Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2012

OR

For the transition period from                     to

Commission file number 001-4802

Becton, Dickinson and Company

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

1 Becton Drive, Franklin Lakes, New Jersey 07417-1880

(Address of principal executive offices)

(Zip Code)

(201) 847-6800

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

N/A

(Former name, former address and former fiscal year,

if changed since last report)

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  x    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  x    No  ¨

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):

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.

Table of Contents

BECTON, DICKINSON AND COMPANY

FORM 10-Q

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

Table of Contents

ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

BECTON, DICKINSON AND COMPANY

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

Thousands of dollars

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements

3

Table of Contents

BECTON, DICKINSON AND COMPANY

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

Thousands of dollars, except per share data

(Unaudited)

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements

4

Table of Contents

BECTON, DICKINSON AND COMPANY

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

Thousands of dollars

(Unaudited)

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements

5

Table of Contents

BECTON, DICKINSON AND COMPANY

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Dollar and share amounts in thousands, except per share data

March 31, 2012

Note 1 – Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the instructions to Form 10-Q and, in the opinion of the management of the Company, include all adjustments which are of a normal recurring nature, necessary for a fair presentation of the financial position and the results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented. However, the financial statements do not include all information and accompanying notes required for a presentation in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. These condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included or incorporated by reference in the Company’s 2011 Annual Report on Form 10-K. The results of operations for the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations to be expected for the full year.

Note 2 – Accounting Changes

Change in Accounting Principles

In May 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued amendments to clarify guidance relating to fair value measurements. The amendments also expand the disclosure requirements for entities’ fair value measurements, particularly those relating to measurements based upon significant unobservable inputs. The Company adopted the amended fair value measurement guidance, which did not have an impact on the consolidated financial statements, on January 1, 2012.

Change in Accounting Estimates

During the second quarter of fiscal year 2012, the Company changed the useful lives of certain machinery and equipment assets used in production processes from 10 years to 13 years, to better reflect the estimated period during which these assets will remain in service. This change resulted from continuous improvement project evaluations, which included a review of assumptions related to the expected utilization of machinery and equipment assets. The Company accounted for the change in useful lives as a change in estimate prospectively effective January 1, 2012 and this change in estimate is expected to result in an increase in operating income of approximately $19,900 for fiscal year 2012.

6

Table of Contents

Note 3 – Comprehensive Income

Comprehensive income was comprised of the following:

The gain recorded as foreign currency translation adjustments for the three months ended March 31, 2012 is mainly attributable to the strengthening of the Euro against the U.S. dollar during this period. The gain recorded as foreign currency translation adjustments for the six months ended March 31, 2012 is mainly attributable to the strengthening of currencies in Latin America and Asia Pacific against the U.S. dollar during this period. The gain recorded as benefit plan adjustments for the six months ended March 31, 2012 primarily relates to the November 30, 2011 remeasurement of the Company’s U.S. pension plan. Additional disclosures regarding the benefit plan remeasurement are included in Note 8.

Note 4 – Earnings per Share

The weighted average common shares used in the computations of basic and diluted earnings per share (shares in thousands) were as follows:

Note 5 – Contingencies

Given the uncertain nature of litigation generally, the Company is not able in all cases to estimate the amount or range of loss that could result from an unfavorable outcome of the litigation to which the Company is a party. In accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, the Company establishes accruals to the extent probable future losses are

7

Table of Contents

estimable (in the case of environmental matters, without considering possible third-party recoveries). In view of the uncertainties discussed below, the Company could incur charges in excess of any currently established accruals and, to the extent available, excess liability insurance. In the opinion of management, any such future charges, individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and consolidated cash flows.

The Company is named as a defendant in the following purported class action suits brought on behalf of distributors and other entities that purchase the Company’s products (the “Distributor Plaintiffs”), alleging that the Company violated federal antitrust laws, resulting in the charging of higher prices for the Company’s products to the plaintiffs and other purported class members.

These actions have been consolidated under the caption “In re Hypodermic Products Antitrust Litigation.”

8

Table of Contents

The Company is also named as a defendant in the following purported class action suits brought on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s products, such as hospitals (the “Hospital Plaintiffs”), alleging that the Company violated federal and state antitrust laws, resulting in the charging of higher prices for the Company’s products to the plaintiffs and other purported class members.

The plaintiffs in each of the above antitrust class action lawsuits seek monetary damages. All of the antitrust class action lawsuits have been consolidated for pre-trial purposes in a Multi-District Litigation in Federal court in New Jersey.

On April 27, 2009, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with the Distributor Plaintiffs in these actions. The settlement agreement provided for, among other things, the payment by the Company of $45,000 in exchange for a release by all potential class members of the direct purchaser claims under federal antitrust laws related to the products and acts enumerated in the complaint, and a dismissal of the case with prejudice, insofar as it relates to direct purchaser claims. The release would not cover potential class members that affirmatively opt out of the settlement. On September 30, 2010, the court issued an order denying a motion to approve the settlement agreement, ruling that the Hospital Plaintiffs, and not the Distributor Plaintiffs, are the direct purchasers entitled to pursue damages under the federal antitrust laws for certain sales of BD products. The settlement agreement currently remains in effect, subject to certain termination provisions, and the federal court of appeals has granted the Distributor Plaintiffs’ request to appeal the trial court’s order on an interlocutory basis. The Company currently cannot estimate the range of reasonably possible losses with respect to these class action matters beyond the $45,000 already accrued and changes to the amount already recognized may be required in the future as additional information becomes available.

In June 2007, Retractable Technologies, Inc. (“RTI”) filed a complaint against the Company under the caption Retractable Technologies, Inc. vs. Becton Dickinson and Company (Civil Action No. 2:07-cv-250, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas). RTI alleges that the BD Integra^TM syringes infringe patents licensed exclusively to RTI. In its complaint, RTI also alleges that the Company engaged in false advertising with respect to certain of the Company’s safety-engineered products in violation of the Lanham Act; acted to exclude RTI from various product markets and to maintain its market share through, among other things, exclusionary contracts in violation of state and federal antitrust laws; and engaged in unfair competition. In January 2008, the court severed the patent and non-patent claims into separate cases, and stayed the non-patent

9

Table of Contents

claims during the pendency of the patent claims at the trial court level. RTI seeks money damages and injunctive relief. On April 1, 2008, RTI filed a complaint against BD under the caption Retractable Technologies, Inc. and Thomas J. Shaw v. Becton Dickinson and Company (Civil Action No.2:08-cv-141, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas). RTI alleges that the BD Integra^TM syringes infringe another patent licensed exclusively to RTI. RTI seeks money damages and injunctive relief. On August 29, 2008, the court ordered the consolidation of the patent cases. On November 9, 2009, at a trial of these consolidated cases, the jury rendered a verdict in favor of RTI on all but one of its infringement claims, but did not find any willful infringement, and awarded RTI $5,000 in damages. On May 19, 2010, the court granted RTI’s motion for a permanent injunction against the continued sale by the Company of its BD Integra^TM products in their current form, but stayed the injunction for the duration of the Company’s appeal. At the same time, the court lifted a stay of RTI’s non-patent claims. On July 8, 2011, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the District Court judgment that the Company’s 3ml BD Integra™ products infringed the asserted RTI patents and affirmed the District Court judgment of infringement against the Company’s discontinued 1ml BD Integra™ products. On October 31, 2011, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals denied RTI’s request for an en banc rehearing. RTI has filed a petition for review with the U.S. Supreme Court. The trial on RTI’s antitrust and false advertising claims has been postponed pending resolution of RTI’s appeal of the patent ruling.

With respect to RTI’s antitrust and false advertising claims, BD cannot estimate the possible loss or range of possible loss as there are significant legal and factual issues to be resolved. These include discovery regarding RTI’s alleged damages and liability theories, which has not been completed. Each party has filed motions seeking to exclude portions of the other party’s expert testimony and to preclude the other party from introducing certain other evidence at trial. RTI’s appeal of the appellate court’s patent ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court adds further uncertainty to the possible future outcomes of RTI’s antitrust and false advertising claims. In the event that RTI ultimately succeeds at trial and subsequent appeals on its antitrust and false advertising claims, any potential loss could be material as RTI is seeking to recover substantial damages including disgorgement of profits and damages under the federal antitrust laws, which are trebled. BD believes RTI’s allegations are without merit.

