XML 26 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.5.0.2

Commitments and Contingencies | 6 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jul. 02, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies |
Commitments and Contingencies | 10. Commitments and Contingencies Patent Litigation On January 21, 2014, Cresta Technology Corporation (“Cresta Technology”), a Delaware corporation, filed a lawsuit against the Company, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., LG Electronics Inc. and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. in the United States District Court in the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of three United States Patents (the “Cresta Patents”). The Delaware District Court action has been stayed. On January 28, 2014, Cresta Technology also filed a complaint with the United States International Trade Commission (“ITC”) alleging infringement of the same patents. On September 29, 2015, the ITC issued its Final Determination, finding that all the patent claims asserted against the Company’s products were either invalid or not infringed and that Cresta Technology failed to establish the ITC’s domestic industry requirement. The ITC found no violation by the Company and terminated the investigation. On November 30, 2015, Cresta Technology filed an appeal of the ITC decision to the Federal Circuit. On March 8, 2016, pursuant to a stipulated dismissal, the Federal Circuit dismissed Cresta Technology’s appeal in its entirety. In a parallel process, the Company challenged the validity of the claims of the Cresta Patents asserted in the ITC investigation through a series of Inter-Partes Review (IPR) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). On October 21, 2015, the USPTO issued final written decisions on a first set of reviewed claims finding all of the reviewed claims invalid. On December 18, 2015, Cresta Technology appealed those adverse decisions to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit as to this first USPTO determination. Those appeals are now fully briefed and awaiting oral argument. The USPTO has instituted a second set of IPR proceedings against a second set of the remaining claims. On June 1, 2016, the PTAB held a hearing in that second set of IPRs. The parties are now awaiting a final written decision from the PTAB. On March 18, 2016, Cresta Technology filed for chapter 7 bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California. On July 16, 2014, the Company filed a lawsuit against Cresta Technology in the United States District Court in the Northern District of California alleging infringement of six United States Patents. The Company is seeking a permanent injunction and an award of damages and attorney fees. As a result of the chapter 7 bankruptcy filing by Cresta Technology, these proceedings are currently stayed. On May 13, 2016, the Bankruptcy Court approved an agreement for DBD Credit Funding LLC (“DBD”) to buy Cresta Technology’s entire IP portfolio and certain related litigation. Following that sale, DBD (through an apparent assignee, CF Crespe LLC) has substituted in the Delaware District Court action, the appeal proceedings at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for the first set of IPR proceedings and the USPTO PTAB proceedings for the second set of IPRs replacing Cresta Technology. As is customary in the semiconductor industry, the Company provides indemnification protection to its customers for intellectual property claims related to the Company’s products. The Company has not accrued any material liability on its Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet related to such indemnification obligations in connection with the Cresta Technology litigation. The Company intends to continue to vigorously defend against Cresta Technology’s allegations and to continue to pursue its claims against Cresta and their patents. At this time, the Company cannot predict the outcome of these matters or the resulting financial impact to it, if any. Other The Company is involved in various other legal proceedings that have arisen in the normal course of business. While the ultimate results of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company does not expect them to have a material adverse effect on its Consolidated Financial Statements.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 825 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 460 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 8 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=51674963&loc=d3e12565-110249 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=25496072&loc=d3e14435-108349 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 210 -SubTopic 10 -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.25) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 2 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6394976&loc=d3e25287-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration