary OmniPod

Insulin Management System (the “OmniPod System”), an innovative, discreet and easy-to-use insulin infusion
system for people with insulin-dependent diabetes. The OmniPod System is the only commercially-available
insulin infusion system of its kind. The OmniPod System features a unique disposable tubeless OmniPod which
is worn on the body for approximately three days at a time and the handheld, wireless Personal Diabetes Manager
(“PDM”). Conventional insulin pumps require people with insulin-dependent diabetes to learn to use, manage
and wear a number of cumbersome components, including up to 42 inches of tubing. In contrast, the OmniPod
System features only two discreet, easy-to-use devices that eliminate the need for a bulky pump, tubing and
separate blood glucose meter, provides for virtually pain-free automated cannula insertion, communicates
wirelessly and integrates a blood glucose meter. The Company believes that the OmniPod System’s unique
proprietary design offers significant lifestyle benefits to people with insulin-dependent diabetes.

To support the sales of the OmniPod System, in June 2011, the Company acquired Neighborhood Holdings,

Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, “Neighborhood Diabetes”) in order to expand the
Company’s full suite diabetes management product offerings and obtain access to a larger number of insulin
dependent patients. Through Neighborhood Diabetes, the Company is able to provide customers with blood
glucose testing supplies, traditional insulin pumps, pump supplies and pharmaceuticals and has the ability to
process claims as either durable medical equipment or through pharmacy benefits.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approved the original OmniPod System in January 2005,
and the Company began commercial sale in the United States in October 2005. The Company received CE Mark
approval for the original OmniPod System in April 2009.

The Company has also expanded the availability of the OmniPod System internationally through its
partnership with Ypsomed Distribution AG (“Ypsomed”) and GlaxoSmithKline (“GSK”). In January 2010, the
Company entered into a distribution agreement with Ypsomed pursuant to which Ypsomed became the exclusive
distributor of the OmniPod System in multiple countries. In February 2011, the Company entered into a
distribution agreement with GSK pursuant to which GSK became the exclusive distributor of the OmniPod
System in Canada. The Company has focused its efforts through 2011 and 2012 on the development and
regulatory approval of its next generation OmniPod System. In August 2011, the Company received CE Mark
approval, and in December 2012, the Company received 510(k) clearance for the next generation OmniPod
System by the FDA.

2.

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Restatement of Previously Issued Financial Statements

As discussed below and further described in Note 18, the Company restated its financial results for the three

and six months ended June 30, 2011, the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, the year ended
December 31, 2011, the three months ended March 31, 2012, the three and six months ended June 30, 2012, and
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 to correct errors in the accounting for income taxes.

In June 2011, the Company acquired all of the outstanding shares of privately-held Neighborhood Diabetes

and accounted for the acquisition as a business combination. In connection with the acquisition, the Company
recognized net deferred tax liabilities of $11.3 million. The Company also reduced its preexisting valuation
allowance and goodwill, accordingly, through purchase accounting. Upon subsequent review, the Company
determined that the $11.3 million reduction of its preexisting valuation allowance should have been reported as

F-7

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

an income tax benefit and not as an adjustment to goodwill. The Company has corrected its statement of
operations with respect to the income tax benefit generated as a result of the change in the valuation allowance.

In June 2011, the Company modified its outstanding convertible debt. Upon subsequent review, the

Company determined that at the date of the modification it should have recognized approximately $5.5 million in
additional deferred tax liability related to its debt. The recognition of this additional deferred tax liability would
have resulted in a corresponding reduction of the Company’s preexisting valuation allowance and therefore had
no effect on its statement of operations. The Company has corrected certain balance sheet amounts with respect
to the presentation of its deferred tax assets and liabilities.

The restatement resulted in an increase in current deferred tax assets (which are presented as a component of

prepaid expenses and other current assets) of $1.2 million at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2011 and $0.9
million at December 31, 2011, an increase in goodwill of $11.3 million at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2011
and $10.9 million at December 31, 2011, and an increase in non-current deferred tax liabilities (which are
presented as a component of other long-term liabilities) of $1.2 million at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2011
and $0.4 million at December 31, 2011. The restatement also resulted in an increase in tax benefit of $11.3
million in the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, the nine months ended September 30, 2011, and the
year ended December 31, 2011. The restatement had no effect on amounts reported in periods prior to the quarter
ended June 30, 2011.

The restatement resulted in an increase in current deferred tax assets (which are presented as a component of

prepaid and expenses and other current assets) of $0.9 million at March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012 and
September 30, 2012, an increase in goodwill of $10.9 million at March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012 and
September 30, 2012, and an increase in non-current deferred tax liabilities (which are presented as a component
of other long-term liabilities) of $0.4 million at March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012.

Use of Estimates in Preparation of Financial Statements

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the

United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets
and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the
reported amounts of revenue and expense during the reporting periods. The most significant estimates used in
these financial statements include the valuation of stock-based compensation expense, accounts receivable,
inventories, deferred revenue, and equity instruments, the lives of property and equipment and intangible assets,
as well as warranty and doubtful accounts allowance reserve calculations. Actual results may differ from those
estimates.

Principles of Consolidation

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned

subsidiaries. All material intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Reclassifications

Certain previously reported amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.

Certain Risks and Uncertainties

The Company is subject to risks common to companies in the medical device industry, including, but not
limited to, development by the Company or its competitors of new technological innovations, dependence on key
personnel, reliance on third party manufacturers, protection of proprietary technology, and compliance with
regulatory requirements.

F-8

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

Fair Value Measurements

The Company adopted the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards
Codification (“ASC”) 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820”) related to the fair value
measurement of certain of its assets and liabilities. ASC 820 defines fair value as the price that would be received
for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset
or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. FASB ASC 820 also
describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure the fair value:

Level 1 — quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities

Level 2 — observable inputs other than quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities

Level 3 — unobservable inputs in which there is little or no market data available, which require the

reporting entity to develop its own assumptions

The only assets and liabilities subject to fair value measurement standards at December 31, 2012 and 2011
are cash equivalents, including money market accounts, and long-term debt which are based on Level 1 inputs.

Certain of the Company’s financial instruments, including cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable,
accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities are carried at cost, which approximates their fair value
because of the short-term maturity of these financial instruments. Based on the borrowing rates currently
available to the Company for loans with similar terms, the carrying value of the Company’s long-term debt and
capital lease obligations approximates their fair values.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

For the purposes of the financial statement classification, the Company considers all highly liquid

investment instruments with original maturities of 90 days or less, when purchased, to be cash equivalents. Cash
equivalents consist of money market accounts and are carried at cost which approximates their fair value.
Outstanding letters of credit, principally relating to security deposits for lease obligations, totaled $0.1 million at
December 31, 2012 and 2011.

Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

Accounts receivable consist of amounts due from third-party payors, patients, third-party distributors, and

government agencies. The allowance for doubtful accounts is recorded at the time potential collection risk is
identified. The Company estimates its allowance based on historical experience, assessment of specific risk,
discussions with individual customers and various assumptions and estimates that are believed to be reasonable
under the circumstances.

Inventories

Inventories are held at the lower of cost or market, determined under the first-in, first-out method. Inventory
has been recorded at cost at December 31, 2012 and 2011. Work in process is calculated based upon a build up in
the stage of completion using estimated labor inputs for each stage in production. The Company periodically
reviews inventories for potential impairment based on quantities on hand and expectations of future use.

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment is stated at cost and depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated
useful lives of the respective assets. Leasehold improvements are amortized over their useful life or the life of the

F-9

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

lease, whichever is shorter. Assets capitalized under capital leases are amortized in accordance with the
respective class of owned assets and the amortization is included with depreciation expense. Maintenance and
repair costs are expensed as incurred.

Intangibles and Other Long-Lived Assets

The Company’s finite-lived intangible assets are stated at cost less accumulated amortization. The Company

assesses its intangible and other long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances
suggest that the carrying value of an asset may not be recoverable. The Company recognizes an impairment loss
for intangibles and other finite-lived assets if the carrying amount of a long-lived asset is not recoverable based
on its undiscounted future cash flows. Any such impairment loss is measured as the difference between the
carrying amount and the fair value of the asset. The estimation of useful lives and expected cash flows requires
the Company to make significant judgments regarding future periods that are subject to some factors outside its
control. Changes in these estimates can result in significant revisions to the carrying value of these assets and
may result in material charges to the results of operations. The estimated life of the acquired tradename asset is
15 years. The estimated useful life of the acquired customer relationship asset is 10 years. Intangible assets with
determinable estimated lives are amortized over these lives. At December 31, 2012 intangible assets related to
the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes consisted of $20.5 million of customer relationships and $2.5 million
of tradenames.

Goodwill

Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of an acquired business over the fair value of identifiable net
assets acquired. The Company performs an assessment of its goodwill for impairment on at least an annual basis
or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate there might be impairment.

Goodwill is evaluated at the reporting unit level. To test for impairment, the Company compares the
carrying value of the reporting unit to its fair value using a discounted cash flow analysis. If the reporting unit’s
carrying value exceeds its fair value, the Company would record an impairment loss to the extent that the
carrying value of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value. The Company completed its goodwill analysis as of
October 1, 2012 and noted no impairment.

Warranty

The Company provides a four-year warranty on its PDMs and may replace any OmniPods that do not function

in accordance with product specifications. The Company estimates its warranty at the time the product is shipped
based on historical experience and the estimated cost to service the claims. Cost to service the claims reflects the
current product cost which has been decreasing over time. As these estimates are based on historical experience, and
the Company continues to introduce new products and new versions of existing products, the Company also
considers the anticipated performance of the product over its warranty period in estimating warranty reserves.