On October 19, 2009, Gen-Probe Incorporated (“Gen-Probe”) filed a patent infringement action against BD in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The complaint alleges that the BD Viper™ and BD Viper™ XTR™ systems and BD ProbeTec™ specimen collection products infringe certain U.S. patents of Gen-Probe. On March 23, 2010, Gen-Probe filed a complaint, also in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, alleging that the BD Max^TM instrument infringes Gen-Probe patents. The patents alleged to be infringed are a subset of the Gen-Probe patents asserted against the Company in the October 2009 suit. On June 8, 2010, the court consolidated these cases. Gen-Probe is seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief. The Company currently cannot estimate the range of reasonably possible losses for this matter as the proceedings are in relatively early stages and there are significant issues to be resolved, as, among other things, fact discovery is ongoing, expert discovery, including depositions, has not commenced, expert reports (including damage reports) have not been prepared, and summary judgment motions may still be filed.

The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses to each of the above-mentioned suits pending against the Company and is engaged in a vigorous defense of each of these matters.

10

Table of Contents

The Company is also involved both as a plaintiff and a defendant in other legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business.

The Company is a party to a number of Federal proceedings in the United States brought under the Comprehensive Environment Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also known as “Superfund,” and similar state laws. The affected sites are in varying stages of development. In some instances, the remedy has been completed, while in others, environmental studies are commencing. For all sites, there are other potentially responsible parties that may be jointly or severally liable to pay all cleanup costs.

Note 6 – Segment Data

The Company’s organizational structure is based upon its three principal business segments: BD Medical (“Medical”), BD Diagnostics (“Diagnostics”) and BD Biosciences (“Biosciences”). These segments are strategic businesses that are managed separately because each one develops, manufactures and markets distinct products and services. The Company evaluates performance of its business segments and allocates resources to them primarily based upon operating income. Segment operating income represents revenues reduced by product costs and operating expenses. From time to time, the Company hedges against certain forecasted sales of U.S.-produced products sold outside the United States. Gains and losses associated with these foreign currency translation hedges are reported in segment revenues based upon their proportionate share of these international sales of U.S.-produced products. Financial information for the Company’s segments was as follows:

11

Table of Contents

Revenues by geographic areas were as follows:

12

Table of Contents

Note 7 – Share-Based Compensation

The Company grants share-based awards under the 2004 Employee and Director Equity-Based Compensation Plan, which provides long-term incentive compensation to employees and directors. The Company believes that such awards align the interests of its employees and directors with those of its shareholders.

The fair value of share-based payments is recognized as compensation expense in net income. For the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011, compensation expense charged to income was $19,271 and $19,639, respectively. For the six months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011, compensation expense was $53,626 and $53,720, respectively. Share-based compensation attributable to discontinued operations was not material.

The amount of unrecognized compensation expense for all non-vested share-based awards as of March 31, 2012 was approximately $132,169, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average remaining life of approximately 2.3 years.

The fair values of stock appreciation rights granted during the annual share-based grants in November of 2011 and 2010, respectively, were estimated on the date of grant using a lattice-based binomial valuation model based on the following assumptions:

Note 8 – Benefit Plans

The Company has defined benefit pension plans covering substantially all of its employees in the United States and certain foreign locations. The Company also provides certain postretirement healthcare and life insurance benefits to qualifying domestic retirees. Other postretirement benefit plans in foreign countries are not material. The measurement date used for the Company’s employee benefit plans is September 30.

On November 30, 2011, the Company remeasured its U.S. defined pension plan as a result of amendments to this plan that were approved and communicated to affected employees during the first quarter of fiscal year 2012. Effective January 1, 2013, all plan participants’ benefits in the defined benefit traditional pension plan will be converted to a defined benefit cash balance pension plan. The November 30, 2011 remeasurement was based upon a discount rate of 5.1%, compared with the discount rate of 4.9% used on the September 30, 2011 measurement date. The increase in the discount rate will reduce total fiscal year 2012 net pension cost by $5,300. An increase in plan assets held as of November 30, 2011 compared with assets held as of September 30, 2011 also will reduce total fiscal year 2012 net pension cost by $6,200. The total reduction in fiscal year 2012 net pension cost resulting from the remeasurement will be $40,200.

13

Table of Contents

Net pension and postretirement cost included the following components for the three months ended March 31:

Net pension and postretirement cost included the following components for the six months ended March 31:

Postemployment benefit costs for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 were $8,995 and $6,793, respectively. For the six months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011, postemployment benefit costs were $17,990 and $13,587, respectively.

Note 9 – Acquisitions

On February 9, 2012, the Company acquired a 100% interest in KIESTRA Lab Automation BV (“KIESTRA”), a Netherlands-based company that designs, develops, manufactures, markets and sells innovative lab automation solutions for the microbiology lab. The fair value of consideration transferred was $59,457 which consisted of $50,891 in cash, net of $5,176 in cash acquired, as well as $8,566 in contingent consideration that will be paid based upon the achievement of certain development milestones and performance targets. The fair value of the contingent consideration was estimated using a probability-weighted discounted cash flow model that was based upon the probabilities assigned to the contingent events. This acquisition is intended to complement the Company’s existing portfolio of microbiology platforms, reagents and supplies and allow the Company to offer innovative full lab automation solutions to hospitals and laboratories worldwide.

14

Table of Contents

The acquisition was accounted for under the acquisition method of accounting for business combinations and KIESTRA’s results of operations were included in the Diagnostic segment’s results from the acquisition date. Pro forma information is not provided as the acquisition did not have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated results. The following table summarizes the estimated fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed at the acquisition date. These fair values are based upon the information available as of March 31, 2012 and may be adjusted should further information regarding events or circumstances existing at the acquisition date become available.

The core and developed technology asset of $12,581 represents KIESTRA’s developed lab automation solutions. The technology’s fair value was determined based on the present value of projected cash flows utilizing an income approach which reflected a risk-adjusted discount rate of 14.5%. The technology will be amortized over an expected useful life of 10 years, the period over which the technology is expected to generate substantial cash flows.

The acquired in-process research and development asset of $7,416 represents development projects of the existing lab automation technology for use in diagnostic applications. The probability of success associated with the projects, based upon the applicable technological and commercial risk, was assumed to be 100%. The projects’ fair value was determined based on the present value of projected cash flows utilizing an income approach and a risk-adjusted discount rate of 15.5%.

The $33,520 of goodwill was allocated to the Diagnostics segment. Goodwill typically results through expected synergies from combining operations of an acquiree and an acquirer as well as from intangible assets that do not qualify for separate recognition. The goodwill recognized as a result of this acquisition includes, among other things, the value of integrating the Company’s broad clinical microbiology portfolio through automation for maximum workflow efficiency. Synergies are expected to result from the alignment of KIESTRA’s automated instrumentation technologies with the Company’s existing portfolio of microbiology platforms, reagents and

15

Table of Contents

supplies. Additionally, synergies are expected to result from expanding the market for full lab automation solutions into new geographic regions through the Company’s broader global sales organization and customer relationships. No portion of this goodwill will be deductible for tax purposes. The Company recognized $2,500 of acquisition-related costs that were expensed in the current year-to-date period and reported in the Consolidated Statements of Income as Selling and administrative.

Note 10 – Divestitures

In the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2010, the Company sold the Ophthalmic Systems unit and the surgical blades, critical care and extended dwell catheter product platforms for $270,000. The Company recognized a pre-tax gain on sale from all of these divestitures of $146,478.

The results of operations associated with the Ophthalmic Systems unit, surgical blade platform and critical care platform are reported as discontinued operations for all periods presented in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Income and Cash Flows and related disclosures. The Company agreed to perform contract manufacturing for a defined period after the sale of the extended dwell catheter product platform. Due to this significant continuing involvement in operations, the associated results of operations were reported within continuing operations and $18,197 of the gain on sale was recognized in Other income (expense).

Results of discontinued operations were as follows:

16

Table of Contents

Note 11 – Intangible Assets

Intangible assets consisted of: