Assigned to the Honorable Jeffrey R. Finigan LOREN SCOTT MAR,Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, Vv.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The parties, through their undersigned counsel, stipulate as follows: WHEREAS, these securities class actions arise out of allegations that the offering materials issued in connection with the August 2021 transaction by which Illumina, Inc. (“Illumina”) acquired and merged with Grail, Inc. (the “Merger”) were materially false and misleading and omitted material facts required to be disclosed under governing SEC regulations; WHEREAS, on February 2, 2024, Plaintiff Loren Scott Mar filed a complaint in San Mateo Superior Court, Case No. 24-CIV-00585, asserting non-fraud, strict liability claims under Sections 11, 12, and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 against Illumina, Inc., Francis A. deSouza, Sam A. Samad, Karen McGinnis, Jay T. Flatley, Frances Arnold, Ph.D., Caroline Dorsa, Robert S. Epstein, M.D., Scott Gottlieb, M.D., Gary S. Guthart, Ph.D., Philip W. Schiller, Susan E. Siegel, John W. Thompson, Hans E. Bishop, Scott M. Davies, Joydeep Goswami, Lightspeed Venture Partners, New Enterprise Associates, Inc., ARCH Venture Partners, ARCH Venture Fund IX Overage, L.P., ARCH Venture Partners IX, LLC, ARCH Venture Fund VIII, L.P., and ARCH Venture Partners VIII, LLC (Joint Declaration of Adam E. Polk and David W. Hall (“Joint Decl.”), ¶ 4); WHEREAS, on February 6, 2024, Plaintiff Scott Zerzanek filed a complaint in San Mateo Superior Court, Case No. 24-CIV-00666, asserting substantially similar claims against the same Defendants (Joint Decl., ¶ 5); WHEREAS, these above-referenced actions were designated complex and assigned for all purposes to the Honorable Jeffrey R. Finigan (Joint Decl., ¶ 6); WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiffs have engaged with counsel for New Enterprise Associates, Inc. (“NEA”) concerning the claims brought against NEA, and, after the exchange of information between counsel, Plaintiffs’ counsel have determined to voluntarily dismiss NEA (Joint Decl., ¶ 7); WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiffs have engaged with counsel for Lightspeed Venture Partners (“LSVP”) concerning the claims brought against LSVP, and, after the exchange of information between counsel, Plaintiffs’ counsel have determined to voluntarily dismiss LSVP (Joint Decl., ¶ 8); WHEREAS, these actions remain in their infancy, no class has been certified, and as a result, notice of pendency has not been issued to class members, and accordingly, no class members will be

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 prejudiced by these dismissals (which dismiss only Defendants New Enterprise Associates, Inc. and Lightspeed Venture Partners), and they will have no impact on the remaining Defendants (Joint Decl., ¶ 9); WHEREAS, based on the accompanying Joint Declaration of Adam E. Polk and David W. Hall, and consistent with California Rule of Court 3.770, the parties respectfully request that the Court dismiss NEA and LSVP from the above-referenced actions; and WHEREAS, Plaintiffs’ dismissal of NEA and LSVP does not affect the pendency of any other claims against the remaining Defendants in these actions.

NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned parties, through their respective counsel of record, and subject to approval by the Court, hereby stipulate that NEA and LSVP shall be dismissed from these actions pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 581.

The Court, having read and considered the joint stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing, hereby orders that New Enterprise Associates, Inc. and Lightspeed Venture Partners are dismissed from Mar, et al. v. Illumina, Inc., et al., Case No. 24-CIV-00585, and Zerzanek et al. v. Illumina, Inc., et al., Case No. 24-CIV-00666.

Assigned to the Honorable Jeffrey R. Finigan LOREN SCOTT MAR,Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, Vv.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The parties, through their undersigned counsel, stipulate as follows: WHEREAS, these securities class actions arise out of allegations that the offering materials issued in connection with the August 2021 transaction by which Illumina, Inc. (“Illumina”) acquired and merged with Grail, Inc. (the “Merger”) were materially false and misleading and omitted material facts required to be disclosed under governing SEC regulations; WHEREAS, on February 2, 2024, Plaintiff Loren Scott Mar filed a complaint in San Mateo Superior Court, Case No. 24-CIV-00585, asserting non-fraud, strict liability claims under Sections 11, 12, and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 against Illumina, Inc., Francis A. deSouza, Sam A. Samad, Karen McGinnis, Jay T. Flatley, Frances Arnold, Ph.D., Caroline Dorsa, Robert S. Epstein, M.D., Scott Gottlieb, M.D., Gary S. Guthart, Ph.D., Philip W. Schiller, Susan E. Siegel, John W. Thompson, Hans E. Bishop, Scott M. Davies, Joydeep Goswami, Lightspeed Venture Partners, New Enterprise Associates, Inc., ARCH Venture Partners, ARCH Venture Fund IX Overage, L.P., ARCH Venture Partners IX, LLC, ARCH Venture Fund VIII, L.P., and ARCH Venture Partners VIII, LLC (Joint Declaration of Adam E. Polk and David W. Hall (“Joint Decl.”), ¶ 4); WHEREAS, on February 6, 2024, Plaintiff Scott Zerzanek filed a complaint in San Mateo Superior Court, Case No. 24-CIV-00666, asserting substantially similar claims against the same Defendants (Joint Decl., ¶ 5); WHEREAS, these above-referenced actions were designated complex and assigned for all purposes to the Honorable Jeffrey R. Finigan (Joint Decl., ¶ 6); WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiffs have engaged with counsel for New Enterprise Associates, Inc. (“NEA”) concerning the claims brought against NEA, and, after the exchange of information between counsel, Plaintiffs’ counsel have determined to voluntarily dismiss NEA (Joint Decl., ¶ 7); WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiffs have engaged with counsel for Lightspeed Venture Partners (“LSVP”) concerning the claims brought against LSVP, and, after the exchange of information between counsel, Plaintiffs’ counsel have determined to voluntarily dismiss LSVP (Joint Decl., ¶ 8); WHEREAS, these actions remain in their infancy, no class has been certified, and as a result, notice of pendency has not been issued to class members, and accordingly, no class members will be

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 prejudiced by these dismissals (which dismiss only Defendants New Enterprise Associates, Inc. and Lightspeed Venture Partners), and they will have no impact on the remaining Defendants (Joint Decl., ¶ 9); WHEREAS, based on the accompanying Joint Declaration of Adam E. Polk and David W. Hall, and consistent with California Rule of Court 3.770, the parties respectfully request that the Court dismiss NEA and LSVP from the above-referenced actions; and WHEREAS, Plaintiffs’ dismissal of NEA and LSVP does not affect the pendency of any other claims against the remaining Defendants in these actions.

NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned parties, through their respective counsel of record, and subject to approval by the Court, hereby stipulate that NEA and LSVP shall be dismissed from these actions pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 581.

The Court, having read and considered the joint stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing, hereby orders that New Enterprise Associates, Inc. and Lightspeed Venture Partners are dismissed from Mar, et al. v. Illumina, Inc., et al., Case No. 24-CIV-00585, and Zerzanek et al. v. Illumina, Inc., et al., Case No. 24-CIV-00666.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 WHEREAS, the Mar Action has been designated complex and is assigned for all purposes to the Honorable Jeffrey R. Finigan; WHEREAS, all defendants in the Mar Action have been served or have waived service; WHEREAS, on February 6, 2024, plaintiff Scott Zerzanek filed a complaint in San Mateo Superior Court, Case No. 24-CIV-00666 (the “Zerzanek Action”), asserting substantially similar claims against the same defendants; WHEREAS, all defendants in the Zerzanek Action have been served or have waived service; WHEREAS, the parties agree that the Mar Action and the Zerzanek Action are related as defined by California Rule of Court 3.300; WHEREAS, counsel for plaintiffs have met and conferred and agree that the interests of judicial economy and efficient case management are best served, in accordance with California Rule of Court 3.350, by: (1) consolidation of the Mar Action and the Zerzanek Action, with any future cases before this Court that involve substantially similar factual and legal issues to be consolidated with this case; and (2) appointment of Girard Sharp LLP and The Hall Firm, Ltd. as co-lead counsel for plaintiffs; WHEREAS, counsel for plaintiffs have met and conferred with counsel for defendants, and defendants do not oppose consolidation and take no position on the appointment of proposed co-lead counsel for plaintiffs; WHEREAS, this matter is set for a Case Management Conference on May 6, 2024; and WHEREAS, the parties are conferring concerning the timing of plaintiffs’ consolidated complaint and any responses thereto, and will submit an initial proposed schedule to the Court by April 19, 2024, along with the Case Management Statement.

Co-Lead Counsel shall meet and confer with counsel for all parties and submit with the Case Management Statement an initial proposed schedule for the filing of the consolidated complaint and for the filing of parties’ responses thereto by April 19, 2024, in advance of the Case Management Conference set for May 6, 2024.

Co-Lead Counsel shall have the authority to speak for plaintiffs in matters regarding pre- trial procedure, trial and settlement and shall make all work assignments in such manner as to facilitate the orderly and efficient prosecution of the Consolidated Action and to avoid duplicative or unproductive effort on the part of any party.

No motion, request for discovery, or other pre-trial or trial proceedings shall be initiated or filed by any plaintiff except through Co-Lead Counsel.

Honorable Jeffrey R. Finigan Superior Court of the State of California County of San Mateo

Date: 4/9/2024 In the Matter of: LOREN SCOTT MAR, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED vs

I certify that I am a Deputy Clerk of the San Mateo County Superior Court, that I am not a party to this cause, and that the above-listed documents were served upon the persons whose names and addresses are set forth below, on this date in San Mateo County, California, by placing the documents for collection and mailing so as to cause it to be mailed with the United States Postal Service by first class mail in a sealed addressed envelope with postage fully prepaid, following standard court practices.

I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on: 4/9/2024

Neal I Taniguchi, Court Executive Officer/Clerk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 WHEREAS, the Mar Action has been designated complex and is assigned for all purposes to the Honorable Jeffrey R. Finigan; WHEREAS, all defendants in the Mar Action have been served or have waived service; WHEREAS, on February 6, 2024, plaintiff Scott Zerzanek filed a complaint in San Mateo Superior Court, Case No. 24-CIV-00666 (the “Zerzanek Action”), asserting substantially similar claims against the same defendants; WHEREAS, all defendants in the Zerzanek Action have been served or have waived service; WHEREAS, the parties agree that the Mar Action and the Zerzanek Action are related as defined by California Rule of Court 3.300; WHEREAS, counsel for plaintiffs have met and conferred and agree that the interests of judicial economy and efficient case management are best served, in accordance with California Rule of Court 3.350, by: (1) consolidation of the Mar Action and the Zerzanek Action, with any future cases before this Court that involve substantially similar factual and legal issues to be consolidated with this case; and (2) appointment of Girard Sharp LLP and The Hall Firm, Ltd. as co-lead counsel for plaintiffs; WHEREAS, counsel for plaintiffs have met and conferred with counsel for defendants, and defendants do not oppose consolidation and take no position on the appointment of proposed co-lead counsel for plaintiffs; WHEREAS, this matter is set for a Case Management Conference on May 6, 2024; and WHEREAS, the parties are conferring concerning the timing of plaintiffs’ consolidated complaint and any responses thereto, and will submit an initial proposed schedule to the Court by April 19, 2024, along with the Case Management Statement.

Co-Lead Counsel shall meet and confer with counsel for all parties and submit with the Case Management Statement an initial proposed schedule for the filing of the consolidated complaint and for the filing of parties’ responses thereto by April 19, 2024, in advance of the Case Management Conference set for May 6, 2024.

Co-Lead Counsel shall have the authority to speak for plaintiffs in matters regarding pre- trial procedure, trial and settlement and shall make all work assignments in such manner as to facilitate the orderly and efficient prosecution of the Consolidated Action and to avoid duplicative or unproductive effort on the part of any party.

Co-Lead Counsel shall be responsible for coordinating all activities and appearances on behalf of plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action.

Honorable Jeffrey R. Finigan Superior Court of the State of California County of San Mateo