Restructuring Expenses and Impairment of Assets

In connection with its efforts to pursue improved gross margins, leverage operational efficiencies and better

pursue opportunities for low-cost supplier sourcing, the Company periodically performs an evaluation of its
manufacturing processes and reviews the carrying value of its property and equipment to assess the
recoverability of these assets whenever events indicate that impairment may have occurred. As part of this
assessment, the Company reviews the future undiscounted operating cash flows expected to be generated by

F-10

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

those assets. If impairment is indicated through this review, the carrying amount of the asset would be reduced to
its estimated fair value. This review of manufacturing processes and equipment can result in restructuring activity
or an impairment of assets based on current net book value and potential future use of the assets.

The Company’s restructuring expenses may also include workforce reduction and related costs for one-time

termination benefits provided to employees who are involuntarily terminated under the terms of a one-time benefit
arrangement. The Company records these one-time termination benefits upon incurring the liability, provided that
the employees are notified, the plan is approved by the appropriate level of management, the employees to be
terminated and the expected completion date are identified, and the benefits the identified employees will be paid
are established. Significant changes to the plan are not expected when the Company records the costs. In recording
the workforce reduction and related costs, the Company estimates related costs such as taxes and outplacement
services which may be provided under the plan. If changes in these estimated services occur, the Company may be
required to record or reverse restructuring expenses associated with these workforce reduction and related costs.

Revenue Recognition

The Company generates nearly all of its revenue from sales of its OmniPod System and other diabetes

related products including blood glucose testing supplies, traditional insulin pumps, pump supplies and
pharmaceuticals to customers and third-party distributors who resell the products to patients with diabetes.

Revenue recognition requires that persuasive evidence of a sales arrangement exists, delivery of goods
occurs through transfer of title and risk and rewards of ownership, the selling price is fixed or determinable and
collectibility is reasonably assured. With respect to these criteria:

• The evidence of an arrangement generally consists of a physician order form, a patient information form

and, if applicable, third-party insurance approval for sales directly to patients or a purchase order for sales
to a third-party distributor.

• Transfer of title and risk and rewards of ownership are passed to the patient or third-party distributor upon

shipment of the products.

• The selling prices for all sales are fixed and agreed with the patient or third-party distributor and, if

applicable, the patient’s third-party insurance provider(s) prior to shipment and are based on established
list prices or, in the case of certain third-party insurers, contractually agreed upon prices. Provisions for
discounts and rebates to customers are established as a reduction to revenue in the same period the related
sales are recorded.

The Company offers a 45-day right of return for its OmniPod System sales to new patients, and defers
revenue to reflect estimated sales returns in the same period that the related product sales are recorded. Returns
are estimated through a comparison of the Company’s historical return data to its related sales. Historical rates of
return are adjusted for known or expected changes in the marketplace when appropriate. When doubt exists about
reasonable assuredness of collectibility from specific customers, the Company defers revenue from sales of
products to those customers until payment is received.

In June 2011, the Company entered into a development agreement with a U.S. based pharmaceutical
company (“the Development Agreement”). Under the Development Agreement, the Company is required to
perform design, development, regulatory, and other services to support the pharmaceutical company as it works
to obtain regulatory approval to use the Company’s drug delivery technology as a delivery method for its
pharmaceutical. Over the term of the Development Agreement, the Company has and will continue to invoice
amounts based upon meeting certain defined deliverable milestones. Revenue on the development agreement is
recognized using a proportional performance methodology based on efforts incurred and total payments under
the agreement.

F-11

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

The Company deferred revenue of $5.4 million and $2.7 million as of December 31, 2012 and 2011,

respectively. The deferred revenue recorded was primarily comprised of product-related revenue and
unrecognized amounts related to the development agreement.

Shipping and Handling Costs

The Company does not typically charge its customers for shipping and handling costs associated with

shipping its product to its customers. These shipping and handling costs are included in general and
administrative expenses.

Concentration of Credit Risk

Financial instruments that subject the Company to credit risk primarily consist of cash and cash equivalents.

The Company maintains the majority of its cash with two accredited financial institutions.

The Company purchases complete OmniPods from Flextronics International Ltd., its single source supplier.
As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, liabilities from one vendor represented approximately 19% and 12% of the
combined balance of accounts payable and accrued expenses, respectively.

Research and Development Expenses

The Company’s research and development expenses consist of engineering, product development, quality

assurance, clinical and regulatory expenses. These expenses are primarily related to employee compensation,
including salary, benefits and stock-based compensation. The Company also incurs expenses related to
consulting fees, materials and supplies, and clinical studies, including data management and associated travel
expenses. Research and development costs are expensed as incurred.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses are primarily comprised of salaries and benefits associated with
finance, legal and other administrative personnel, overhead and occupancy costs, outside legal costs, and other
general and administrative costs.

Sales and Marketing Expenses

Sales and marketing expenses are primarily comprised of salaries and benefits associated with sales and

marketing personnel, outside marketing expenses including commercial product samples, tradeshows and
advertising expenses.

Segment Reporting

Operating segments are defined as components of an enterprise about which separate financial information is

available that is evaluated on a regular basis by the chief operating decision-maker, or decision making group, in
deciding how to allocate resources to an individual segment and in assessing performance of the segment. The
Company’s current product offering consists of diabetes supplies, including the OmniPod System as well as other
diabetes related products and supplies such as blood glucose testing supplies, traditional insulin pumps, pump supplies,
and pharmaceuticals. The Company’s current product offering is marketed to a single customer type, people with
diabetes. As the Company sells a single product type, management operates the business as a single entity.

F-12

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

Income Taxes

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between the financial reporting and

tax bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates that will be in effect in the years in
which the differences are expected to reverse. A valuation allowance is required to reduce the deferred tax assets
reported if, based on the weight of the evidence, it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred
tax assets will not be realized. The Company reviews its deferred tax assets for recoverability considering
historical profitability, projected future taxable income, and the expected timing of the reversals of existing
temporary differences and tax planning strategies.

The Company follows the provisions of FASB ASC 740-10, Income Taxes (“ASC 740-10”) on accounting

for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in its financial statements. ASC 740-10 prescribes a recognition
threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position
taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. In addition, ASC 740-10 provides guidance on derecognition,
classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition. The Company had
unrecognized tax benefits of $0.1 million and $0.2 million as of December 31, 2012, and 2011, respectively.

The Company files federal, state and foreign tax returns. These returns are generally open to examination by

the relevant tax authorities from three to four years from the date they are filed. The tax filings relating to the
Company’s federal and state tax returns are currently open to examination for tax years 2009 through 2011 and
2008 through 2011, respectively. In addition, the Company has generated tax losses since its inception in 2000.
These years may be subject to examination if the losses are carried forward and utilized in future years.

The Company recognizes estimated interest and penalties for uncertain tax positions in income tax expense.

As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, interest and tax penalties were immaterial to the financial statements.

For the year ended December 31, 2012, income tax expense was comprised of $121,000 for the current

portion and $91,000 for the deferred portion. For the year ended December 31, 2011, income taxes were
comprised of an expense of $77,000 for the current portion and a benefit of $11.3 million for the deferred
portion. The current portion in the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 primarily relates to state, local, and
foreign taxes. The deferred portion in the year ended December 31, 2012 primarily relates to the U.S. Federal and
State tax amounts. The deferred portion in the year ended December 31, 2011 primarily relates to deferred tax
liabilities acquired with the Neighborhood Diabetes acquisition. These deferred tax liabilities were used to offset
the Company’s preexisting deferred tax assets reducing the amount of the valuation allowance required in that
period. The Company recorded no income tax benefit or expense in the year ended December 31, 2010.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company accounts for stock-based compensation under the provisions of FASB ASC 718-10,
Compensation — Stock Compensation (“ASC 718-10”). ASC 718-10 requires all share-based payments to
employees, including grants of employee stock options and restricted stock units, to be recognized in the income
statement based on their fair values.

The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the weighted-average fair value of
options granted. The Company determines the intrinsic value of restricted stock and restricted stock units based
on the closing price of its common stock on the date of grant. The Company recognizes the compensation
expense of share-based awards on a straight-line basis over the vesting period of the award.

The determination of the fair value of share-based payment awards utilizing the Black-Scholes model is
affected by the stock price and a number of assumptions, including expected volatility, expected life, risk-free

F-13

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

interest rate and expected dividends. The expected life of the awards is estimated based on the midpoint between
the vesting date and the end of the contractual term. The risk-free interest rate assumption is based on observed
interest rates appropriate for the terms of the awards. The dividend yield assumption is based on Company
history and the expectation of paying no dividends. Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and revised, if
necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. Stock-based compensation
expense recognized in the financial statements is based on awards that are ultimately expected to vest. The
Company evaluates the assumptions used to value the awards on a quarterly basis and if factors change and
different assumptions are utilized, stock-based compensation expense may differ significantly from what has
been recorded in the past. If there are any modifications or cancellations of the underlying unvested securities,
the Company may be required to accelerate, increase or cancel any remaining unearned stock-based
compensation expense.

In the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, the Company recorded $9.9 million, $7.7 million,

and $5.0 million of stock-based compensation expense, respectively.

See Footnote 14 for a summary of the stock option activity under the Company’s stock-based employee

compensation plan.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04 Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value

Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs (“ASU No. 2011-04”). ASU No. 2011-04
clarifies existing concepts regarding existing fair value principles. The amendments are effective in fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2011. The Company adopted the guidance in the first quarter of 2012. The
adoption of these amendments did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08 Testing Goodwill for Impairment (“ASU
No. 2011-08”). ASU No. 2011-08 provides guidance on simplifying the impairment testing for goodwill. A
company may first assess the qualitative factors to determine whether it is more-likely-than-not that the fair value
of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform
the two-step goodwill impairment test on the reporting unit. The guidance is effective in fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2011, and the Company adopted the guidance in the first quarter of 2012. The adoption of
this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities.
ASU 2011-11 will require disclosure of information about offsetting and related arrangements to enable users of
the Company’s financial statements to understand the effect of those arrangements on its financial position. The
guidance is effective in fiscal years beginning after January 1, 2013. The Company believes the adoption of ASU
No. 2011-11 will have no material impact on its financial statements.

In July 2012, the FASB issued ASU No. 2012-02 Intangibles — Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing

Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment (“ASU No. 2012-02”). ASU No. 2012-02 gives a company the
option to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more-likely-than-not that the indefinite-lived
intangible is impaired. Qualitative factors include related events and circumstances that could affect the
significant inputs used in determining the fair value of the indefinite-lived intangible asset. The guidance is
effective in fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012. The Company believes the adoption of ASU
No. 2012-02 will have no material impact on its financial statements.

F-14

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

3. Acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes

In June 2011, the Company acquired all of the outstanding shares of privately-held Neighborhood Diabetes,

a durable medical equipment distributor specializing in direct to consumer sales of diabetes supplies, including
pharmaceuticals, and support services. Neighborhood Diabetes serves more than 60,000 customers with Type 1
and Type 2 diabetes primarily in the northeast and southeast regions of the United States with blood glucose
testing supplies, traditional insulin pumps, pump supplies, pharmaceuticals, as well as other products for the
management and treatment of diabetes. Neighborhood Diabetes is based in Massachusetts, with additional offices
in New York and Florida. At the time of the acquisition, Neighborhood Diabetes employed approximately 200
people across its three locations. The acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes provides the Company with full suite
diabetes management product offerings, accelerates the Company’s sales force expansion, strengthens the
Company’s back office support capabilities, expands the Company’s access to insulin dependent patients, and
provides pharmacy adjudication capabilities to drive incremental sales higher. The aggregate purchase price of
approximately $62.4 million consisted of approximately $37.9 million in cash paid at closing, 1,197,631 shares
of the Company’s common stock valued at approximately $24.4 million, or $20.40 per share based on the closing
price of the Company’s common stock on the acquisition date, and contingent consideration with a fair value of
approximately $0.1 million. Of the $37.9 million of cash, $6.6 million is being held in an escrow account to
reimburse the Company and its affiliates for certain claims for which the Company is entitled to be indemnified
pursuant to the terms of the agreement and plan of merger with Neighborhood Diabetes.

The Company has accounted for the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes as a business combination.
Under business combination accounting, the assets and liabilities of Neighborhood Diabetes were recorded as of
the acquisition date, at their respective fair values, and consolidated with the Company’s results. The excess of
the purchase price over the fair value of net assets acquired was recorded as goodwill. The operating results of
Neighborhood Diabetes have been included in the consolidated financial statements since June 2011, the period
in which the acquisition was completed. The purchase price allocation, including an independent appraisal for
intangible assets, has been prepared based on the information that was available to management at the time the
consolidated financial statements were prepared. The allocation of the purchase price was finalized during the
year ended December 31, 2011.

The purchase price (restated) has been allocated as follows (in thousands):

Cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Common stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contingent consideration obligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total allocable purchase price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Allocation of purchase price:

Accounts receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Inventories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prepaid expenses and other current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Property and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Customer relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tradenames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goodwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accounts payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$37,855
24,432
61
$62,348

5,897
2,336
242
391
30,100
2,800
37,536
253
4,109
1,700
11,339
59
$62,348

F-15

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

The Company incurred transaction costs of approximately $3.2 million, which consisted primarily of

banking, legal, accounting and other administrative fees. These costs have been recorded as general and
administrative expense in the year ended December 31, 2011.

4. Debt

At December 31, 2012 and 2011, the Company had outstanding convertible debt and related deferred

financing costs on its balance sheet as follows (in thousands):

As of December 31,

2012

2011

Principal amount of the 5.375% Convertible Senior Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Principal amount of the 3.75% Convertible Senior Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unamortized discount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 15,000
143,750
(40,591)

$ 15,000
143,750
(50,210)

Total debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Current portion of long-term debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

118,159
14,429

108,540
—

Long-term debt

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$103,730

$108,540

Deferred financing costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

2,004

$

2,597

Interest expense related to the 5.375% Senior Notes (as defined below), the 3.75% Senior Notes (as defined

below) and the Facility Agreement (as defined below) was included in interest expense on the consolidated
statements of operations as follows (in thousands):

Contractual coupon interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accretion of debt discount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other interest payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amortization of debt issuance costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 6,197
9,619
—
593

$ 5,383
7,213
1,991
532

$ 7,203
13,247
650
1,780

Total interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$16,409

$15,119

$22,880

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

The Company expects to pay cash interest of $5.8 million in 2013, $5.4 million in each of 2014 and 2015,

and $2.5 million in 2016. Additionally, $15 million related to the 5.375% Notes is due to the holders in 2013 and
$143.8 million related to the 3.75% Notes is due to the holders in 2016.

5.375% Convertible Senior Notes

In June 2008, the Company sold $85.0 million principal amount of 5.375% Convertible Senior Notes due

June 15, 2013 (the “5.375% Notes”) in a private placement to qualified institutional buyers pursuant to
Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The interest rate on the notes is 5.375% per annum on
the principal amount from June 16, 2008, payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on December 15 and June 15
of each year. The 5.375% Notes are convertible into the Company’s common stock at an initial conversion rate
of 46.8467 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of the 5.375% Notes, which is equivalent to a
conversion price of approximately $21.35 per share, representing a conversion premium of 34% to the last
reported sale price of the Company’s common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market on June 10, 2008, subject
to adjustment under certain circumstances, at any time beginning on March 15, 2013 or under certain other

F-16

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

circumstances and prior to the close of business on the business day immediately preceding the final maturity
date of the notes. The 5.375% Notes will be convertible for cash up to its principal amount and shares of the
Company’s common stock for the remainder of the conversion value in excess of the principal amount.

If a fundamental change, as defined in the Indenture for the 5.375% Notes, occurs at any time prior to
maturity, holders of the 5.375% Notes may require the Company to repurchase their notes in whole or in part for
cash equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest,
including any additional interest to, but excluding, the date of repurchase. If a holder elects to convert its 5.375%
Notes upon the occurrence of a make-whole fundamental change, as defined in the Indenture for the 5.375%
Notes, the holder may be entitled to receive an additional number of shares of common stock on the conversion
date. These additional shares are intended to compensate the holders for the loss of the time value of the
conversion option and are set forth in the Indenture to the 5.375% Notes. In no event will the number of shares
issuable upon conversion of a note exceed 62.7746 per $1,000 principal amount (subject to adjustment as
described in the Indenture for the 5.375% Notes).

The Company recorded a debt discount of $26.9 million to equity to reflect the value of its nonconvertible

debt borrowing rate of 14.5% per annum. This debt discount is being amortized as interest expense over the five-
year term of the 5.375% Notes. The Company incurred deferred financing costs related to this offering of
approximately $3.5 million, of which $1.1 million has been reclassified as an offset to the value of the amount
allocated to equity. The remainder is recorded as other assets in the consolidated balance sheet and is being
amortized as non-cash interest expense over the five-year term of the 5.375% Notes.

In June 2011, in connection with the issuance of $143.8 million in principal amount of 3.75% Convertible
Notes due June 15, 2016 (the “3.75% Notes”), the Company repurchased $70 million in principal amount of the
5.375% Notes for $85.1 million, a 21.5% premium on the principal amount. The investors that held the $70
million in principal amount of repurchased 5.375% Notes purchased $59.5 million in principal amount of the
3.75% Notes and retained approximately $13.5 million in principal amount of the remaining 5.375% Notes. The
investors’ combined $73.0 million in principal amount of convertible debt ($13.5 million of 5.375% Notes and
$59.5 million of 3.75% Notes) was considered to be a modification of a portion of the 5.375% Notes. See the
section entitled “3.75% Convertible Senior Notes” below for additional detail on the modification accounting.

Cash interest expense related to the 5.375% Notes was $0.8 million, $2.7 million, and $4.6 million for the

years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.

As of December 31, 2012, the Company included approximately $14.4 million on its balance sheet in the

current portion of long-term debt related to the 5.375% Notes. As of December 31, 2012 the 5.375% Notes have
a remaining term of 6 months.

3.75% Convertible Senior Notes

In June 2011, the Company sold $143.8 million principal amount of 3.75% Notes. The interest rate on the
notes is 3.75% per annum, payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on December 15 and June 15 of each year.
The 3.75% Notes are convertible into the Company’s common stock at an initial conversion rate of 38.1749
shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of the 3.75% Notes, which is equivalent to a conversion
price of approximately $26.20 per share, subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. The 3.75% Notes are
convertible prior to March 15, 2016 only upon the occurrence of certain circumstances. On and after March 15,
2016 and prior to the close of business on the second scheduled trading day immediately preceding the final
maturity date of the 3.75% Notes, the notes may be converted without regard to the occurrence of any such

F-17

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

circumstances. The 3.75% Notes and any unpaid interest will be convertible at the Company’s option for cash,
shares of the Company’s common stock or a combination of cash and shares of the Company’s common stock
for the principal amount. The Company intends to settle the principal in cash.

The Company may not redeem the 3.75% Notes prior to June 20, 2014. From June 20, 2014 to June 20,

2015 the Company may redeem the 3.75% Notes, at its option, in whole or in part only if the last reported sale
price per share of the Company’s common stock has been at least 130% of the conversion price then in effect for
at least 20 trading days during a period of 30 consecutive trading days. On and after June 25, 2015, the Company
may redeem the 3.75% Notes, at its option (without regard to such sale price condition), in whole or in part. If a
fundamental change, as defined in the Indenture for the 3.75% Notes, occurs at any time prior to maturity,
holders of the 3.75% Notes may require the Company to repurchase their notes in whole or in part for cash equal
to 100% of the principal amount of the 3.75% Notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest. If a
holder elects to convert its 3.75% Notes upon the occurrence of a make-whole fundamental change, as defined in
the Indenture for the 3.75% Notes, the holder may be entitled to receive an additional number of shares of the
Company’s common stock on the conversion date. These additional shares are intended to compensate the
holders for the loss of the time value of the conversion option and are set forth in the Indenture to the 3.75%
Notes. In no event will the number of shares issuable upon conversion of a note exceed 50.5816 per $1,000
principal amount (subject to adjustment as described in the Indenture for the 3.75% Notes). The 3.75% Notes are
unsecured and are equal in right of payment to the 5.375% Notes.

The Company identified certain features related to a portion of the 3.75% Notes, including the holders’
ability to require the Company to repurchase their notes and the higher interest payments required in an event of
default, which are considered embedded derivatives and should be bifurcated and accounted for at fair value. The
Company assesses the value of each of these embedded derivatives at each balance sheet date. At December 31,
2012, the Company separately accounted for and determined that these derivatives had de minimus value.

In connection with the issuance of the 3.75% Notes, the Company repurchased $70 million in principal amount

of the 5.375% Notes for $85.1 million, a 21.5% premium on the principal amount. The investors that held the
$70 million in principal amount of repurchased 5.375% Notes purchased $59.5 million in principal amount of the
3.75% Notes and retained approximately $13.5 million in principal amount of the remaining 5.375% Notes. This
transaction was treated as a modification of a portion of the 5.375% Notes. The Company accounted for this
modification of existing debt separately from the issuance of the remainder of the 3.75% Notes.

Prior to the transaction, the $70 million in principal amount of repurchased 5.375% Notes had a debt
discount of $10.5 million. This amount remained in debt discount related to the $73 million in principal amount
of modified debt. The Company recorded additional debt discount of $15.1 million related to the premium
payment in connection with the repurchase and $0.2 million related to the increase in the value of the conversion
feature. The portion of the debt discount related to the value of the conversion feature was recorded as additional
paid-in capital. The total debt discount of $25.8 million related to the modified debt is being amortized as non-
cash interest expense at the effective rate of 16.5% over the five year term of the modified debt. The Company
paid transaction fees of approximately $2.0 million related to the modification, which were recorded as interest
expense at the time of the modification.

Of the $143.8 million in principal amount of 3.75% Notes issued in June 2011, $84.3 million in principal
amount was considered to be an issuance of new debt. The Company recorded a debt discount of $26.6 million
related to the $84.3 million in principal amount of 3.75% Notes. The debt discount was recorded as additional
paid-in capital to reflect the value of its nonconvertible debt borrowing rate of 12.4% per annum. This debt
discount is being amortized as non-cash interest expense over the five year term of the 3.75% Notes. The

F-18

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

Company incurred deferred financing costs related to this offering of approximately $2.8 million, of which
$0.9 million has been reclassified as an offset to the value of the amount allocated to equity. The remainder is
recorded as other assets in the consolidated balance sheet and is being amortized as non-cash interest expense
over the five year term of the 3.75% Notes.

Cash interest expense related to the $143.8 million in principal amount of 3.75% Notes was $5.4 million and

$2.7 million in the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. No cash interest was recorded on the
3.75% Notes in the year ended December 31, 2010.

As of December 31, 2012, the Company included $103.7 million on its balance sheet in long-term debt related

to the 3.75% Notes. As of December 31, 2012, the 3.75% Notes have a remaining term of three and a half years.

Facility Agreement and Common Stock Warrants

In March 2009, the Company entered into a facility agreement with certain institutional accredited investors

(the “Facility Agreement”), pursuant to which the investors agreed to loan the Company up to $60 million,
subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Facility Agreement. Total financing costs, including the
transaction fee, were $3.0 million and were amortized as interest expense over the 42 months of the Facility
Agreement. In September 2009, the Company entered into an amendment to the Facility Agreement whereby the
Company repaid the $27.5 million originally drawn and promptly drew down the remaining $32.5 million
available under the Facility Agreement. The annual interest rate was 8.5%, payable quarterly in arrears. In
connection with the amendment to the Facility Agreement, the Company entered into a securities purchase
agreement with the institutional accredited investors whereby the Company sold 2,855,659 shares of its common
stock to the such investors at $9.63 per share, a $1.9 million discount based on the closing price of the
Company’s common stock of $10.28 on that date. The Company recorded the $1.9 million as a debt discount,
which was amortized as interest expense over the remaining term of the loan. The Company received aggregate
proceeds of $27.5 million in connection with the sale of its shares.

In connection with the execution of the Facility Agreement, the Company issued to the investors fully

exercisable warrants to purchase an aggregate of 3.75 million shares of common stock of the Company at an
exercise price of $3.13 per share. The warrants qualified for permanent treatment as equity, and their relative fair
value of $6.1 million on the issuance date was recorded as additional paid-in capital and debt discount. The debt
discount was amortized as non-cash interest expense over the term of the loan. As of December 31, 2012, all
warrants to acquire 3.75 million shares of the Company’s common stock issued in connection with the Facility
Agreement were exercised.

In December 2010, the Company paid $33.3 million to the lenders, of which $32.5 million related to

principal and $0.8 million related to interest and prepayment fees, to extinguish this debt. The Company recorded
a non-cash interest charge of $7.0 million in 2010 related to the write-off of the remaining debt discounts and
financing costs included in other assets which were being amortized to interest expense over the term of the debt.
At December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, there were no amounts related to the Facility Agreement
included on the Company’s balance sheet.

5. Net Loss Per Share

Basic net loss per share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of common shares

outstanding for the period, excluding unvested restricted common shares. Diluted net loss per share is computed
using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding and, when dilutive, potential common share
equivalents from options, restricted stock units, and warrants (using the treasury-stock method), and potential
common shares from convertible securities (using the if-converted method). Because the Company reported a net

F-19

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

loss for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, all potential common shares have been excluded
from the computation of the diluted net loss per share for all periods presented because the effect would have
been antidilutive. Potential dilutive common share equivalents consist of the following:

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

5.375% Convertible Senior Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.75% Convertible Senior Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unvested restricted common shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unvested restricted stock units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Outstanding options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Outstanding warrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

702,701
5,487,642
—
825,068
2,502,190
62,752

702,701
5,487,642
—
603,882
2,814,591
62,752

3,981,969
—
444
355,999
3,018,469
62,752

Total dilutive common shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9,580,353

9,671,568

7,419,633

6. Accounts Receivable

Accounts receivable consist of amounts due from third-party payors, patients, third-party distributors and
government agencies. The Company records an allowance for doubtful accounts at the time potential collection risk
is identified. The Company estimates its allowance based on historical experience, assessment of specific risk,
discussions with individual customers or various assumptions and estimates that are believed to be reasonable under
the circumstances. The Company believes the reserve is adequate to mitigate current collection risk.

As of December 31, 2012, accounts receivable from two customers represented approximately 18% and
11% of gross accounts receivable, respectively. No customers represented more than 10% of gross accounts
receivable as of December 31, 2011.

The components of accounts receivable are as follows:

Trade receivables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Allowance for doubtful accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$39,921
(6,627)

$30,211
(7,021)

Total accounts receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$33,294

$23,190

Bad debt expense for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 amounted to $3.4 million,

As of December 31,

2012

2011

(In thousands)

$3.2 million, and $3.3 million, respectively.

7.

Inventories

Inventories consist of the following:

Raw materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Work-in-process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Finished goods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 1,487
1,595
11,785

$ 3,528
359
7,951

Total inventories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$14,867

$11,838

As of December 31,

2012

2011

(In thousands)

F-20

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

8.

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment consist of the following:

Machinery and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lab equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Computers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Office furniture and fixtures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Leasehold improvement
Construction in process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total property and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Less: Accumulated depreciation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total property and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

* Lesser of lease term or useful life of asset

Estimated
Useful Life
(Years)

2-5
2
3
3
3-5
*
—

As of
December 31,

2012

2011

(In thousands)

$ 28,879
1,481
3,558
4,670
2,045
2,899
9,817

$ 15,908
1,481
3,373
4,486
1,853
2,648
12,606

$ 53,349
(27,927)

$ 42,355
(22,933)

$ 25,422

$ 19,422

Depreciation expense related to property and equipment was $5.0 million, $4.6 million, and $5.1 million for

the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The Company recorded $0.6 million,
$0.4 million, and $0.2 million of capitalized interest for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010,
respectively.

Construction in process mainly consists of machinery and equipment in the process of being constructed for

use in the Company’s next generation product manufacturing lines. Depreciation on the machinery and
equipment does not begin until the machinery and equipment are installed and integrated into the manufacturing
process.

9. Other Intangible Assets

Other intangible assets consist of the following (in thousands):

As of
December 31, 2012

2012

2011

Customer relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tradename . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$30,100
2,800

$30,100
2,800

Total intangible assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Less: Accumulated amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$32,900
(9,937)

$32,900
(3,898)

Total other intangible assest

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$22,963

$29,002

The Company recorded $32.9 million of other intangible assets in the year ended December 31, 2011 as a

result of the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes (see Footnote 3 for further description). The Company
determined that the estimated useful life of the customer relationships asset is ten years and is amortizing the
asset over the estimated period of use. The Company determined that the estimated useful life of the tradename is

F-21

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

15 years and is amortizing the asset over that period on a straight-line basis. Accumulated amortization on the
customer relationships asset was $9.6 million and $3.8 million as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Accumulated amortization on the tradename asset was $0.3 million and $0.1 million as of December 31, 2012
and 2011, respectively. The amortization expense related to other intangible assets was approximately $6.0 and
$3.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. No amortization expense was
recorded in any year prior to the year ended December 31, 2011.

Amortization expense expected for the next five years is as follows (in thousands):

Year Ending December 31,

Amortization Expense

Customer
Relationships

Tradename

Total

2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$4,736
3,790
3,064
2,478
2,003

$187
187
187
187
187

$4,923
3,977
3,251
2,665
2,190

As of December 31, 2012, the weighted average amortization period of the Company’s intangible assets is

approximately ten years.

10. Goodwill

The Company follows the provisions of FASB ASC Topic 350-20, Intangibles — Goodwill and Other
(“ASC 350-20”). ASC 350-20 requires companies to use the purchase method of accounting for all business
combinations initiated after June 2001, and establishes specific criteria for the recognition of intangible assets
separately from goodwill. Goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets are not amortized and are tested for
impairment at least annually. In accordance with ASC 350-20, the Company tests goodwill for impairment on an
annual basis or whenever events and circumstances indicate there might be an impairment. The Company’s
goodwill arose in connection with the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes in June 2011. No goodwill
impairment loss was recorded in the year ended December 31, 2012.

11. Accrued Expenses

Accrued expenses consist of the following:

Employee compensation and related items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Professional and consulting services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and use tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Supplier charges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Warranty reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

As of
December 31,

2012

2011

(In thousands)

$ 6,789
2,069
3,965
1,752
258
863
455
2,875

$ 6,141
2,813
247
1,009
258
940
377
1,279

Total accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$19,026

$13,064

F-22

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

Product Warranty Costs

The Company provides a four-year warranty on its PDMs and may replace any OmniPods that do not

function in accordance with product specifications. Warranty expense is recorded in the period that shipment
occurs. The expense is based on historical experience and the estimated cost to service the claims. A
reconciliation of the changes in the Company’s product warranty liability is as follows:

Year Ended
December 31,

2012

2011

(In thousands)

Balance at the beginning of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Warranty expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Warranty claims settled . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 1,960
2,666
(2,634)

$ 1,873
3,071
(2,984)

Balance at the end of the year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 1,992

$ 1,960

Composition of balance:
Short-term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Long-term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

863
1,129

$

940
1,020

Total warranty balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 1,992

$ 1,960

12. Restructuring Expenses and Impairment of Assets

During the year ended December 31, 2010, the Company determined that certain amounts related to
manufacturing equipment for its next generation OmniPod would not be used in the final product, and the
Company recorded an impairment charge of approximately $1.0 million. In addition, the Company terminated
certain other projects related to its existing OmniPod as the Company focused primarily on the introduction of its
next generation product. As a result, the Company recorded an impairment charge of approximately $3.4 million
related to this manufacturing equipment and construction in process. The Company had no restructuring or
impairment activity in the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.

13. Commitments and Contingencies

Operating Leases

The Company leases its facilities in Massachusetts, New York, Florida, and Singapore. The Company’s
leases are accounted for as operating leases. The leases generally provide for a base rent plus real estate taxes and
certain operating expenses related to the leases. The Company has extended the leases of its facilities in Bedford
and Billerica, Massachusetts. Following the extensions, these leases expire in September 2014. The lease space in
Bedford contain a five-year renewal option and escalating payments over the life of the lease. The leases in
Woburn, Singapore, Florida, and New York expire in June 2013, July 2013, December 2013, and April 2015,
respectively.

During the year ended December 31, 2012, the Company terminated a lease for one of its corporate offices

spaces in Bedford, Massachusetts. The lease termination resulted in no material impact to the financial
statements for the year ended December 31, 2012. During the same period, the Company entered into a new lease
agreement for an additional 26,500 square feet in Bedford, Massachusetts. The lease expires in September 2014
and includes escalating rent payments over its term. Furthermore, during the year ended December 31, 2012, the
Company renewed its lease for its Florida property. The lease now expires in December 2013.

F-23

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

Certain of the Company’s operating lease agreements contain scheduled rent increases, which are being

amortized over the terms of the agreement using the straight-line method and are included in other liabilities in
the accompanying balance sheet. The Company has considered FASB ASC 840-20, Leases in accounting for
these lease provisions. The Company leases its corporate offices under long-term leases with a five-year renewal
option. The Company leases its warehouse facility under a long-term lease with a five-year renewal option. The
aggregate future minimum lease payments of these leases as of December 31, 2012, are as follows (in
thousands):

Year Ending December 31,

2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thereafter

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Minimum
Lease Payments

$1,511
965
45
—

$2,521

Rent expense of approximately $1.7 million, $1.3 million, and $0.9 million was charged to operations in the

years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The deferred rent had a de minimus value for the
years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.

Legal Proceedings

In August 2010, Becton, Dickinson and Company (“BD”) filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court
in the State of New Jersey against the Company alleging that the OmniPod System infringes three of its patents.
BD seeks a declaration that the Company has infringed its patents, equitable relief, including an injunction that
would enjoin the Company from infringing these patents, and an unspecified award for monetary damages. The
Company believes that the OmniPod System does not infringe these patents. The Company expects that this
litigation will not have a material adverse impact on its financial position or results of operations. The Company
believes it has meritorious defenses to this lawsuit; however, litigation is inherently uncertain and there can be no
assurance as to the ultimate outcome or effect of this action. The Company does not believe it has any material
financial exposure at December 31, 2012.

In a letter received in March 2007, Medtronic, Inc. invited the Company to discuss its “taking a license to
certain Medtronic patents.” In October 2012, Medtronic MiniMed Inc., Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co.
and MiniMed Distribution Corp. (collectively, “Medtronic”) filed a lawsuit in United States District Court for the
Central District of California alleging that the Company infringes the two patents referenced in their 2007 letter
which are owned by Medtronic MiniMed Inc. and licensed to Medtronic Puerto Rico Operations Co. and
MiniMed Distribution Corp. Medtronic seeks a declaration that the Company has infringed its patents, equitable
relief, including an injunction that would enjoin the Company from infringing these patents and as unspecified
award for monetary damages. The patents referenced by this lawsuit relate to technology that is material to the
Company’s business. The Company believes that the OmniPod System does not infringe these patents. The
Company believes it has meritorious defenses to this lawsuit; however, litigation is inherently uncertain and there
can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome or effect of this action. The Company does not believe it has any
material financial exposure at December 31, 2012.

Indemnifications

In the normal course of business, the Company enters into contracts and agreements that contain a variety of

representations and warranties and provide for general indemnifications. The Company’s exposure under these

F-24

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

agreements is unknown because it involves claims that may be made against the Company in the future, but have
not yet been made. To date, the Company has not paid any claims or been required to defend any action related to
its indemnification obligations. However, the Company may record charges in the future as a result of these
indemnification obligations.

In accordance with its bylaws, the Company has indemnification obligations to its officers and directors for

certain events or occurrences, subject to certain limits, while they are serving at the Company’s request in such
capacity. There have been no claims to date under such indemnification obligations and the Company has a
director and officer insurance policy that enables it to recover a portion of any amounts paid for future claims.

At December 31, 2012, the Company is subject to an on-going sales and use tax audit by the Massachusetts
Department of Revenue related to Neighborhood Diabetes for a period prior to the acquisition. Under the Merger
Agreement, the Company has been indemnified by the former stockholders of Neighborhood Diabetes for any
liability resulting from or related to any tax attributable to pre-acquisition periods. The Company has recorded a
contingent liability in current liabilities and a corresponding indemnification asset in current assets related to the
estimated sales tax payable to the state of Massachusetts for the period under audit.

14. Equity

In March 2009, in connection with the Facility Agreement entered into with certain institutional accredited
investors, the Company issued warrants to purchase 3,750,000 shares of its common stock at an exercise price of
$3.13 per share. The warrants were exercised in the year ended December 31, 2010 and the Company received
approximately $11.7 million in proceeds.

In December 2010, in a public offering, the Company issued and sold 3,450,000 shares of its common stock

at a price of $13.27 per share. In connection with the offering, the Company received total gross proceeds of
$47.8 million, or approximately $45.4 million in net proceeds after deducting underwriting discounts and
offering expenses.

In June 2011, in connection with the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes, the Company issued 1,197,631

shares of its common stock at a price of $20.40 per share, as partial consideration for the acquisition.

In January 2013, in a public offering, the Company issued and sold 4,715,000 shares of its common stock at

a price of $20.75 per share. In connection with the offering, the Company received total gross proceeds of
$97.8 million, or approximately $92.8 million in net proceeds after deducting underwriting discounts and
offering expenses.

The Company grants share-based awards to employees in the form of options to purchase the Company’s
common stock, the ability to purchase stock at a discounted price under the employee stock purchase plan and
restricted stock units. Stock-based compensation expense related to share-based awards recognized in the years
ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $9.9 million, $7.7 million, and $5.0 million, respectively, and was
calculated based on awards ultimately expected to vest. At December 31, 2012, the Company had $21.6 million
of total unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested stock options and restricted stock units.

