XML 27 R13.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.23.2

Legal Proceedings | 6 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2023
Legal Proceedings [Abstract] |
Legal Proceedings | Legal Proceedings 2019 Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit In January 2019, three derivative lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California which were later consolidated, purportedly on our behalf, naming as defendants the then current members of our Board of Directors along with certain of our executive officers. The complaints assert various state law causes of action, including for breaches of fiduciary duty, insider trading, and unjust enrichment. The complaints seek unspecified monetary damages on our behalf, which is named solely as a nominal defendant against whom no recovery is sought, as well as disgorgement and the costs and expenses associated with the litigation, including attorneys’ fees. The consolidated action is currently stayed. Defendants have not yet responded to the complaints. On April 12, 2019, a derivative lawsuit was also filed in California Superior Court for Santa Clara County, purportedly on our behalf, naming as defendants the members of our Board of Directors along with certain of our executive officers. The allegations in the complaint are similar to those in the derivative suits described above. The matter is currently stayed. Defendants have not yet responded to the complaint. We believe these claims are without merit. We are currently unable to predict the outcome of these lawsuits and therefore cannot determine the likelihood of loss nor estimate a range of possible loss. Antitrust Class Actions On June 5, 2020, a dental practice named Simon and Simon, PC doing business as City Smiles brought an antitrust action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of itself and a putative class of similarly situated practices seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief relating to our alleged market activities in alleged clear aligner and intraoral scanner markets. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint and added VIP Dental Spas as a plaintiff on August 14, 2020. A jury trial is scheduled to begin in this matter on June 29, 2024. We believe the plaintiffs’ claims are without merit and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves. On May 3, 2021, an individual named Misty Snow brought an antitrust action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of herself and a putative class of similarly situated individuals seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief relating to our alleged market activities in alleged clear aligner and intraoral scanner markets based on Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on July 30, 2021 adding new plaintiffs and various state law claims. Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint on October 21, 2021. On March 2, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint. On October 3, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended complaint. On May 18, 2023, the court granted plaintiffs leave to file a fifth amended complaint. The amended complaints added allegations based on Section 1 of the Sherman Act. A jury trial is scheduled to begin in this matter on June 29, 2024 for issues related to Section 2 allegations. A jury trial is scheduled to begin in this matter on January 21, 2025 for issues related to Section 1 allegations. We believe the plaintiffs’ claims are without merit and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves. We are currently unable to predict the outcome of these lawsuits and therefore we cannot determine the likelihood of loss, if any, nor estimate a range of possible loss. SDC Dispute On August 27, 2020, we initiated a confidential arbitration proceeding against SmileDirectClub LLC (“SDC”) before the American Arbitration Association in San Jose, California. This arbitration relates to the Strategic Supply Agreement (“Supply Agreement”) entered into between the parties in 2016. The complaint alleges that SDC breached the Supply Agreement’s terms, causing damages to us in an amount to be determined. On January 19, 2021, SDC filed a counterclaim alleging that we breached the Supply Agreement. On May 3, 2022, SDC filed an additional counterclaim alleging that we breached the Supply Agreement. We deny SDC's allegations in the counterclaims and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves against them. The arbitration hearing on our claims and SDC’s first counterclaim was held on July 18-27, 2022 in Chicago, Illinois. On October 27, 2022, the arbitrator issued an interim award on our claims and SDC’s first counterclaim finding that SDC breached the Supply Agreement, we did not breach the Supply Agreement, and SDC caused harm to us. Based on these findings, the arbitrator awarded us an interim award. On December 2, 2022, SDC filed a motion to re-open the arbitrator’s interim award in Align’s favor. On March 3, 2023, the arbitrator denied SDC’s motion to re-open. On March 6, 2023, Align filed a petition to confirm the arbitrator’s interim award in the Superior Court for Santa Clara County. The arbitration hearing on SDC’s second counterclaim was held on February 21-23, 2023 in Chicago, Illinois. On May 18, 2023, the arbitrator issued a final award on SDC’s second counterclaim, finding that Align did not breach the Supply Agreement. The final award subsumed the interim award on our claims and SDC’s first counterclaim and concluded the Supply Agreement arbitration proceedings. On May 30, 2023, Align filed a petition to confirm the final award in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County. Confirmation of the final award may be material to our results in the quarter reported. On June 16, 2023, SDC filed a petition to vacate the final award before the same court. On August 3, 2023, the Superior Court held arguments on Align's petition to confirm and SDC’s petition to vacate the final award in Align’s favor. Depending on how the Superior Court rules on those petitions, we anticipate recognizing the amount ultimately realizable following confirmation of the final award. In addition to the above, in the ordinary course of our operations, we are involved in a variety of claims, suits, investigations, and proceedings, including actions with respect to intellectual property claims, patent infringement claims, government investigations, labor and employment claims, breach of contract claims, tax, and other matters. Regardless of the outcome, these proceedings can have an adverse impact on us because of defense costs, diversion of management resources, and other factors. Although the results of complex legal proceedings are difficult to predict and our view of these matters may change in the future as litigation and events related thereto unfold; we currently do not believe that these matters, individually or in the aggregate, will materially affect our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

X
- Definition Legal Proceedings [Abstract] + References No definition available. + Details
Name: | algn_LegalProceedingsAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | algn_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for legal proceedings, legal contingencies, litigation, regulatory and environmental matters and other contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//450/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_LegalMattersAndContingenciesTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration