Form 10-Q

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 is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” 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.

On January 22, 2007, the registrant had 39,667,594 shares of Class A common stock, par value $0.001 per share, and 69,256,207 shares of Class B common stock, par value $0.001 per share, outstanding.

Dolby Laboratories develops and delivers innovative products and technologies that make the entertainment experience more realistic and immersive. Since Ray Dolby founded Dolby Laboratories in 1965, we have been at the forefront of delivering sound technologies that assist the entertainment creation process and enhance the entertainment experience. Today, Dolby technologies are standard in a wide range of entertainment platforms. For example, Dolby products are widely used in movie theatres around the world and our technologies are used in virtually all DVD players and DVD playback software for personal computers. In addition, Dolby Digital is mandated in all North American digital televisions and digital set-top boxes that include Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC) television tuners and is widely included in high-definition set-top boxes used for European high-definition television broadcasts.

The accompanying interim condensed consolidated balance sheet as of December 29, 2006, the condensed consolidated statements of operations for the fiscal quarters ended December 30, 2005 and December 29, 2006 and the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows for the fiscal quarters ended December 30, 2005 and December 29, 2006 are unaudited. These interim consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP). In our opinion, the interim consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended September 29, 2006 and include all adjustments necessary for fair presentation. The results for the fiscal quarter ended December 29, 2006 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for any subsequent quarterly or annual financial period, including the fiscal year ending September 28, 2007. The fiscal quarters ended December 29, 2006 and December 30, 2005 both consisted of 13 weeks. Our 2007 fiscal year consists of 52 weeks and ends on September 28, 2007. Our 2006 fiscal year consisted of 52 weeks and ended on September 29, 2006.

The accompanying interim financial statements are prepared in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission rules and regulations, which allow certain information and footnote disclosures that are normally included in annual financial statements to be condensed or omitted. As a result, the accompanying interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements for the year ended September 29, 2006 that are included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported and disclosed in our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Significant items subject to such estimates and assumptions include valuation allowances for receivables, carrying values of inventories, goodwill, intangible assets, stock-based compensation and deferred income tax assets. Actual results could differ from our estimates.

Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing net income by the weighted-average number of shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per share is computed by dividing net income by the sum of the weighted-average number of shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock outstanding and the potential number of shares of dilutive Class A common stock and Class B common stock equivalents outstanding during the period. The dilutive shares are comprised entirely of options to purchase shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock.

The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share:

A total of 1,765,475 and 948,353 options were excluded from the calculation of common stock equivalents for the first quarter of fiscal 2006 and the first quarter of fiscal 2007, respectively, because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive.

We have investments in money market funds, United States government agency securities, auction rate certificates and municipal debt securities. We account for these instruments under the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities.” Investments that have original maturities of 90 days or less from the date of purchase are classified as cash equivalents; investments that have original maturities between 91 days and one year from the date of purchase are classified as short-term investments; and investments that have maturities of more than one year from the date of purchase are classified as long-term investments. Auction rate certificates which have original maturities greater than one year are classified as short-term investments based on our ability and intent to sell these instruments within one year from the date of purchase. All of our investments are classified as available-for-sale and are recorded at fair market value, except for an investment in equity securities that is accounted for under the cost method, on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet. Unrealized gains or losses from these investments are reported as a component of other comprehensive income and realized gains or losses are reported as a component of other income, net.

We account for stock-based compensation under the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R), “Share-Based Payment” (SFAS 123R). SFAS 123R requires measurement of all employee stock-based awards using a fair-value method and recording of related compensation expense in the consolidated financial statements over the requisite service period. Further, as required under SFAS 123R, we estimate forfeitures for share based awards that are not expected to vest. In the first quarter of fiscal 2007, we recorded stock-based compensation expense of $4.9 million under the fair-value provisions of SFAS 123R, compared to $5.1 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2006. See Note 4 “Stockholders’ Equity and Stock-Based Compensation” for further discussion.

Comprehensive income includes net income, unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities and foreign currency translation adjustments, which are reflected as a component of stockholders’ equity. The components of comprehensive income, net of tax, were as follows:

Licensing revenue is recognized gross of withholding taxes that are remitted by our licensees directly to their local tax authorities. Withholding taxes were $2.2 million and $3.1 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2006 and 2007, respectively. Sales tax is accounted for on a net basis and is excluded from revenues.

Cash, cash equivalents, and investments as of December 29, 2006 consisted of the following:

Our investment portfolio which is recorded as cash equivalents, short-term investments, and long-term investments as of December 29, 2006 is as follows:

The equity investment represents equity securities that we have accounted for under the cost method and classified as long-term investments based on our ability and intent to hold the investment for more than one year.

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out) or market, adjusted for excess and obsolete items, and consist of the following:

Amortization expense associated with our intangible assets was $0.5 million in both the first quarter of fiscal 2006 and 2007, and is included in cost of licensing, cost of product sales, and selling, general and administrative expenses in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations. The increase in goodwill from September 29, 2006 to December 29, 2006 was due to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates.

Our chief operating decision maker is our Chief Executive Officer (CEO). While the CEO evaluates results in a number of different ways, the primary basis for which the allocation of resources and financial results are assessed is by examining our business in two operating segments: the technology licensing segment and the products and services segment. The technology licensing segment licenses our technologies, trademarks and know-how to manufacturers of consumer electronics products, software developers and developers of professional products, and administers joint licensing programs. The products and services segment provides professional products to movie theatres and to the recording, broadcast, cable and video post-production industries. Additionally, this segment provides services to broadcast, film production and distribution companies.

Accounting policies for each of the operating segments are the same as those used on a consolidated basis. Our reportable segment information for the fiscal quarters ended December 30, 2005 and December 29, 2006 is as follows:

We do not track capital expenditures or assets by reportable segment. Consequently, it is not practical to show this information.

Revenue by geographic region was determined based on the location of our licensees for licensing revenue, the location of our direct customers or distributors for product sales, and the location where services were performed for service revenue, was as follows:

The concentration of our revenue from individual countries or geographic regions was as follows:

Revenue from one of our licensing segment’s customers represented $10.7 million, or 10%, of total revenue for the first quarter of fiscal 2007. No single customer accounted for 10% or more of total revenue in the first quarter of fiscal 2006.

Long-lived tangible assets, net of accumulated depreciation, by geographic region were as follows:

Long-lived tangible assets, which consist of property, plant and equipment net of accumulated depreciation, held in the United Kingdom were $21.0 million and $21.9 million at September 29, 2006 and December 29, 2006, respectively.

We utilize stock-based awards as a form of compensation for employees, officers, directors and non-employee consultants. Stock-based compensation expense was $5.1 million and $4.9 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2006 and 2007, respectively.

We recognized $3.8 million and $11.5 million in tax benefits related to stock-based compensation arrangements in the first quarter of fiscal 2006 and 2007, respectively.

We have issued stock-based awards in the form of stock options, stock appreciation rights, shares issued under our employee stock purchase plan and stock grants. Below is a summary of the different types of stock-based awards issued under our stock plans:

Stock Options. We have granted stock options to our employees, officers and directors under our 2005 Stock Plan and our 2000 Stock Incentive Plan. Stock options are generally granted at fair market value on the date of grant. Options granted to employees and officers generally vest over 4 years, with equal annual cliff-vesting and expire on the earlier of 10 years or 3 months after termination of service. Options granted to outside directors generally vest over 3 years. All options granted vest over the requisite service period and are settled through the issuance of shares of Dolby Laboratories common stock. Our 2005 Stock Plan also allows us to grant stock awards which vest based on the satisfaction of specific performance criteria, though no such awards have been granted as of December 29, 2006. Upon the exercise of stock options, we issue new shares of Class B common stock under the 2000 Stock Incentive Plan and new shares of Class A common stock under the 2005 Stock Plan. We utilize a Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the fair value of employee stock options at the date of grant.

The fair value of our stock-based awards was estimated using the following weighted-average assumptions:

To determine the expected term of our stock options granted in the first quarter of fiscal 2007, we utilized the historical exercise patterns of our employees. To determine the risk-free interest rate we used an average interest rate based on U.S. Treasury instruments having terms consistent with the expected term of our awards. To determine the expected stock price volatility we examined historical volatilities for our common stock and those of our peers. In addition, we considered the implied volatilities of our publicly-traded options with terms greater than six months. We then used a weighted-average of historical and implied volatility to determine our expected stock price volatility.

The following table summarizes the weighted-average fair value of stock options granted, the total intrinsic value of stock options exercised and the fair value of options vested during the first quarter of fiscal 2007:

Included in stock-based compensation expense was $4.3 million for the first quarter of fiscal 2006 and $4.6 million for the first quarter of fiscal 2007 related to employee stock options under the provisions of SFAS 123R, net of estimated forfeitures. Total unrecorded stock-based compensation cost at December 29, 2006 associated with employee stock options was $43.6 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 2.2 years.

Non-Employee Stock Options. We have also granted stock options to employees whose status subsequently changed to non-employee consultants subsequent to the dates of grant. We recognized $0.7 million and $0.1 million of stock-based compensation expense related to stock options held by non-employee consultants in the first quarter of fiscal 2006 and 2007, respectively. In accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force Issue 96-18, “Accounting for

Equity Instruments That Are Issued to Other Than Employees for Acquiring or in Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services” (EITF 96-18), compensation cost for options issued to non-employee consultants is determined based on the fair value at the end of each reporting period. We utilize a Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the fair value at the end of each reporting period, and we recognize compensation over the service period.

The following table summarizes information about stock options issued to officers, directors, employees and non-employee consultants under our 2000 Stock Incentive Plan and 2005 Stock Plan:

Aggregate intrinsic value is based on the closing price of our common stock on December 29, 2006 of $31.02 and excludes the impact of options that were not in-the-money.

Stock Appreciation Rights. We have granted stock appreciation rights to certain of our foreign employees. These awards are settled in cash rather than stock, and are classified as liability awards under SFAS 123R. Stock-based compensation expense related to stock appreciation rights was $0.1 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2006 and $0.3 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2007.

Employee Stock Purchase Plan. We have an employee stock purchase plan (ESPP). During the first quarter of fiscal 2007, we issued 17,504 shares of Class A common stock under the ESPP. During the first quarter of fiscal 2007, the terms of our ESPP were considered non-compensatory under SFAS 123R and, therefore, no stock-based compensation expense associated with our ESPP was recognized. During the first quarter of fiscal 2006, we recorded $0.1 million in stock-based compensation for our ESPP as our plan was compensatory under SFAS 123R for the purchase period ending in November 2005.

In May 2001, we filed a lawsuit against Lucent Technologies, Inc. and Lucent Technologies Guardian I, LLC together “Lucent,” contending that Lucent was wrongly asserting that our licensees using Dolby AC-3 audio compression technology required licenses to the patents at issue and seeking a declaration that the patents at issue are not infringed and/or are invalid. Lucent filed a counterclaim alleging that we have infringed the patents at issue. These patents generally involve a process and means for digitally encoding and decoding audio signals. On April 22, 2005, the United District Court for the Northern District of California granted our motions for summary judgment, finding that we have not infringed, induced others to infringe, or contributed to the infringement of the patents at issue. In granting summary judgment of non-infringement, the court found that Lucent had not presented evidence from which a reasonable fact-finder could find that Dolby AC-3 technology infringes the patents at issue. In light of the Court’s finding of non-infringement, it dismissed our claims that the Lucent patents are invalid. Lucent appealed the Court’s April 22, 2005 ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which affirmed the decision of the United States District Court granting summary judgment. Lucent chose not to file a petition for a panel rehearing en banc with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and did not seek a writ of certiorari before the United States Supreme Court. Accordingly the judgment is now final.

In March 1997, an unrelated third party filed a lawsuit against us alleging breach of a written agreement. In April 2002, we settled the dispute and agreed to pay a total of $30.0 million, without interest, in ten equal annual installments of $3.0 million per year beginning in June 2002. We recorded this liability at its present value of $24.2 million on the consolidated balance sheet using a discount rate of 5.125%, which approximates our incremental cost of borrowing rate. Interest related to this liability is recorded quarterly and is included in other income, net on the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations. Other than such payments, neither party has any material obligations as a result of the settlement. As of December 29, 2006, we had $15.0 million remaining to be paid under this settlement.

In addition, we are involved in various legal proceedings from time to time arising from the normal course of business activities, including claims of alleged infringement of intellectual property rights, commercial, employment and other matters. In our opinion, resolution of these proceedings is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our operating results or financial condition. However, it is possible that an unfavorable resolution of one or more such proceedings could materially affect our future operating results or financial condition in a particular period.

In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157, Fair Value Measurements (SFAS 157). The purpose of SFAS 157 is to define fair value, establish a framework for measuring fair value and enhance disclosures about fair value measurements. The measurement and disclosure requirements are effective for periods beginning after November 15, 2007. We do not expect the adoption of SFAS 157 will have a material effect on our financial position or results of operations.

In September 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108, Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements (SAB 108). SAB 108 provides interpretive guidance on how to evaluate the materiality of an uncorrected misstatement in the current year financial statements using both an income statement approach (the rollover approach) and a balance sheet approach (the iron curtain approach). The rollover approach quantifies a misstatement based on the amount of the error originating in the current year income statement while the iron curtain approach quantifies a misstatement based on the effects of correcting the cumulative misstatement existing in the balance sheet at the end of the current year. SAB 108 is effective for periods beginning after November 15, 2006. We do not expect the adoption of SAB 108 to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

In June 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48 (FIN 48), Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements in accordance with FASB Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes. This Interpretation defines the minimum recognition threshold a tax position is required to meet before being recognized in the financial statements. FIN 48 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. We are currently evaluating the effect that the adoption of FIN 48 will have on our financial position and results of operations.

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our condensed consolidated financial statements and the related notes that appear elsewhere in this Form 10-Q. These discussions contain forward-looking statements reflecting our current expectations that involve risks and uncertainties. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continue” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: demand for and future revenues from the sale of consumer electronics products incorporating our technologies, including traditional and next–generation DVD players; growth opportunities in the consumer electronics market; opportunities to incorporate our technologies in markets outside the traditional consumer electronics market; the impact of inclusion of certain of our technologies in audio standards; the rate of adoption of and sales of next–generation DVD players; diversification of sources of licensing revenue; demand for and future revenues from incorporation of our technologies in personal computers; increase in sales of our products and demand for consumer electronics products containing our technologies in emerging economies; concentration of manufacturing of consumer electronic products containing our technologies in emerging economies and the associated challenges in royalty collection and intellectual property enforcement; pricing strategies for our digital cinema product and competitive pricing pressures for our cinema products; the pace of the movie industry’s transition to digital cinema and our expected revenue associated with the transition; our expected product sales and expected gross margins; our expected effective tax rate for the remaining quarters of fiscal 2007; our critical accounting policies, including those regarding revenue recognition, allowance for doubtful accounts, accounting for goodwill, accounting for income taxes, personal holding company matters and stock-based compensation; calculations of royalties due to our licensors; statements regarding the sufficiency of our cash reserves; and our expected rate of return on investments. Actual results may differ materially from those discussed in these forward looking statements due to a number of factors, including: the rate of growth of the markets for consumer electronics that include our technologies; whether our technologies are selected for and remain part of audio standards; the rate of deployment and adoption of next–generation DVD players; the extent to which our expectations regarding new licensing markets are realized; the extent to which consumer electronics manufacturers concentrate their production in emerging economies that present royalty collection and intellectual property enforcement challenges; the extent to which consumers in emerging economies elect to purchase products containing our technologies; the extent to which professionals using our equipment continue to demand innovative technology solutions developed by us; the pace of the movie industry’s transition to digital cinema; our ability to tailor our traditional model of selling to respond to market trends; whether our competitors are able to develop and sell alternative digital cinema technologies to our customers; the accuracy of our identification of critical accounting policies and the accuracy of the assumptions we make in implementing such policies; the accuracy of our estimates regarding our taxable income and cash needs for the next twelve months; the accuracy of our calculations of royalties due to our licensors; fluctuations in interest rates; and risks set forth in the section entitled “Risk Factors” of in Part II, Item 1A of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and elsewhere in this filing. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. Moreover, neither we nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of these forward-looking statements. We are under no duty to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q to conform our prior statements to actual results. The periods presented herein consist of our first quarters of fiscal years 2006 and 2007. Our fiscal quarter periods ended December 30, 2005 and December 29, 2006 both consisted of 13 weeks. Our 2007 fiscal year consists of 52 weeks and ends on September 28, 2007.

We conduct our business in two operating segments: licensing our technologies to manufacturers of consumer electronics products, software developers and developers of professional products, and selling our professional products and related services.

In our technology licensing segment, we work with manufacturers of integrated circuits (ICs) to help them incorporate our technologies into their ICs. These manufacturers then sell ICs to product manufacturers that license our technologies for incorporation in products such as DVD players, DVD recorders, audio/video receivers, television sets, set-top boxes, video game consoles, portable audio and video players, personal computers, in-car entertainment systems and other consumer electronics products. We also license our technologies to software developers who implement our technologies for use in personal computer software products. Our licensing arrangements typically entitle us to receive a specified royalty for every product shipped by product manufacturer or software developer licensees that incorporates our technologies. We do not receive royalties from IC manufacturers. We also collect fees for administering joint licensing programs (commonly referred to as “patent pools”) on behalf of third parties. In fiscal 2005, 2006 and the first quarter of fiscal 2007 our licensing revenue represented 75%, 77% and 79% of our total revenue, respectively.

In our products and services segment, we design, manufacture and sell audio products for the motion picture, broadcast, music and video game industries to improve sound quality, provide surround sound and increase the efficiency of sound storage and distribution. The majority of our professional product revenue is derived from sales of cinema processors, which movie theatres use to process film soundtracks. Our services revenue is primarily generated by service agreements with motion picture production companies who utilize our services and equipment. Our sound engineers work alongside filmmakers, television broadcasters, music producers and video game designers to help them use our products to create and reproduce the sound they envision. Our sound engineers also provide training, system design expertise and on-site technical expertise to cinema operators to help them configure their theatres and sound equipment to ensure that movie soundtracks are replayed with consistent high-quality sound. In our digital cinema content preparation service unit we act as a technical agent for our clients, following the content from start to finish, providing the compression mastering and distribution media preparation, distribution and verification services.

We are a global organization. We have licensed our technologies to manufacturers in approximately 35 countries, including countries in North America, Europe and Asia. In fiscal 2005, 2006 and the first quarter of fiscal 2007, revenue from licensees outside the United States represented 76%, 77% and 79% of our licensing revenue, respectively. Our licensees distribute products incorporating our technologies throughout the world. We sell our professional products and services in over 50 countries. In fiscal 2005, 2006 and the first quarter of fiscal 2007, revenue from sales outside the United States represented 61%, 64% and 68% of our professional products sales and services revenue, respectively. Most of our revenue is derived from transactions denominated in United States dollars.

Revenue from our technology licensing segment constitutes the majority of our total revenue, representing 75%, 77% and 79% of total revenue in fiscal 2005, 2006 and the first quarter of fiscal 2007, respectively. We categorize our technology licensing segment into the following markets:

Historically, the consumer electronics market, which is driven primarily by revenue attributable to DVD player sales, has been our largest market, generating just over 50% of our licensing revenue in fiscal 2005 and

approximately 45% of our licensing revenue in fiscal 2006. We expect next-generation DVD players for high-definition content to be a growth opportunity in the consumer electronics market. Our Dolby Digital, Dolby Digital Plus and TrueHD technologies have been selected as mandatory audio standards in the High-Definition Digital Versatile Disc (HD-DVD) format. Dolby Digital has been selected as a mandatory audio standard and Dolby Digital Plus and TrueHD have been selected as optional audio standards in the Blu-ray Disc format. However, the release and consumer adoption of next-generation DVD players has been slower than expected due, in part, to the competing HD-DVD and Blu-ray Disc formats. Consequently, we expect our ability to generate significant royalties from incorporation of our technology in next-generation DVD players will also be delayed. Even assuming resolution of the competing disc format conflict, the rate of consumer adoption of next-generation DVD players is uncertain and may be slower than past growth rates of traditional DVD players. Furthermore, as the market for traditional DVD players continues to mature, the industry has moved towards lower-end Chinese-made DVD players, which we believe poses challenges in royalty collection and intellectual property enforcement in China.

We are continuing to diversify our sources of licensing revenue by actively promoting the incorporation of our technologies for use in growing markets outside of our traditional consumer electronics market, such as personal computers, broadcast, gaming and automotive.

The personal computing market, which represented over 25% of our licensing revenue in fiscal 2005 and just over 30% in fiscal 2006, has been primarily driven by demand for software DVD players and to a lesser extent, DVD authoring applications. Historically, PC manufacturers have frequently included DVD playback functionality, which includes Dolby technologies, in their products. However, PC manufacturers are experiencing pricing pressure and, as a result, may elect to exclude DVD playback functionality from their products, thereby, requiring an additional cost to add this capability, which may affect demand for our technology. Microsoft recently introduced its Windows Vista operating system, which includes Dolby technologies in two of its six operating system editions, the Windows Vista Home Premium Edition and the Windows Vista Ultimate Edition. It is unclear which edition, or editions, will be widely adopted, and therefore, how this operating system will affect demand for software DVD players.

The broadcast market, which is primarily driven by demand for Dolby Digital in televisions and set-top boxes, represented approximately 10% of our licensing revenue in fiscal 2005 and just over 10% in fiscal 2006. The broadcast market has benefited in recent years from the transition from analog televisions to digital televisions. Revenue generated from the gaming and automotive markets has primarily been driven by demand for Dolby Digital and ATRAC technology in video game consoles and Dolby Digital in in-car entertainment systems.

Any future growth in the PC, broadcast, gaming and automotive markets may not fully offset a potential decline in the growth of revenue generated from our consumer electronics market.

Our technologies are incorporated in consumer electronics and digital entertainment products throughout the world. We expect that sales of products incorporating our technologies in emerging economies, such as China and India, will increase in the future as consumers in these geographical markets have more disposable income available for increased purchases of entertainment products, although there can be no assurance that this will occur. We also expect that manufacturers from lower-cost manufacturing countries, including China, will increase production of consumer electronics and digital entertainment products in the future to satisfy this increased demand. Associated with opportunities of doing business in these emerging economies, such as China, are unique risks that have and will continue to affect our operating results, such as manufacturers failing to report or underreporting product shipments. In an effort to better serve our licensees and address these risks we have expanded our presence in Asia, with offices in Taiwan, Shenzhen and Seoul.

Revenue from our products and services segment represented 25%, 23% and 21% of total revenue in fiscal 2005, 2006 and the first quarter of 2007, respectively. We are committed to developing technologies for use by professionals in the entertainment industry. We believe that filmmakers, broadcasters, music producers and video game designers will continue to push for technology solutions to help create, distribute and play back rich, high quality sounds and images. As a result, we believe that major advances in sound, imaging and other technologies for the recording, delivery and playback of entertainment will likely first be introduced in products designed for use by professionals.

Sales of our professional products and services tend to fluctuate based on the underlying trends in the motion picture and broadcast industries. For example, when box office receipts for the motion picture industry increase, we

have typically seen sales of our professional cinema products increase as well, as cinema owners are more likely to build new theatres and upgrade existing theatres with our more advanced cinema products when they are doing well financially. Conversely, when box office receipts are down cinema owners tend to scale back on plans to upgrade their systems or build new theatres. In the broadcast industry, consumer demand for high-quality broadcasts can drive broadcasters to purchase our professional broadcast products. For example, broadcasters seeking to deliver content to consumers in Dolby Digital 5.1 surround sound positively affected sales of our professional broadcast products in fiscal 2006.

Our services revenue, both in the United States and internationally, is also tied to the strength of the motion picture production industry and, in particular, to the number of films being made by studios and independent filmmakers. The number of films that are produced can be affected by a number of factors, including strikes and work-stoppages within the motion picture industry as well as by the tax incentive arrangements that many foreign governments provide filmmakers to promote local filmmaking.

In recent years we have developed a digital cinema system which allows for the storage and playback of digital content in theatres. Helping the motion picture industry transition to digital cinema continues to be a major initiative in our products and services segment. Digital cinema offers the motion picture industry possible means to achieve substantial cost savings in printing and distributing movies, to combat piracy, and to enable movies to be played repeatedly without degradation in image and audio quality. It also provides additional revenue opportunities for cinema operators, as concerts and sporting events already in digital format could be broadcast live via satellite to digitally-equipped theatres. The cinema industry is still in the early stages of the adoption of digital cinema for the distribution and exhibition of movies. A single systems integrator, Christie/AIX, has installed most of the digital cinema systems deployed to date in U.S. theatres. In response to movie studio requirements, Christie/AIX has required that the digital cinema equipment included in its installations provide particular capabilities, which our products did not satisfy at the end of the first quarter of fiscal 2007. Consequently, we have not supplied digital cinema systems to Christie/AIX, and at least one competitor has a significantly greater installed base of its competing digital cinema products than we do due to its participation in Christie/AIX’s deployments. After the end of the first quarter of fiscal 2007, we incorporated enhancements to our digital cinema system which we believe satisfies the particular capabilities required by Christie/AIX, although there is no assurance that Christie/AIX will include our digital cinema systems in its future installations. Additionally, our inability to deploy our digital cinema products in significant numbers in the early stages of the transition to digital cinema could limit our eventual share of the digital cinema product market.

A number of competitors offer competing products for digital cinema, some of which are priced lower than our products. We expect that as the market for digital cinema grows we will face more competitive pricing pressures than we have traditionally experienced for cinema products. As a result, we may have to implement pricing strategies which could have an adverse impact on our product sales gross margins in the future.

Furthermore, if the market for digital cinema develops more slowly than we anticipate or if we do not identify opportunities and successfully execute our initiatives to participate in the emerging digital cinema market, our significant investment in digital cinema technology may not yield the returns we anticipate and our business could be adversely affected.

In an effort to encourage the motion picture industry to increase the pace of conversion to digital cinema, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Walt Disney Pictures and Television in the third quarter of fiscal 2005 under which we deployed digital cinema systems in selected theatres throughout the U.S. We funded the majority of the equipment and installation costs related to this deployment, resulting in a total expense of approximately $8.6 million to cost of product sales and cost of services, of which the majority was recorded in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2005 and the first quarter of fiscal 2006.

In recent years, our products and services segment has grown more slowly than our technology licensing segment. In addition, the profit margin for our products and services segment has been lower than our technology licensing segment and is expected to remain so. Future initiatives associated with digital cinema in this competitive market may adversely affect our gross margin.

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our condensed consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, or U.S. GAAP. The preparation of these financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP requires us to utilize accounting policies and make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingencies as of the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during a fiscal period. The SEC considers an

accounting policy to be critical if it is both important to a company’s financial condition and results of operations and it requires significant judgment and estimates on the part of management in its application. We have discussed the selection and development of the critical accounting policies with the audit committee of our board of directors, and the audit committee has reviewed our related disclosures in this Form 10-Q. Although we believe that our judgments and estimates are appropriate and correct, actual results may differ from those estimates.

The following are our critical accounting policies because we believe they are both important to the portrayal of our financial condition and results of operations and require critical management judgments and estimates about matters that are uncertain. If actual results or events differ materially from those contemplated by us in making these estimates, our reported financial condition and results of operation for future periods could be materially affected. See “Risk Factors” for certain matters bearing risks on our future results of operations.

We evaluate revenue recognition for transactions to sell products and services and to license technology, trademarks and know-how using the criteria set forth by the SEC in Staff Accounting Bulletin 104, Revenue Recognition (SAB 104). For revenue transactions that involve software or software-related products, such as certain fees we earn from integrated software vendors (ISVs), certain other licensees and certain product sales, we recognize revenue under the guidance established by Statement of Position No. 97-2, Software Revenue Recognition (SOP 97-2). Both SAB 104 and SOP 97-2 state that revenue is recognized when each of the following criteria is met: persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred or services have been rendered, the seller’s price to the buyer is fixed or determinable, and collectibility is probable.

Licensing. Our licensing revenue is primarily derived from royalties paid to us by licensees of our intellectual property rights, including patents, trademarks and know-how. Royalties are recognized when all revenue recognition criteria have been met. We make judgments as to collectibility based on the licensee’s recent payment history, the existence of a standby letter-of-credit between the licensee’s financial institution and our financial institution, or an evaluation of the licensee’s creditworthiness. In cases where collectibility is not probable, we recognize revenue upon receipt of cash, provided that all other revenue recognition criteria have been met.

We generate the majority of our licensing revenue through our licensing contracts with original equipment manufacturers (system licensees) and independent software vendors. Our revenue recognition policies for each of these arrangements are summarized below.

Licensing to system licensees. We license our technologies to system licensees who manufacture consumer electronic devices and, in return, the system licensee pays us a royalty for each unit shipped that incorporates our technologies. Royalties from system licensees are generally recognized upon receipt of a royalty report from the licensee and when all other revenue recognition criteria have been met.

Licensing to independent software vendors. We license our technologies for resale to independent software vendors and, in return, the software vendor pays us a royalty for each unit of software distributed that incorporates our technologies. Royalties from independent software vendors are generally recognized upon receipt of a royalty report from the licensee and when all other revenue recognition criteria have been met.

Product Sales and Services. Our revenue from the sale of products is recognized when the risk of ownership has transferred to our customer as provided under the terms of the governing purchase agreement, typically the invoice we deliver to the customer, and all the other revenue recognition criteria have been met. Generally, these purchase agreements provide that the risk of ownership is transferred to the customer when the product is shipped. Services are recognized as the services related to a given project are completed and all other revenue recognition criteria have been met.

Multiple-Element Arrangements. We enter into arrangements that include multiple elements such as hardware, software, maintenance and other services. Revenue from these arrangements is allocated based on the fair value of each element. The allocated revenue for each element is recognized when all revenue recognition criteria for that element has been met. If we cannot objectively determine the fair value of any undelivered element included in a multiple-element arrangement, we defer revenue until all elements are delivered and/or services have been performed, or until we can objectively determine the fair value of all remaining undelivered elements.

We continually monitor customer payments and maintain a reserve for estimated losses resulting from our customers’ inability to make required payments. In determining the reserve, we evaluate the collectibility of our accounts receivable based upon a variety of factors. In cases where we are aware of circumstances that may impair a specific customer’s ability to meet its financial obligations, we record a specific allowance against amounts due,

thereby reducing the net recognized receivable to the amount reasonably believed to be collectible. For all other customers, we recognize allowances for doubtful accounts based on our actual historical write-off experience in conjunction with the length of time the receivables are past due, customer creditworthiness, geographic risk and the current business environment. Actual future losses from uncollectible accounts may differ from our estimates and may have a material effect on our consolidated statements of operations and our financial condition. Our allowance for doubtful accounts totaled $1.7 million at December 29, 2006. An incremental change of 1% in our allowance for doubtful accounts as a percentage of trade accounts receivables would have a $0.1 million increase or decrease in our operating results.

We account for goodwill in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (SFAS 142). As required by SFAS 142, we perform an impairment test on recorded goodwill by comparing the estimated fair value of each of our reporting units to the carrying value of the assets and liabilities of each unit, including goodwill. The fair value of each of our reporting units is determined by using a discounted cash-flow model which considers a number of factors, including estimated future cash-flows, risks facing us and our current market capitalization. If the carrying value of the assets and liabilities of the reporting units, including goodwill, were to exceed our estimation of the fair value of the reporting units, we would record an impairment charge in an amount equal to the excess of the carrying value of goodwill over the implied fair value of the goodwill. Our fiscal 2006 impairment test of goodwill, which was performed in the third quarter of fiscal 2006, resulted in no impairment charge. Fluctuations in our fair value, which may result from changes in economic conditions, our results of operations and other factors, relative to the carrying value, could result in impairment charges in future periods.

In preparing our consolidated financial statements, we are required to make estimates and judgments that affect our accounting for income taxes. This process includes estimating actual current tax exposure together with assessing temporary differences resulting from differing treatment of items for tax and accounting purposes. These differences, including differences in the timing of recognition of stock-based compensation expense, result in deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are included in our consolidated balance sheets. We also assess the likelihood that our deferred tax assets will be recovered from future taxable income and, to the extent that we believe that recovery is not likely, we have established a valuation allowance.

Significant judgment is required in determining the provision for income taxes, deferred tax assets and liabilities and the valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets. Our financial position and results of operations may be materially impacted if actual results significantly differ from these estimates or the estimates are adjusted in future periods.

Personal Holding Company Tax Matters. For United States federal income tax purposes, a corporation is generally considered to be a “personal holding company” under the United States Internal Revenue Code if (i) at any time during the last half of its taxable year more than 50% of its stock by value is owned, directly or indirectly, by virtue of the application of certain stock ownership attribution rules set forth in the Internal Revenue Code for purposes of applying the personal holding company rules, by five or fewer individuals and (ii) at least 60% of its adjusted ordinary gross income, as defined for United States federal income tax purposes, is “personal holding company income.” Personal holding company income is generally passive income, including royalty income, subject to certain exceptions such as qualifying software royalties. A personal holding company is subject to an additional tax on its undistributed after-tax income, calculated at the statutory tax rate, which is currently 15%. Since the personal holding company tax is imposed only on undistributed income, a personal holding company can avoid or mitigate liability for the tax, but not interest or penalties, by paying a dividend to its stockholders.

During fiscal 2006 and the first quarter of fiscal 2007, more than 50% of the value of our stock was held by Ray Dolby and stockholders considered affiliated with him pursuant to the stock ownership attribution rules applicable to personal holding companies. We expect this will continue to be the case in the foreseeable future. In addition, a significant portion of our income is from licensing fees, which may constitute personal holding company income. Currently, however, less than 60% of Dolby Laboratories’ adjusted ordinary gross income is personal holding company income. Given our current sources of revenue, we believe that neither we nor any of our subsidiaries is currently liable for personal holding company tax.

compensation awards using a fair-value method and recording of such expense in the consolidated financial statements over the requisite service period. In the first quarter of fiscal 2007, we recorded stock-based compensation expense of $4.9 million under the fair-value provisions of SFAS 123R, compared to $5.1 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2006. See Note 4 “Stockholders’ Equity and Stock-Based Compensation” for further discussion.

Licensing. The $13.4 million, or 19%, increase in licensing revenue from the first quarter of fiscal 2006 to the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was primarily due to increased revenue from our personal computer market, broadcast market and consumer electronics market. The increase in revenue from our PC market has been driven primarily by growth in sales of DVD player software products. The increase in revenue from our broadcast market has been driven by growth in sales of digital televisions and cable and satellite set-top boxes that incorporate our technologies. The increase in revenue from our consumer electronics market has primarily been driven by growth in sales of traditional and portable DVD players.

Product Sales. The $0.8 million, or 5%, decrease in our product sales revenue from the first quarter of fiscal 2006 to the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was principally attributable to a decrease in sales of our cinema products. This decrease was partially offset by an increase in sales of our live-sound products.

Services. The $0.8 million, or 14%, increase in service revenue from the first quarter of fiscal 2006 to the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was primarily attributable to an increase in film services. In addition, revenue from our foreign services were positively affected by fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates.

Licensing Gross Margin. We license to our customers intellectual property that may be internally developed, acquired by us or licensed from other parties. Our cost of licensing consists principally of royalty obligations to third parties for the licensing of intellectual property rights that we sublicense as part of our licensing arrangements with our customers. Our cost of licensing also includes amortization expenses associated with purchased intangible assets. Cost of licensing in the first quarter of fiscal 2007 includes approximately $6 million in royalty expenses that we accrued under a patent license agreement with an unrelated third party licensor. In the third quarter of fiscal 2006 we evaluated whether the payment of royalties using the methodology under which we have historically calculated royalties would constitute an overpayment. Subsequently, we notified the licensor that we no longer intend to pay royalties under the historic methodology. We have paid the licensor under the new methodology since the third quarter of fiscal 2006. Accrued royalties for unpaid amounts related to this licensor from the third quarter of fiscal 2006 to the first quarter of fiscal 2007 were approximately $16 million at December 29, 2006. We have not received a response from the licensor.

Product Sales Gross Margin. Cost of product sales primarily consists of material costs related to the products sold, applied labor and manufacturing overhead and, to a lesser extent, amortization of certain intangible assets. In addition, cost of product sales includes a $5.7 million charge recorded in the first quarter of fiscal 2006 in connection with our digital cinema collaboration with Walt Disney Pictures and Television discussed above in our product and services segment overview in the “Management Discussion Regarding Opportunities, Challenges and Risks” section. As a result of this charge, product sales gross margin was 21% in the first quarter of fiscal 2006. The increase in product sales gross margin from the first quarter of fiscal 2006 to the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was primarily attributable to the charge recognized in fiscal 2006 in connection with our digital cinema collaboration. In the first quarter of fiscal 2007, our product sales gross margin was negatively impacted by $0.7 million in costs incurred to upgrade our digital cinema equipment currently deployed in theatres, as well as higher production costs compared to the first quarter of fiscal 2006 in order to comply with restrictions on lead and other hazardous substances in specified electronic products sold in the European Union. Upon meeting certain contractual obligations during the remainder of fiscal 2007, we expect to recognize revenue related to a number of digital cinema systems that are currently deferred. We expect that the recognition of this revenue, and related costs, will adversely impact our product sales gross margins for fiscal 2007 because these products were sold at a lower margin than our other professional products.

Services Gross Margin. Cost of services primarily consists of the payroll and benefits costs of employees performing our professional services, the cost of outside consultants and reimbursable expenses incurred on behalf of customers. In the first quarter of fiscal 2006, we recorded a charge of $0.7 million related to services provided in connection with the digital cinema collaboration with Walt Disney Pictures and Television discussed above. The increase in services gross margin from the first quarter of fiscal 2006 to the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was primarily due to this charge.

Selling, General and Administrative. Selling, general and administrative expense consists primarily of personnel and personnel-related expenses, professional service fees and facility costs for our sales, marketing and administrative functions. Selling, general and administrative expenses increased in the first quarter of fiscal 2007 from the first quarter of fiscal 2006 primarily due to an increase of $1.6 million in professional fees, an increase of $1.3 million in personnel expenses, partially offset by a decrease in advertising and promotional expenses of approximately $0.9 million. In addition, we incurred a $0.8 million charge in the first quarter of fiscal 2006 associated with recognizing the results of our subsidiary, Lake Technology Limited, on a current basis rather than one quarter in arrears. The increase in professional fees was driven by an increase in audit and accounting and consulting services incurred to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and to a lesser extent, an increase in outside legal fees. The increase in personnel expenses was primarily driven by increases in headcount.

Research and Development. Research and development expense consists primarily of compensation and benefits related costs for personnel responsible for the research and development of new technologies and products. The $0.9 million, or 11%, increase in research and development expense from the first quarter of fiscal 2006 to the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was primarily driven by personnel expenses driven by increased headcount, and an increase in consulting expenses for outside research and development services.

Other income, net, primarily consists of interest income earned on cash, cash equivalent and investment balances, offset by interest expense on outstanding balances on our facility debt obligations. Also included are gains and losses on interest rate swap agreements associated with our facility debt obligations and foreign exchange rate

fluctuations. The increase in other income of $1.7 million, or 47% from the first quarter of fiscal 2006 to the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was due to an increase in interest income driven by the investment of our available cash into short-term and long-term investments, as well as higher total cash, cash equivalents and investment balances driven by cash generated from operations, offset by losses on foreign currency translation due to an unfavorable fluctuation in foreign currency exchange rates.

Our effective tax rate is based upon projection of annual fiscal year results. Our effective tax rate in the first quarter of fiscal 2006 was 37%, compared to 32% for the first quarter of fiscal 2007. The change in our effective tax rate from the first quarter of fiscal 2006 to the first quarter of fiscal 2007 was due primarily to increases in research and development tax credits resulting from a change in the tax law. This change reinstated the research and development tax credits for periods prior to the first quarter of fiscal 2007. In addition, in the first quarter of fiscal 2007, an increase in tax deductions related to disqualifying dispositions of incentive stock options, as well as the generation of tax-exempt interest income, further decreased our effective tax rate. For the remaining quarters of fiscal 2007 we expect our effective tax rate to be approximately 38% excluding the impact of any further disqualifying dispositions of incentive stock options.

The following table presents selected financial information for the fiscal quarters ended on the dates indicated:

As of December 29, 2006, we had cash and cash equivalents of $409.3 million, compared to $412.5 million at September 29, 2006. In addition, at December 29, 2006 we had short-term and long-term investments of $169.2 million, compared to $106.1 million at September 29, 2006. The decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $3.2 million from September 29, 2006 to December 29, 2006 was primarily due to cash generated from operations and financing activities of $59.6 million, offset by cash used in investing activities of $64.9 million primarily due to net purchases of available-for-sale securities.

Cash flow from operating activities was primarily driven by net income of $29.9 million. Net income also included non-cash expenses of $8.1 million related to stock-based compensation expense and depreciation and amortization for the first quarter of fiscal 2007, as well as approximately $6 million in accrued royalty expenses that we recorded in the first quarter of fiscal 2007 but have not paid. Cash paid out to members of one of our joint patent licensing programs was partially offset by collections of outstanding accounts receivables from September 29, 2006.

We believe that our cash, cash equivalents and potential cash flow from operations will be sufficient to satisfy our cash requirements through at least the next 12 months.

Cash used in investing activities was $64.9 million for the first quarter of fiscal 2007, which was primarily due to net purchases of available-for-sale securities of $63.2 million, and capital expenditures of $1.8 million.

Cash provided by financing activities was $12.4 million for the first quarter of fiscal 2007. Cash provided by financing activities was primarily driven by proceeds and excess tax benefits from the exercise of stock options, as well as the issuance of common stock related to our Employee Stock Purchase Plan.

If we or any of our subsidiaries were to become liable for personal holding company tax, we expect that it is likely that instead of paying the personal holding company tax, we would elect to pay a dividend to our stockholders in an amount equal to all or a significant part of our undistributed personal holding company income. We expect that we would pay such a dividend out of our available working capital, which could significantly decrease our cash, unless we sought additional financing for this purpose. Any such financing might not be available on terms acceptable to us or at all. If instead of paying a dividend we elect to pay the tax, this could significantly increase our consolidated tax expense. We expect we would pay any such tax out of our available working capital, which could also significantly decrease our cash, unless we sought additional financing. For an explanation of personal holding company tax, refer to our “Critical Accounting Policies – Accounting for Income Taxes” for further explanation of matters related to personal holding tax.

Cash, Cash Equivalents and Investments. As of December 29, 2006, we had cash and cash equivalents of $409.3 million, which consisted of cash, highly liquid money market funds and United States government agency securities with original maturities of three months or less. In addition, we had short-term and long-term investments of $169.2 million, which consisted primarily of United States government agency securities and municipal debt with original maturities greater than 90 days. Many of these investments are subject to fluctuations in interest rates, which could impact our results. At December 29, 2006 the average investment maturity of our investment portfolio was six months or less. Based on our investment portfolio balance as of December 29, 2006, a hypothetical change in interest rates of 1% would have approximately a $1.2 million impact, and a change of 0.5% would have approximately a $0.6 million impact on the carrying value of our portfolio. Furthermore, a hypothetical change in interest rates of 1% would have approximately a $4.2 million impact, and a change of 0.5% would have approximately a $2.1 million impact on interest income over a one-year period.

Interest Rate Swap Agreements. We have entered into interest rate swap agreements to manage our exposure to interest rate changes on our facility debt obligations. The swap agreements involve the exchange of fixed and variable interest rate payments without exchanging the notional principal amount. Gains and losses associated with the swap agreements are included in other income, net, in our condensed consolidated statements of operations.

We do not utilize financial instruments for trading or other speculative purposes, nor do we utilize leveraged financial instruments.

We maintain sales, marketing and business operations in foreign countries, most significantly in the United Kingdom. Consequently, we have exposure to adverse changes in exchange rates associated with our foreign business operations. While most of our revenue is derived from transactions denominated in United States dollars, nearly all of our costs from our foreign operations are derived from transactions denominated in the functional currency of that foreign location. As a result, our operating income is subject to exposure from changes in exchange rates. For example, the average exchange rate for fiscal 2006 of the British pound sterling to the United States dollar was approximately 1.8 United States dollars for one British pound sterling. We estimate that if the average exchange rate for the British pound sterling had been 10% higher or lower, it would have had an impact of approximately a $2.8 million on our operating income during fiscal 2006. In addition, we are in the process of expanding out foreign operations, specifically in Asia, which will increase our exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates.

In fiscal 2005, we began selling more products in United States dollars from our United Kingdom branch and maintained the receipts in a United States dollar account in the United Kingdom. The functional currency of our United Kingdom branch is the British pound sterling. Therefore, we were required to remeasure balances that were in currencies other than the functional currency and recognize the impact of these foreign exchange rate fluctuations in our results of operations. As the United States dollar cash balances grew throughout fiscal 2005, our results of operations became exposed to foreign exchange gains and losses. In the first quarter of fiscal 2006, we converted much of the balance into British pound sterling, thereby significantly mitigating the exposure from fluctuations in foreign exchange rates on our statement of operations. We periodically convert cash balances denominated in United States dollars at our United Kingdom branch into British pound sterling to mitigate this exposure.

We maintain “disclosure controls and procedures,” as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating our disclosure controls and procedures, management recognized that disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the disclosure controls and procedures are met. Additionally, in designing disclosure controls and procedures, our management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible disclosure controls and procedures. The design of any disclosure controls and procedures also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions.

Subject to the limitations noted above, our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the fiscal period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that, as of such date, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to meet the objective for which they were designed and operate at the reasonable assurance level.

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the fiscal quarter ended December 29, 2006, that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

A restated description of the risk factors associated with our business is set forth below. This description includes any material changes to and supersedes the description of the risk factors associated with our business previously disclosed in Part I, Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10–K for our fiscal year ended September 29, 20006. The following risk factors and other information included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q should be carefully considered. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we presently deem less significant may also impair our business operations. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business operating results and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

Our business and prospects depend on the strength of our brand, and if we do not maintain and strengthen our brand, our business will be materially harmed.

Maintaining and strengthening the “Dolby” brand is critical to maintaining and expanding both our products and services business and our technology licensing business, as well as to our ability to enter new markets for our sound and other technologies. Our continued success depends, in part, on our reputation for providing high quality products, services and technologies across a wide range of entertainment industries, including the consumer electronics products industry. If we fail to promote and maintain the Dolby brand successfully on either the products and services or the licensing sides of our business, our business and prospects will suffer. Moreover, we believe that the likelihood that our technologies will be adopted as industry standards in various markets and for various applications depends, in part, upon the strength of our brand, because professional organizations and industry participants are more likely to accept, as an industry standard, technologies developed by a well-respected and well-known brand. Maintaining and strengthening our brand will depend heavily on our ability to continue to develop innovative technologies for the entertainment industry and to continue to provide high quality products and services, which we may not do successfully.

We do not expect sales of traditional consumer DVD players to sustain their past growth rates. To the extent that sales of DVD players and home theatre systems level off or decline, or alternative technologies in which we do not participate replace DVDs as a dominant medium for consumer video entertainment, our licensing revenue will be adversely affected.

Growth in our revenue over the past several years has been the result, in large part, of the rapid growth in sales of DVD players and home theatre systems incorporating our technologies. However, as the markets for DVD players mature, we do not expect sales of traditional consumer DVD players to sustain their past growth rates. To the extent that sales of DVD players and home theatre systems level off or decline, our licensing revenue will be adversely affected. Additionally, the release and consumer adoption of next-generation DVD players has been delayed. There are currently two potential, incompatible formats for next-generation high-definition disc format proposed, and consumers may not react favorably to having to make a choice between formats. The delay in the release and consumer adoption of the next-generation disc format, as well as the inability of traditional DVD players to sustain their past growth rates, could adversely affect our licensing revenue. Even assuming resolution of the competing disc format conflict, the rate of consumer adoption of next-generation DVD players is uncertain and may be slower than past growth rates of traditional DVD players. In addition, if new technologies are developed for use with DVDs or new technologies are developed that substantially compete with or replace DVDs as a dominant medium for consumer video entertainment, and if we are unable to develop and successfully market technologies that are incorporated into or compatible with those new technologies, our business, operating results and prospects will be adversely affected.

We depend on the sale by our licensees of products that incorporate our technologies, and a reduction in those sales would adversely affect our licensing revenue.

We derive most of our revenue from the licensing of our technologies to consumer electronics product manufacturers. We derived 73%, 75% and 79% of our total revenue from our technology licensing business in fiscal 2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively. We do not manufacture consumer electronics products ourselves and our licensing revenue is dependent on sales by our licensees of products that incorporate our technologies. We cannot control these manufacturers’ product development or commercialization efforts or predict their success. In addition, our license agreements, which typically require manufacturers of consumer electronics products and software developers to pay us a specified royalty for every electronics product shipped that incorporates our technologies, do not require these manufacturers to include our technologies in any specific number or percentage of units, and only a few of these agreements guarantee us a minimum aggregate licensing fee. Accordingly, if our licensees sell fewer products incorporating our technologies, or otherwise face significant economic difficulties, our revenue will decline. Moreover, we have a widespread presence in markets for electronics products, such as the consumer electronics product market, which includes DVD players, audio/video receivers and other home theatre consumer electronics products, and, as a result, there is little room for us to further penetrate such markets. Lower sales of products incorporating our technologies could occur for a number of reasons. Changes in consumer tastes or trends, or changes in industry standards, may adversely affect our licensing revenue. Increasing market saturation, durability of products in the marketplace, competing products and alternate consumer entertainment options could adversely affect demand for new products incorporating our technologies. In addition, our licensees, for whatever reason, may not choose to or may not be able to incorporate our technologies into their products in the future.

We face risks in conducting business in emerging economies, such as China, particularly due to the limited recognition and enforcement of intellectual property and contractual rights in these countries.

We believe that various trends will continue to increase our exposure to the risks of conducting business in emerging economies. For example, we expect consumer electronics product manufacturing in emerging economies, such as China, to continue to increase due to the availability of lower manufacturing costs as compared to in other industrial countries and an industry shift by discount retailers towards lower-end DVD player offerings. We also believe that our sales of professional products and production services in emerging economies will expand in the future to the extent that the use of digital surround sound technologies increases in these countries, including in movies and broadcast television. We further expect that the sale of products incorporating our technologies will increase in emerging economies to the extent that consumers there become more affluent. We face many risks associated with operating in these emerging economies, in large part, due to limited recognition and enforcement of contractual and intellectual property rights. As a result, we may experience difficulties in enforcing our intellectual property rights in these emerging economies, where intellectual property rights are not as respected as they are in the United States, Japan and Europe. We believe that it is critical that we strengthen existing relationships and develop new relationships with entertainment industry participants world-wide to increase our ability to enforce our intellectual property and contractual rights without relying solely on the legal systems in the countries in which we operate. If we are unable to develop, maintain and strengthen these relationships, our revenue from these countries could be adversely affected.

Our future success depends, in part, upon the growth of new and existing markets for our technologies and our ability to develop and adapt our technologies for those markets. If those markets do not grow or we are not able to develop successful products for them, our business prospects could be limited.

We expect that the future growth of our licensing revenue will depend, in part, upon the growth of, and our successful participation in, new opportunities for our technologies, including:

The development of these markets depends on increased consumer demand for products that contain our technologies, which may not occur. Any failure of such markets to develop or consumer demand to grow would have a material adverse effect on our business and prospects. For example, in the PC market, equipment manufacturers and software developers are experiencing pricing pressure and, as a result, may elect to exclude DVD playback functionality from their products, thereby, requiring an additional cost to add this capability, which may affect demand for our technology. Whether our revenue from digital broadcast networks and broadband internet services increases depends upon the expansion of digital broadcast technologies and broadband internet as a medium of entertainment, which may not occur. In addition, even when our technologies are adopted as industry standards for a particular market, such market may not fully develop. In such case, our success depends not only on whether our technologies are adopted as industry standards for such market, but also on the development of that market, which may not occur. Demand for our technologies in any of these developing markets may not continue to grow, and a sufficiently broad base of consumers and professionals may not adopt or continue to use these technologies. In addition, our ability to generate revenue from these markets may be limited to the extent that service providers in these markets choose to provide select technologies and entertainment for little or no cost, such as many of the services provided in connection with broadband internet services. Moreover, some of these markets are ones in which we have not previously participated and, because of our limited experience, we may not be able to adequately adapt our business and our technologies to the needs of customers in these fields.

If we fail to deliver innovative technologies in response to changes in the entertainment industry, our business could decline.

The markets for our professional products and the markets for consumer electronics products using our licensed technologies are characterized by rapid change and technological evolution. We will need to expend considerable resources on research and development, or acquisitions, in the future in order to continue to design and deliver enduring, innovative entertainment products and technologies. Despite our efforts, we may not be able to develop, or acquire, and effectively market new products, technologies and services that adequately or competitively address the needs of the changing marketplace. For example, we cannot assure that Dolby Volume, Dolby’s new volume leveling solution designed to address the annoyances of inconsistent loudness, will address the needs of the marketplace, be effectively marketed or be a successful technology. In addition, we may not correctly identify new or changing market trends at an early enough stage to capitalize on market opportunities. At times such changes can be dramatic, such as the shift from VHS tapes to DVDs for consumer playback of movies in homes and elsewhere. Our future success depends to a great extent on our ability to develop, or acquire, and deliver innovative technologies that are widely adopted in response to changes in the entertainment industry and that are compatible with the technologies or products introduced by other entertainment industry participants.

Our operating results may fluctuate depending upon the timing of when we receive royalty reports from our licensees and of the satisfaction of our revenue recognition criteria.

Our quarterly operating results may fluctuate depending upon the timing of when we receive royalty reports from our licensees and of the satisfaction of our revenue recognition criteria. We recognize license revenue only after we receive royalty reports from our licensees regarding the shipment of their products that incorporate our technologies. As a result, the timing of our revenue depends upon the timing of our receipt of those reports. In addition, it is not uncommon for royalty reports to include positive or negative corrective or retroactive royalties that cover extended periods of time. Furthermore, there have been times in the past when we have recognized an unusually large amount of licensing revenue from a licensee in a given quarter because not all of our revenue recognition criteria were met in prior periods. This can result in a large amount of licensing revenue from a licensee being recorded in a given quarter that is not necessarily indicative of the amounts of licensing revenue to be received from that licensee in future quarters, thus causing fluctuations in our operating results.

If our products and technologies fail to be adopted as industry standards, our business prospects could be limited and our operating results could be adversely affected.

The entertainment industry depends upon industry standards to ensure the compatibility of its content across a wide variety of entertainment systems and products. Accordingly, we make significant efforts to design our products and technologies to address capabilities, quality and cost considerations so that they either meet, or, more importantly, are adopted as, industry standards across the broad range of entertainment industry markets in which we participate, as well as the markets in which we hope to compete in the future, including digital cinema. To have our products and technologies adopted as industry standards, we must convince a broad spectrum of professional organizations throughout the world, as well as our major customers and licensees who are members of such organizations, to adopt them as such and to ensure that other industry standards are consistent with our products and technologies. If our technologies are not adopted or do not remain as industry standards, our business, operating results and prospects could be materially and adversely affected. We expect that meeting, maintaining and establishing industry standard technologies will continue to be critical to our business in the future. In addition, the market for broadcast technologies has traditionally been heavily based upon industry standards, often set by governments or other regulatory bodies, and we expect this to continue to be the case in the future. If our technologies are not chosen as industry standards for broadcasting in particular geographic areas, this could adversely affect our ability to compete in these markets.

It may be more difficult for us, in the future, to have our technologies adopted as individual industry standards to the extent that entertainment industry participants collaborate on the development of industry standard technologies.

Increasingly, standards-setting organizations are adopting or establishing technology standards for use in a wide range of consumer electronics products. As a result, it is more difficult for individual companies to have their technologies adopted wholesale as an informal industry standard. We call this type of standard a “de facto” industry standard, meaning that the standard is not explicitly mandated by any industry standards-setting body but is nonetheless widely adopted. In addition, increasingly there are a large number of companies, including ones that typically compete against one another, involved in the development of new technologies for use in consumer entertainment products. As a result, these companies often license their collective intellectual property rights as a group, making it more difficult for any single company to have its technologies adopted widely as a de facto industry standard or to have its technologies adopted as an exclusive, explicit industry standard for consumer electronics products.

Even if our technologies are adopted as an industry standard for a particular market, market participants may not widely adopt our technologies.

Even when a standards-setting body mandates our technologies for a particular market, which we call an “explicit” industry standard, our technologies may not be the sole technologies adopted for that market as an industry standard. Accordingly, our operating results depend upon participants in that market choosing to adopt our technologies instead of competitive technologies that also may be acceptable under such standard. For example, the continued growth of our revenue from the broadcast market will depend upon both the continued adoption of digital television generally and the choice to use our technologies where it is an optional industry standard.

Our licensing of industry standard technologies can be subject to limitations that could adversely affect our business and prospects.

When a standards-setting body mandates our technologies as explicit industry standards, we generally must agree to license such technologies on a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory basis, which could limit our control over

the use of these technologies. In these situations, we must often limit the royalty rates we charge for these technologies, which could adversely affect our gross margins. Furthermore, we may be unable to limit to whom we license such technologies, and may be unable to restrict many terms of the license. From time to time we may be subject to claims that our licenses of our industry standard technologies may not conform to the requirements of the standards-setting body. Private parties have raised this type of issue with us in the past. Allegations such as these could be asserted in private actions seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief, or in regulatory actions. Claimants in such cases could seek to restrict or change our licensing practices or our ability to license our technologies in ways that could injure our reputation and otherwise materially and adversely affect our business, operating results and prospects.

Third parties from whom we license technologies may challenge our calculation of the royalties we owe them for inclusion of their technologies in our products and licensed technologies, which could adversely affect our operating results, business and prospects.

In some cases, primarily in connection with the licensing of our Dolby Digital technologies, the products we sell and the technologies we license to our customers include intellectual property that we have licensed from third parties. Our agreements with these third parties generally require us to pay them royalties for that use, and give the third parties the right to audit our calculation of those royalties. As a result of such an audit, a third party could challenge the accuracy of our calculation. A successful challenge could increase the amount of royalties we have to pay to the third party, decrease our gross margin and adversely affect our operating results. Such a challenge could result in the termination of the license agreement which would impair our ability to continue to use and re-license intellectual property from that third party which, in turn, could adversely affect our business and prospects.

Inaccurate licensee royalty reporting and unauthorized use of our intellectual property could materially adversely affect our operating results.

Our licensing revenue is generated primarily from consumer electronics product manufacturers and software developers who license our technologies and incorporate them in their products. Under our existing arrangements, these licensees typically pay us a specified royalty for every product they ship that incorporates our technologies. We rely on our licensees to accurately report the number of units shipped that incorporate our technologies. We calculate our license fees, prepare our financial reports, projections and budgets, and direct our sales and product development efforts based on these reports we receive from our licensees. However, it is often difficult for us to independently determine whether or not our licensees are reporting shipments accurately. This is especially true with respect to software incorporating our technologies because software can be copied relatively easily and we oftentimes do not have easy ways to determine how many copies have been made. Most of our license agreements permit us to audit our licensees’ records, but audits are generally expensive and time consuming and initiating audits could harm our customer relationships. In the past, licensees, particularly in emerging economies, such as China, have understated or failed to report the number of products incorporating our technologies that they shipped, and we have not been able to collect and recognize revenue to which we were entitled. We expect that we will continue to experience understated and non-reporting by licensees, which could adversely affect our operating results. Conversely, to the extent that our licensees overstate the number of products incorporating our technologies, or report the products under the wrong categories, negative corrections could result in reductions of royalty revenue in subsequent periods. In addition, some of our licensees may begin to more closely scrutinize their past or future licensing statements which may result in an increased receipt of negative corrective statements.

We also have often experienced, and expect to continue to experience, problems with non-licensee consumer electronics product manufacturers and software developers, particularly in emerging economies, such as China, incorporating our technologies or incorporating our technologies and trademarks into their products without our authorization and without paying us any licensing fees. This unauthorized use of our intellectual property could adversely affect our operating results.

Our licensing revenue depends in large part upon semiconductor manufacturers incorporating our technologies into integrated circuits, or ICs, for sale to our electronics product licensees and if, for any reason, our technologies are not incorporated in these ICs or fewer ICs are sold that incorporate our technologies, our operating results would be adversely affected.

Our licensing revenue from consumer electronics product manufacturers depends in large part upon the availability of integrated circuits, or ICs, that implement our technologies. IC manufacturers incorporate our technologies into these ICs, which are then incorporated in consumer electronics products. We do not manufacture these ICs, but rather depend on IC manufacturers to develop, produce and then sell them to licensed consumer

electronics product manufacturers. We do not control the IC manufacturers’ decisions whether or not to incorporate our technologies into their ICs, and we do not control their product development or commercialization efforts nor predict their success. As a result, if these IC manufacturers are unable or unwilling, for any reason, to implement our technologies into their ICs, or if, for any reason, they sell fewer ICs incorporating our technologies, our operating results will be adversely affected.

Our inability to deploy our digital cinema products in significant numbers in the early stages of the transition to digital cinema, coupled with the price of our products, could limit our future prospects in the digital cinema market and could materially and adversely affect our business.

A single systems integrator, Christie/AIX, has installed most of the digital cinema systems deployed to date in U.S. theatres. In response to movie studio requirements, Christie/AIX has required that the digital cinema equipment included in its installations provide particular capabilities, which our products did not satisfy at the end of the first quarter of fiscal 2007. Consequently, we have not supplied digital cinema systems to Christie/AIX, and at least one competitor has a significantly greater installed base of its competing digital cinema products than we do due to its participation in Christie/AIX’s deployments. After the end of the first quarter of fiscal 2007, we incorporated enhancements to our digital cinema system which we believe now satisfies the particular capabilities required by Christie/AIX, although there is no assurance that Christie/AIX will include our digital cinema systems in its future installations. Additionally, our inability to deploy our digital cinema products in significant numbers in the early stages of the transition to digital cinema and the prices of our digital cinema products could limit the success of our digital cinema initiatives, which could materially and adversely affect our operating results. In addition, our digital cinema products have higher prices than those of some of our competitors.

If the market for digital cinema develops more slowly than expected, our future prospects could be limited and our business could be materially and adversely affected.

If the industry cannot agree on one or more business models for digital cinema, the broad adoption of digital cinema will be delayed. The conversion of movie theatres from film to digital cinema will require significant expenditures, and we cannot predict how quickly digital cinema will become widely adopted. At present only a limited number of movie theatres have been converted to digital cinema, and we expect the conversion of theatres to digital cinema technologies, if it occurs, to be a long-term process due to both technological and financial obstacles. If the market for digital cinema develops more slowly than expected, or if there is significant and sustained resistance by the motion picture industry or cinema operators to this technology or the cost of implementation, we may not realize significant returns on our investments in digital cinema technology, which could materially and adversely affect our operating results.

If we do not identify opportunities and successfully execute our initiatives to participate in the emerging digital cinema market, our future prospects could be limited and our business could be adversely affected.

The cinema industry is in the early stages of the adoption of digital cinema for the distribution and exhibition of movies. Industry participants continue to discuss business models to facilitate adoption of digital cinema by allocating the costs among industry participants, and the business models that ultimately emerge may vary from country to country. Participating in some of the models under discussion may require us to depart from our traditional model of selling our professional products pursuant to one-time contracts, and could expose us to various risks we have not faced in the past. For example, we have participated in one model by deploying, at our expense, fully integrated digital cinema systems and seeking payment from motion picture distributors for films presented on the systems. If we do not identify, and successfully execute on, the business models that provide an opportunity to generate revenues from our digital cinema products and services, our future prospects in this market will be limited and our business could be materially and adversely affected.

If our digital cinema initiatives do not perform to expectations, our reputation may suffer and demand for our digital cinema products and services may not develop.

As we participate in digital cinema initiatives, if we or our equipment do not perform to expectations, our relationships with cinema industry participants may be adversely affected and our reputation may suffer, affecting the demand for our digital cinema products and services. Any negative publicity or significant problems with our digital cinema initiatives could materially and adversely affect our relationships in the cinema industry or the perception of our brand.

If we are unable to expand our business into non-sound technologies, our future growth could be limited.

Our future growth will depend, in part, upon our expansion into areas beyond sound technologies. For example, in addition to our digital cinema initiative, we are exploring other areas that facilitate delivery of digital entertainment, such as technologies for processing digital moving images and content protection. We will need to spend considerable resources on research and development or acquisitions in the future in order to deliver innovative non-sound technologies. However, we have limited experience in these markets and, despite our efforts, we cannot predict whether we will be successful in developing, or acquiring and marketing non-sound products, technologies and services. In addition, many of these markets are relatively new and may not develop as we currently anticipate. Moreover, although we believe that many of the technological advances we may develop or acquire for digital cinema may have applicability in other areas, such as broadcasting or consumer electronics products, we may not ever be able to achieve these anticipated benefits in these other markets. A number of competitors and potential competitors may develop non-sound technologies similar to those that we develop, or acquire, some of which may provide advantages over our products, technologies and services. Some of these competitors have much greater experience and expertise in the non-sound fields we may enter. The non-sound products, technologies and services we expect to market may not achieve or sustain market acceptance, may not meet industry needs, and may not be accepted as industry standards. If we are unsuccessful in selling non-sound products, technologies and services, the future growth of our business may be limited. In addition, our efforts to enter or strengthen our positions in non-sound markets may be tied to the success of specific programs.

