Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Commitments and Contingencies	Jun. 29, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies	10. Commitments and Contingencies Patent Litigation On May 13, 2012, MaxLinear, Inc., a Delaware corporation, filed a lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court in the Southern District of California, San Diego Division, seeking a declaratory judgment that MaxLinear products do not infringe 19 of the Company’s patents and that such patents are invalid. The Company has counterclaimed accusing MaxLinear of infringing 9 of the Company’s patents, including 6 of the named 19 patents and 3 additional patents. The Company has asked the Court for a permanent injunction stopping the sale of all allegedly infringing MaxLinear products. On May 3, 2013, the Court dismissed MaxLinear’s claims seeking a declaratory judgment that 13 of the patents are invalid and not infringed by MaxLinear. MaxLinear has alleged that it does not infringe any of the Company’s 9 patents currently at issue in this lawsuit and that all 9 of the patents are invalid. On July 17, 2012, the Company filed a lawsuit against MaxLinear in the United States District Court in the Southern District of California, San Diego Division, alleging infringement of one additional patent. The Company’s complaint seeks a permanent injunction stopping the sale of all allegedly infringing MaxLinear products. On July 30, 2012, the Company filed a complaint in United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, seeking a declaratory judgment that 3 of MaxLinear’s patents are invalid and that the Company’s products do not infringe such patents. The Texas Court determined that the dispute concerning MaxLinear’s patents shall instead proceed in the California Court in the second lawsuit referenced above. In this second lawsuit in the California Court, MaxLinear has counterclaimed alleging infringement of those 3 MaxLinear patents by a variety of the Company’s products, and has asked the Court for a permanent injunction stopping the sale of all allegedly infringing Company products. MaxLinear is also seeking a declaratory judgment that the Company’s patent asserted in this second lawsuit is not infringed and is invalid. On May 16, 2013, MaxLinear filed a lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court in the Southern District of California, San Diego Division, alleging infringement of 5 MaxLinear patents by a variety of the Company’s products, and has asked the Court for a permanent injunction stopping the sale of all allegedly infringing Company products. 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.

The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef

-Publisher FASB

-Name FASB Interpretation (FIN)

-Number 14

-Paragraph 3

-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: 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 3: 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 4: 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=6398077&loc=d3e12565-110249

Reference 5: 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=6952336&loc=d3e14435-108349

Reference 6: 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

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef

-Publisher FASB

-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)

-Number 5

-Paragraph 9, 10, 11, 12

-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

+ Details