Stock Options

In May 2007, upon the closing of the Company’s initial public offering, the Company’s 2007 Stock Option
and Incentive Plan (the “2007 Plan”) became effective and the Company’s Board of Directors determined not to
make any further grants under the Company’s 2000 Stock Option and Incentive Plan. Under the 2007 Plan,

F-25

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

awards may be granted to persons who are, at the time of grant, employees, officers, non-employee directors or
key persons (including consultants and prospective employees) of the Company. The 2007 Plan provides for the
granting of stock options, restricted stock units, stock appreciation rights, deferred stock awards, restricted stock,
unrestricted stock, cash-based awards, performance share awards or dividend equivalent rights. Options granted
under the 2007 Plan generally vest over a period of four years and expire ten years from the date of grant. The
Company had originally reserved 535,000 shares of common stock for issuance under the 2007 Plan in which the
amount was increased on each January 1 through January 1, 2012 by 725,000 shares. The 2007 Plan was
amended and restated in November 2008 and May 2012 to provide for the issuance of additional shares and
changes to certain other provisions. In May 2012, shares available for grant under the 2007 Plan were increased
by 3,775,000 shares. At December 31, 2012, 4,189,332 shares remain available for future issuance under the
2007 Plan.

Under the Company’s 2000 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the “2000 Plan”), options could be granted to

persons who were, at the time of grant, employees, officers, or directors of, or consultants or advisors to, the
Company. The 2000 Plan provided for the granting of non-statutory stock options, incentive stock options, stock
bonuses, and rights to acquire restricted stock. The option price at the date of grant was determined by the Board
of Directors and, in the case of incentive stock options, could not be less than the fair market value of the
common stock at the date of grant, as determined by the Board of Directors. Options granted under the 2000 Plan
generally vest over a period of four years and expire 10 years from the date of grant. The provisions of the 2000
Plan limit the exercise of incentive stock options. At the time of grant, options are typically immediately
exercisable, but subject to restrictions. The restrictions generally lapse over a period of four years.

Activity under the Company’s Stock Option Plans:

Number of
Options(#)

Balance, December 31, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercised . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Canceled . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2,814,591
485,970
(676,819)
(121,552)

Balance, December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2,502,190

Vested, December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vested and expected to vest, December 31, 2012(3) . . . . . . . .

1,539,729
2,154,495

Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price($)

$11.02
19.33
6.98
15.44

$13.51

$11.06

Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value($)

(In thousands)

$ 9,019(1)

$19,463

$15,763(2)
$17,957(2)

(1) The aggregate intrinsic value was calculated based on the positive difference between the estimated fair
value of the Company’s common stock as of the date of exercise and the exercise price of the underlying
options. The aggregate intrinsic value of options exercised in the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and
2010, was $9.0 million, $8.8 million and $3.8 million, respectively.

(2) The aggregate intrinsic value was calculated based on the positive difference between the estimated fair

value of the Company’s common stock as of December 31, 2012, and the exercise price of the underlying
options.

(3) Represents the number of vested options as of December 31, 2012, plus the number of unvested options

expected to vest as of December 31, 2012, based on the unvested options outstanding at December 31, 2012,
adjusted for the estimated forfeiture rate of 16%.

F-26

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

At December 31, 2012, there were 2,502,190 options outstanding with a weighted average exercise price of

$13.51 and a weighted average remaining contractual life of 6.8 years. At December 31, 2012, there were
1,539,729 options exercisable with a weighted average exercise price of $11.06 and a weighted average
remaining contractual life of 5.7 years.

The Company recognizes compensation expense for all share-based payment awards made to its employees,

directors and consultants. Stock-based compensation expense recognized is based on the value of the portion of
stock-based awards that is ultimately expected to vest. The Company recognizes the value of stock-based
compensation in operating expense using the straight-line method.

The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the fair value of stock options. The

determination of the fair value of stock-based payment awards on the date of grant using a pricing model is
affected by the Company’s stock price as well as assumptions regarding a number of complex and subjective
variables. The estimated grant date fair values of the employee stock options were calculated using the Black-
Scholes option pricing model, based on the following assumptions:

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

Risk-free interest rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expected term (in years) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dividend yield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expected volatility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0.80% - 1.16% 1.16% - 2.61% 1.47% - 3.05%
6.25
-
72% - 76%

6.25
-
67% - 71%

6.25
-
71% - 78%

Risk-free interest rate. The risk-free interest rate is based on U.S. Treasury zero-coupon issues with

remaining terms similar to the expected term on the options.

Expected volatility. Expected volatility measures the amount that a stock price has fluctuated or is

expected to fluctuate during a period.

Expected term. The expected term of stock options represents the period the stock options are expected to

remain outstanding and is based on the midpoint between the vesting date and the end of the contractual term.

Dividend yield. The Company has never declared or paid any cash dividends and does not plan to pay cash

dividends in the foreseeable future, and, therefore, used an expected dividend yield of zero in the valuation
model.

Forfeitures. Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and revised in subsequent periods if actual

forfeitures differ from those estimates. The Company uses historical data to estimate pre-vesting option
forfeitures and record stock-based compensation expense only for those awards that are expected to vest. If the
Company’s actual forfeiture rate is materially different from its estimate, the stock-based compensation expense
could be significantly different from what the Company has recorded in the current period.

The weighted average grant date fair value of options granted for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011

and 2010 was $12.04, $11.75, and $9.92, respectively. Employee stock-based compensation expense related to
stock options recognized in the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $4.8 million, $4.4 million,
and $4.0 million, respectively, and was calculated based on awards ultimately expected to vest.

At December 31, 2012, the Company had $9.3 million of total unrecognized compensation expense related
to stock options under FASB ASC 718-10 that will be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.2 years.

F-27

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan

The 2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“2007 ESPP”) was adopted by the Board of Directors and
approved by stockholders in April 2007 and became effective upon the closing of the initial public offering in
May 2007. The 2007 ESPP authorizes the issuance of up to a total of 380,000 shares of common stock to
participating employees.

All employees who have been employed by the Company for at least six months and whose customary
employment is for more than 20 hours a week are eligible to participate in the 2007 ESPP. Any employee who
owns 5% or more of the voting power or value of shares of the Company’s common stock is not eligible to
purchase shares under the 2007 ESPP.

The Company will make one or more offerings each year to employees to purchase stock under the 2007
ESPP. Offerings usually begin on each January 1 and July 1 and continue for six-month periods, referred to as
offering periods. Each employee eligible to participate on the date of the closing of the initial public offering was
automatically deemed to be a participant in the initial offering period.

Each employee who is a participant in the Company’s 2007 ESPP may purchase shares by authorizing

payroll deductions of up to 10% of his or her cash compensation during an offering period. Unless the
participating employee has previously withdrawn from the offering, his or her accumulated payroll deductions
will be used to purchase common stock on the last business day of the offering period at a price equal to 85% of
the fair market value of the common stock on the last day of the offering period. Under applicable tax rules, an
employee may purchase no more than $25,000 worth of common stock, valued at the start of the purchase period,
under the 2007 ESPP in any calendar year.

The accumulated payroll deductions of any employee who is not a participant on the last day of an offering
period will be refunded. An employee’s rights under the 2007 ESPP terminate upon voluntary withdrawal from
the plan or when the employee ceases employment with the Company for any reason.

The 2007 ESPP may be terminated or amended by the Board of Directors at any time. An amendment to

increase the number of shares of common stock that is authorized under the 2007 ESPP and certain other
amendments require the approval of stockholders.

The Company issued 18,346 shares of common stock in 2012, 12,429 shares of common stock in 2011, and

15,024 shares of common stock in 2010 to employees participating in the 2007 ESPP. The Company recorded
$59,000, $38,000 and $34,000 of stock-based compensation expense related to the 2007 ESPP for the years
ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Restricted Stock Units

In the year ended December 31, 2012, the Company awarded 498,739 restricted stock units to certain
employees. The restricted stock units were granted under the 2007 Plan and vest annually over three to four years
from the grant date. The restricted stock units granted have a weighted average fair value of $19.12 per share
based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. The restricted stock units were
valued at approximately $9.5 million at their grant dates, and the Company recognizes the compensation expense
of the restricted stock units expected to vest over the three to four year vesting period. Approximately
$5.1 million, $3.3 million and $1.0 million of stock-based compensation expense related to the vesting of
restricted stock units was recognized in the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Approximately $12.3 million of the fair value of the restricted stock units remained unrecognized as of

F-28

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

December 31, 2012 and will be recognized over a weighted average period of 1.3 years. Under the terms of the
award, the Company will issue shares of common stock on each of the vesting dates. The following table
summarizes the status of the Company’s restricted stock units:

Balance, December 31, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Forfeited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of
Shares (#)

603,882
498,739
(238,134)
(39,419)

Balance, December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

825,068

Weighted
Average
Fair Value ($)

$17.12
19.12
16.72
17.86

$18.40

Stock-based Compensation Associated with Awards for Non-Employees

Restricted Common Stock

During the year ended December 31, 2008, the Company awarded 4,000 shares of restricted common stock
to a non-employee. The shares of restricted common stock were granted under the 2007 Plan and vested over two
years. The shares of restricted common stock granted had a weighted average fair value of $8.04 based on the
closing price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. Of the shares awarded, 444 shares of
restricted stock vested in the year ended December 31, 2011 and 1,776 shares of restricted stock vested in the
year ended December 31, 2010. The shares were valued at approximately $32,000 at their grant date, and the
Company recognized the compensation expense over the two-year vesting period.

Shareholder Rights Plan

In November 2008, the Board of Directors of the Company adopted a shareholder rights plan (“the

Shareholder Rights Plan”), as set forth in the Shareholder Rights Agreement between the Company and the rights
agent, the purpose of which is, among other things, to enhance the ability of the Board of Directors to protect
shareholder interests and to ensure that shareholders receive fair treatment in the event any coercive takeover
attempt of the Company is made in the future. The Shareholder Rights Plan could make it more difficult for a
third party to acquire, or could discourage a third party from acquiring, the Company or a large block of the
Company’s common stock.

In connection with the adoption of the Shareholder Rights Plan, the Board of Directors of the Company

declared a dividend distribution of one preferred stock purchase right (a “Right”) for each outstanding share of
common stock to stockholders of record as of the close of business on November 15, 2008. In addition, one Right
will automatically attach to each share of common stock issued between November 15, 2008 and the distribution
date. The Rights currently are not exercisable and are attached to and trade with the outstanding shares of
common stock. Under the Shareholder Rights Plan, the Rights become exercisable if a person or group becomes
an “acquiring person” by acquiring 15% or more of the outstanding shares of common stock or if a person or
group commences a tender offer that would result in that person or group owning 15% or more of the common
stock. If a person or group becomes an “acquiring person,” each holder of a Right (other than the acquiring
person) would be entitled to purchase, at the then-current exercise price, such number of shares of the Company’s
preferred stock which are equivalent to shares of common stock having a value of twice the exercise price of the
Right. If the Company is acquired in a merger or other business combination transaction after any such event,
each holder of a Right would then be entitled to purchase, at the then-current exercise price, shares of the
acquiring company’s common stock having a value of twice the exercise price of the Right.

F-29

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

15. Defined Contribution Plan

The Insulet 401(k) Retirement Plan (the “401(k) Plan”) is a defined contribution plan in the form of a

qualified 401(k) plan, in which substantially all employees are eligible to participate upon the first day of the
month following 30 days of service. Eligible employees may elect to contribute, subject to certain IRS limits, up
to 20% of their compensation. The Company has the option of making both matching contributions and
discretionary profit-sharing contributions to the 401(k) Plan. During 2010, the Company offered a discretionary
match of 25% for the first 4% of an employee’s salary that was contributed to the 401(k) Plan. During 2011 and
2012, the Company offered a discretionary match of 50% for the first 6% of an employee’s salary that was
contributed to the 401(k) Plan. The Company match vests over a four-year period (25% per year). In connection
with the acquisition of Neighborhood Diabetes, the Company adopted the legacy Neighborhood Diabetes 401(k)
plan. During the year ended December 31, 2012, all employees participating in the legacy Neighborhood
Diabetes 401(k) plan were moved to the Company’s plan. The total amount contributed by the Company under
the 401(k) Plan and the adopted Neighborhood 401(k) Plan was $1.0 million, $0.7 million, and $0.1 million for
the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

16. Income Taxes

The Company accounts for income taxes under ASC 740-10. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are

determined based upon differences between financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities and are
measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse.

Income tax benefit (expense) consists of the following (in thousands):

Current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total income tax benefit (expense) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Year Ended December 31,

2012

$(121)
(91)
$(212)

2011
(Restated)

$

(77)
11,289
$11,212

2010

$—
—
$—

For the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 the current portion of income tax expense primarily
related to state, local, and foreign taxes. For the year ended December 31, 2012, the deferred portion of tax
expense primarily related to the U.S. Federal and State amounts. For the year ended December 31, 2011, income
tax benefit resulted from a change in the valuation allowance for preexisting deferred tax assets as a result of the
Neighborhood Diabetes acquisition and current tax expense primarily related to state and local taxes. For the year
ended December 31, 2010 there was no income tax benefit or expense.

A reconciliation of income tax benefit (expense) at the statutory federal income tax rate as reflected in the

financial statements is as follows:

Year Ended December 31,

Tax at U.S. statutory rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State taxes, net of federal benefit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tax credits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State apportionment
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in valuation allowance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Effective income tax rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

F-30

2011
(Restated)

2010

2012
34.00% 34.00% 34.00%
(1.88)
(1.18)
2.07
0.50
—
—
(11.65)
(32.34)
(2.88)
(1.38)
(0.40)% 19.66%

3.48
0.80
(7.98)
(27.14)
(3.16)

—%

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amount of
assets and liabilities for financial reporting and the amounts used for income tax purposes as well as federal and
state net operating losses and tax credit carryforwards. Significant components of the Company’s deferred tax
assets (liabilities) consists of the following:

Deferred tax assets:

Net operating loss carryforwards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Start up expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tax credits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Bad debt
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Depreciation & amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total deferred tax assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Deferred tax liabilities:

Prepaids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amortization of acquired intangibles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amortization of debt discount
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goodwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total deferred tax liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Valuation allowance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net deferred tax liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011
(Restated)

(In thousands)

$ 151,818
2,020
7,608
2,602
2,357
4,661
$ 171,066

(169)
(9,015)
(15,955)
(139)
$ (25,278)
$(145,927)
(139)
$

$ 141,000
2,142
7,352
2,589
1,988
4,040
$ 159,111

(657)
(10,696)
(18,535)
(48)
$ (29,936)
$(129,223)
(48)
$

A valuation allowance is required to reduce the deferred tax assets reported if, based on the weight of the
evidence, it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. After
consideration of the available evidence, both positive and negative, the Company has determined that a
$145.9 million valuation allowance at December 31, 2012 is necessary to reduce the deferred tax assets to the
amount that will more likely than not be realized. The Company provided a valuation allowance for the full
amount of its net deferred tax asset for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 because realization of any
future tax benefit was not sufficiently assured. In the year ended December 31, 2012, the Company’s valuation
allowance increased by $16.7 million to $145.9 million from the balance at December 31, 2011 of
$129.2 million. The change in the valuation allowance is primarily attributable to the deferred tax liabilities
related to the Neighborhood Diabetes acquisition and the additional deferred tax liabilities related to the
modification of the debt, offset by an increase in net operating loss carryforwards.

In the future, the Company will generate additional deferred tax assets and liabilities related to its
amortization of acquired intangible assets for tax purposes because these long-lived intangible assets are not
amortized for financial reporting purposes. The tax amortization in future years will give rise to a temporary
difference, and a tax liability, which will only reverse at the time of ultimate sale or further impairment of the
underlying intangible assets. Due to the uncertain timing of this reversal, the temporary difference cannot be
considered as a source of future taxable income for purposes of determining a valuation allowance; therefore, the
tax liability cannot be used to offset the deferred tax asset related to the net operating loss carryforward for tax
purposes that will be generated by the same amortization.

At December 31, 2012 and 2011, the Company included $0.5 million and $0.9 million, respectively, of

current deferred tax assets in prepaid expenses and other current assets and $0.7 million and $0.9 million,
respectively, of non-current deferred tax liabilities in other long-term liabilities on its balance sheet.

F-31

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

At December 31, 2012, the Company had approximately $404.4 million, $282.8 million and $7.6 million of

federal net operating loss carryforwards, state net operating loss carryforwards and research and development
and other tax credits, respectively, that if not utilized, will begin to expire in 2020 and will continue to expire
through 2032 for federal tax purposes and began to expire in 2005 and will continue to expire through 2032 for
state tax purposes. At December 31, 2011, the Company had approximately $372.3 million, $277.5 million and
$7.4 million of federal net operating loss carryforwards, state net operating loss carryforwards and research and
development and other tax credits, respectively. The utilization of such net operating loss carryforwards and the
realization of tax benefits in future years depends predominantly upon having taxable income. Under the
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, certain substantial changes in the Company’s ownership may result in a
limitation on the amount of net operating loss carryforwards and tax credit carryforwards which may be used in
future years. As there were significant issuances of Series C, Series D and Series E redeemable convertible
preferred stock in 2003, 2005 and 2006, respectively, to mostly new investors, it is probable that there will be a
yearly limitation placed on the amount of net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards available for use in
future years.

The Company had $0.1 million and $0.2 million of unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2012 and

2011, respectively. Unrecognized tax benefits represent tax positions for which reserves have been established.
Unrecognized state benefits and interest related to unrecognized tax benefits are reflected net of applicable tax
benefits. The Company expects its uncertain tax positions will reduce by approximately $0.1 million over the
next twelve months.

The Company currently intends to reinvest the total amount of its unremitted earnings in the local
international jurisdiction or to repatriate the earnings only when tax-effective. As such, the Company has not
provided for U.S. Federal income taxes on the unremitted earnings of its international subsidiary.

17. Quarterly Data (Unaudited)

2012 Quarters ended

December 31

September 30
(Restated)

June 30
(Restated)

March 31
(Restated)

(In thousands, except per share data)

Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross profit
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss per share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 57,828
$ 25,319
$(10,194)
(0.21)
$

$ 54,752
$ 24,390
$(12,417)
(0.26)
$

$ 51,035
$ 22,331
$(14,476)
(0.30)
$

$ 47,754
$ 20,296
$(14,780)
(0.31)
$

2011 Quarters ended

December 31
(Restated)

September 30
(Restated)

June 30
(Restated)

March 31

(In thousands, except per share data)

Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross profit
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss per share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 47,192
$ 20,080
$(14,337)
(0.30)
$

$ 44,594
$ 18,561
$(13,562)
(0.29)
$

$32,211
$14,538
$ (8,084)
$ (0.17)

$28,258
$13,533
$ (9,848)
$ (0.22)

As further described in Note 18, the Company restated its financial results for the second, third, and fourth

quarters of the year ended December 31, 2011 to correct errors in the accounting for income taxes. The following
tables summarize the effect of the restatement by major financial statement line item in the three and six months
ended June 30, 2011 and the nine months ended September 30, 2011 (in thousands). The restatement had no
effect on any amounts reported in periods prior to the quarter ended June 30, 2011.

F-32

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

The restatement resulted in an increase in current deferred tax assets (which are presented as a component of

prepaid expenses and other current assets) of $1.2 million at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2011, an increase
in goodwill of $11.3 million at June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2011 and an increase in non-current deferred tax
liabilities (which are presented as a component of other long-term liabilities) of $1.2 million at June 30, 2011 and
September 30, 2011. The restatement also resulted in an increase in tax benefit of $11.3 million in the three and
six months ended June 30, 2011 and the nine months ended September 30, 2011.

Consolidated Balance Sheet

June 30, 2011

September 30, 2011

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

$

Prepaid expenses and other current assets . .
Total current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goodwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated deficit
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity . . .

Consolidated Statement of Operations

4,770
147,834
26,727
226,190
1,303
132,091
(413,122)
94,099
226,190

(unaudited)
$

(unaudited)
$

5,991
149,055
38,066
238,750
2,524
133,312
(401,783)
105,438
238,750

$

3,653
137,857
26,164
215,780
1,260
132,340
(426,684)
83,440
215,780

4,874
139,078
37,503
228,340
2,481
133,561
(415,345)
94,779
228,340

Three Months Ended
June 30, 2011

Six Months Ended
June 30, 2011

Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2011

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

$

— $11,339
(8,084)

(19,423)

$

— $ 11,339
(17,930)

(29,269)

$

— $ 11,339
(31,492)

(42,831)

Income tax benefit

(expense)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss per share basic and

diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(0.42)

(0.17)

(0.64)

(0.39)

(0.92)

(0.68)

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:

Prepaid expenses and other current assets . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Six Months Ended
June 30, 2011

Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2011

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

$(29,269)
—

$(17,930)
(11,339)

$(42,831)
—

$(31,492)
(11,339)

(434)
(316)

(1,655)
905

851
(359)

(370)
862

The restatement had no effect on the previously reported amounts of operating, investing, and financing

cash flows in the Company’s consolidated statement of cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and
the nine months ended September 30, 2011.

The following tables summarize the effect of the restatement by major financial statement line item at
March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012 (in thousands). The restatement resulted in an increase

F-33

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

in current deferred tax assets (which are presented as a component of prepaid expenses and other current assets)
of $0.9 million at March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012, an increase in goodwill of $10.9
million at March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012 and an increase in non-current deferred tax
liabilities (which are presented as a component of other long-term liabilities) of $0.4 million at March 31,
2012, June 30, 2012, and September 30, 2012. The restatement had no effect on the consolidated statement of
operations or cash flows during these periods.

Consolidated Balance Sheet

March 31, 2012

June 30, 2012

September 30, 2012

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

As Previously
Reported

As
Restated

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

(unaudited)

Prepaid expenses and other current

assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $

3,463 $

4,313 $

3,454 $

4,304 $

4,717 $

Total current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goodwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated deficit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities and stockholders’

127,369
26,647
203,942
1,640
145,064
(455,803)
58,878

128,219
37,536
215,681
2,040
145,464
(444,464)
70,217

115,615
26,647
191,940
1,668
144,190
(470,279)
47,750

116,465
37,536
203,679
2,068
144,590
(458,940)
59,089

113,394
26,647
191,642
1,670
152,529
(482,696)
39,113

5,567
114,244
37,536
203,381
2,070
152,929
(471,357)
50,452

equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

203,942

215,681

191,940

203,679

191,642

203,381

18. Restatement of Previously Issued Financial Statements

Subsequent to the issuance of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2011, the Company and its audit committee concluded that it should restate its consolidated
balance sheet at December 31, 2011, and its consolidated statements of operations, cash flows, and changes in
stockholder’s equity for the year ended December 31, 2011 to correct the following errors:

In June 2011, the Company acquired all of the outstanding shares of privately-held Neighborhood Diabetes

and accounted for the acquisition as a business combination. In connection with the acquisition, the Company
recognized net deferred tax liabilities of $11.3 million. The Company also reduced its preexisting valuation
allowance and goodwill, accordingly, through purchase accounting. Upon subsequent review, the Company
determined that the $11.3 million reduction of its preexisting valuation allowance should have been reported as
an income tax benefit and not as an adjustment to goodwill. The Company has corrected its statement of
operations with respect to the income tax benefit generated as a result of the acquired deferred tax liabilities.

In June 2011, the Company modified its outstanding convertible debt. Upon subsequent review, the

Company determined that at the date of the modification it should have recognized approximately $5.5 million in
additional deferred tax liability related to its debt. The recognition of this additional deferred tax liability would
have resulted in a corresponding reduction of its preexisting valuation allowance and therefore had no effect on
its statement of operations. The Company has corrected certain balance sheet amounts with respect to the
presentation of its deferred tax assets and liabilities.

The following tables summarize the effect of the restatement by major financial statement line item for the

year ended December 31, 2011 (in thousands). The restatement resulted in an increase in current deferred tax

F-34

INSULET CORPORATION

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)

assets (which are presented as a component of prepaid expenses and other current assets) of $0.9 million at
December 31, 2011, an increase in goodwill of $10.9 million at December 31, 2011, and an increase to non-
current deferred tax liabilities (which are presented as a component of other long-term liabilities) of $0.4 million
at December 31, 2011. The restatement resulted in an increase in tax benefit of $11.3 million in the year ended
December 31, 2011.

Consolidated Balance Sheet

Prepaid expenses and other current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goodwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated deficit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Consolidated Statement of Operations

Income tax benefit (expense) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss per share basic and diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:

December 31, 2011

As Previously
Reported

$

2,802
131,785
26,647
209,583
1,652
138,187
(441,023)
71,396
209,583

As Restated

$

3,652
132,635
37,536
221,322
2,052
138,587
(429,684)
82,735
221,322

Year Ended
December 31, 2011

As Previously
Reported

$

(127)
(57,170)
(1.22)

As Restated

$ 11,212
(45,831)
(0.98)

Year Ended
December 31, 2011

As Previously
Reported

$(57,170)
—

As Restated

$(45,831)
(11,289)

Prepaid expenses and other current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other long-term liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1,703
(417)

853
383

The restatement had no effect on the previously reported amounts of operating, investing, and financing

cash flows in the Company’s consolidated statement of cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2011.

Financial information included in the accompanying financial statements and the notes thereto reflect the

effects of the corrections described above.

F-35

SCHEDULE II — VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS

The following table sets forth activities in our accounts receivable reserve and deferred tax valuation
allowance accounts:

Classifications

Year Ended December 31, 2012
Allowance for doubtful accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax valuation allowance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Year Ended December 31, 2011
Allowance for doubtful accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax valuation allowance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Year Ended December 31, 2010
Allowance for doubtful accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax valuation allowance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Balance
Beginning of
Period

Additions
Charged to
Costs and
Expenses

Deductions

Balance End
of Period

(In thousands)

$
7,021
$129,223

$ 3,409
$20,972

$ 3,803
$ 4,268

$
6,627
$145,927

$
5,432
$138,028

$ 3,165
$27,047

$ 1,576
$35,852

$
7,021
$129,223

$
7,190
$121,432

$ 3,317
$23,937

$ 5,075
$ 7,341

$
5,432
$138,028

F-36

Shannon and Brian Davis are  
all-too-familiar with diabetes. 

Brian was diagnosed when he was 27, and their son Joshua was  
diagnosed at 11 months. They learned about managing their  
diabetes together – and through their journey, found trust in the  
OmniPod System.

“The OmniPod enabled  
us to simplify at least  
a small part of this  
horrible disease.”  
-Shannon Davis

Brian believes Joshua’s diagnosis truly 
saved his life. They finally received the 
proper diabetes management resources 
they were missing – and Brian chose to 
take advantage of this new education  
to be the best role model for his son.

With both of them on the OmniPod,  
the Davis family has found a sense  
of trust and comfort in their diabetes  
management.

Board of Directors

Sally W. Crawford 
Healthcare consultant and Director,  
Hologic, inc., eXacT Sciences, inc.,  
Zalicus, inc., Universal american  
corporation, Prolacta Bioscience, inc.

Duane DeSisto 
President, chief executive Officer  
and Director, insulet corporation

Charles Liamos 
chief Operating Officer and Director,  
insulet corporation

W. Mark Lortz 
Director, cutera, inc.

Regina Sommer 
Director, wright express corporation

John Fallon MD 
chief Physician executive  
and Senior vice President,  
Blue cross Blue Shield  
of Massachusetts

Steven T. Sobieski 
Senior vice President  
and chief financial Officer,  
roka Bioscience, inc.

Daniel Levangie 
chief executive Officer and Director,  
Dune Medical Devices, inc.

Joseph Zakrzewski 
chairman and chief executive Officer,  
amarin corporation

Executive Officers

Duane DeSisto 
President, chief executive Officer  
and Director 

Charles Liamos 
chief Operating Officer and Director

Brian K. Roberts 
chief financial Officer

Peter J. Devlin 
chief commercial Officer

R. Anthony Diehl, Esq. 
General counsel

Investor Inquiries

Insulet Corporation
9 Oak Park Drive
Bedford, Ma 01730
phone: 781.457.5000
fax: 781.457.5010
www.insulet.com

Investor Relations
877.PODD.ir1 (877.763.3471)
email: ir@insulet.com
investors.insulet.com

Independent Registered  
Public Accounting Firm
ernst & young, LLP
200 clarendon Street
Boston, Ma 02116
617.266.2000
www.ey.com

Primary Outside Legal Counsel
Goodwin Procter LLP
exchange Place
Boston, Ma 02109
617.570.1000
www.goodwinprocter.com

Registrar and Transfer Agent
Questions regarding accounts, 
address changes, stock transfers
and lost certificates should be
directed to:

computershare investor Services
P.O. Box 43078
Providence, ri 02940-3078
Overnight Mail: 250 royall Street
canton, Ma 02021
800.662.7232 (toll-free within the U.S.)
781.575.4238 (outside U.S.)
www.computershare.com

2012 ANNUAL REPORT

 9 Oak Park Drive    BeDfOrD, Ma 01730    781.457.5000
www.MyOMniPOD.cOM