Pricing pressures on the electronics product manufacturers who incorporate our technologies into their products could limit the licensing fees we charge for our technologies, which could adversely affect our revenues.

The markets for the consumer electronics products in which our technologies are incorporated are intensely competitive and price sensitive. Retail prices for consumer electronics products that include our sound technology, such as DVD players and home theatre systems, have decreased significantly, and we expect prices to continue to decrease for the foreseeable future. In response, manufacturers have sought to reduce their product costs, which can result in downward pressure on the licensing fees we charge our customers who incorporate our technologies into the consumer electronics products that they sell. A decline in the licensing fees we charge could materially and adversely affect our operating results.

If the sale of consumer electronics products incorporating our technologies does not grow in emerging markets, our ability to increase our licensing revenue may be limited.

We also expect that growth in our licensing revenue will depend, in part, upon the growth of sales of consumer electronics products incorporating our technologies in emerging economies, as consumers in these markets have more disposable income and are increasingly purchasing entertainment products with surround sound capabilities. However, if our licensing revenue from the use of our technologies in these new markets or geographic areas does not expand, our prospects could be adversely affected.

We face significant competition in various markets, and if we are unable to compete successfully, our business will suffer.

The markets for entertainment industry technologies are highly competitive, and we face competitive threats and pricing pressure in our markets. Competitors on the professional side of our business include Avica, DTS, Doremi, EVS, GDC, Kodak, Microsoft, NEC, Panastereo, Qube, QuVis, Sony and UltraStereo. Competitors on the consumer side of our business include Coding Technologies, DTS, Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Circuits, Philips, Microsoft, RealNetworks, Sony, SRS Labs, DivX, Inc., and Thomson. In addition, other companies may become competitors in the future. Some people may perceive the quality of sound produced by some of our competitors’ technologies to be equivalent or superior to that produced by ours. In addition, some of our current and/or future competitors may have significantly greater financial, technical, marketing and other resources than we do, or may have more experience or advantages in the markets in which they compete. For example, Microsoft and RealNetworks may have an advantage over us in the market for internet technologies because of their greater experience and presence in that market. In addition, some of our current or potential competitors, such as Microsoft and RealNetworks, may be able to offer integrated system solutions in markets for sound or non-sound entertainment technologies, including audio, video and rights management technologies related to personal computers or the internet, which could make competing technologies that we develop unnecessary. By offering an integrated system solution, these potential competitors also may be able to offer competing technologies at lower prices than our technologies, which could adversely affect our operating results. Further, many of the consumer electronics products that include our sound technologies also include sound technologies developed by our competitors. As a result, we must continue to invest significant resources in research and development in order to

enhance our technologies and our existing products and services and introduce new high-quality products and services to meet the wide variety of such competitive pressures. Our business will suffer if we fail to do so successfully.

Acquisitions could result in operating difficulties, dilution to our stockholders and other harmful consequences.

We have evaluated, and expect to continue to evaluate, a wide array of possible strategic transactions, including acquisitions. For example, we consider these types of transactions in connection with our efforts to expand our business beyond sound technologies to other technologies related to the delivery of digital entertainment. Although we cannot predict whether or not we will complete any such acquisition or other transactions in the future, any of these transactions could be material in relation to our financial condition and results of operations. The process of integrating an acquired company, business or technology may create unforeseen difficulties and expenditures. The areas where we may face risks include:

Foreign acquisitions involve unique risks in addition to those mentioned above, including those related to integration of operations across different geographies, cultures and languages, currency risks and risks associated with the particular economic, political and regulatory environment in specific countries. Also, the anticipated benefit of our acquisitions may not materialize. Future acquisitions could result in potentially dilutive issuances of our equity securities, the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities or amortization expenses, or write-offs of goodwill, any of which could harm our operating results or financial condition. Future acquisitions may also require us to obtain additional equity or debt financing, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all.

Our relationships with entertainment industry participants are particularly important to our products and services and our technology licensing businesses, and if we fail to maintain such relationships our business could be materially harmed.

If we fail to maintain and expand our relationships with a broad range of participants throughout the entertainment chain, including motion picture studios, broadcasters, video game designers, music producers and manufacturers of consumer electronics products, our business and prospects could be materially harmed. Relationships have historically played an important role in the entertainment industries that we serve, both on the professional and consumer sides of our business. For example, our products and services business is particularly dependent upon our relationships with the major motion picture studios and broadcasters, and our technology licensing business is particularly dependent upon our relationships with consumer electronics product manufacturers, software developers and integrated circuit, or IC, manufacturers. If we fail to maintain and strengthen these relationships, these entertainment industry participants may be more likely not to purchase and use our products, services and technologies, or create content incorporating our technologies, which could materially harm our business and prospects. In addition to directly providing substantially all of our revenue, these relationships are also critical to our ability to have our technologies adopted as industry standards. In addition, if major industry participants form strategic relationships that exclude us, whether on the products and services side or the licensing side of our business, our business and prospects could be materially adversely affected.

We have limited or no patent protection for our technologies in particular countries, including China and India, which could limit our ability to grow our business in these markets.

We have a relatively limited number of issued patents in particular countries, including China and India. For example, in China we have only limited patent protection, especially with respect to our Dolby Digital technologies. In India, we have no issued patents. Consequently, growing our licensing revenue in these emerging countries will depend on our ability to obtain patent rights in these counties for existing and new technologies, which is uncertain. Moreover, because of the limitations of the legal systems in many of these countries, the effectiveness of patents obtained or that may in the future be obtained, if any, is likewise uncertain.

We face diverse risks in our international business, which could adversely affect our operating results.

We are dependent on international sales for a substantial amount of our total revenue. For fiscal 2004, 2005 and 2006, royalties from licensees outside the United States were 80%, 76% and 77% of our licensing revenue, respectively, and our sales outside the United States were 59%, 61% and 64% of our professional products and service revenue, respectively. We expect that international and export sales will continue to represent a substantial portion of our revenue for the foreseeable future. This future revenue will depend to a large extent on the continued use and expansion of our technologies in entertainment industries worldwide. Increased worldwide use of our technologies is also an important factor in our future growth.

Due to our reliance on sales to customers outside the United States, we are subject to the risks of conducting business internationally, including:

The licensing of patents constitutes a significant source of our revenue. If we are unable to replace expiring patents with new patents or proprietary technologies, our revenue could decline.

We hold patents covering much of the technology that we license to consumer electronics product manufacturers, and our licensing revenue is tied in large part to the life of those patents. Our right to receive royalties related to our patents terminates with the expiration of the last patent covering the relevant technologies. However, many of our licensees choose to continue to pay royalties for continued use of our trademarks and know-how even after the licensed patents have expired, although at a reduced royalty rate. Accordingly, to the extent that we do not continue to replace licensing revenue from technologies covered by expiring patents with licensing revenue based on new patents and proprietary technologies, our revenue could decline.

As of December 29, 2006, we had nearly 1,000 individual issued patents in nearly 35 jurisdictions and over 1,350 pending patent applications throughout the world. Our issued patents are scheduled to expire at various times

through February 2025. Of these, 49 patents are scheduled to expire in calendar year 2007, 19 patents are scheduled to expire in calendar year 2008 and 6 patents are scheduled to expire in calendar year 2009. We derive our licensing revenue principally from our Dolby Digital technologies. Patents relating to our Dolby Digital technologies generally expire between 2008 and 2017, and patents relating to our Dolby Digital Plus technologies, an extension of Dolby Digital, expire between 2019 and 2023. In addition, the remaining patents relating to Dolby Digital Live technologies, an extension of Dolby Digital, are scheduled to expire in 2021.

We are, and may in the future be, subject to intellectual property rights claims, which are costly to defend, could require us to pay damages and could limit our ability to use particular technologies in the future.

Companies in the technology and entertainment industries own large numbers of patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets and frequently enter into litigation based on allegations of infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights. We have faced such claims in the past and we expect to face similar claims in the future. For example, Lucent has asserted that we infringe some of their patents, prompting us to file a complaint for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and/or invalidity of such Lucent patents. These patents generally involve a process and means for encoding and decoding audio signals. Lucent contended that products incorporating our AC-3 technology infringe those patents. The U.S. District Court of Northern District of California recently granted our motions for summary judgment that we have not infringed the Lucent patents at issue and have not contributed to or induced infringement by others. In light of the court’s finding of non-infringement, it dismissed our claims that the Lucent patents are invalid. Lucent appealed the court’s ruling granting summary judgment of non-infringement to the United States Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed the decision of the U.S. District Court granting summary judgment. Lucent chose not to file a petition for a panel rehearing en banc with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and did not seek a writ of certiorari before the United States Supreme Court. Accordingly, the judgment is now final.

Any intellectual property claims, with or without merit, could be time-consuming, expensive to litigate or settle and could divert management resources and attention. In the past we have settled claims relating to infringement allegations and agreed to make payments in connection with such settlements. We expect that similar claims will be asserted against us in the future in the ordinary course of our business. An adverse determination in any intellectual property claim could require that we pay damages or stop using technologies found to be in violation of a third party’s rights and could prevent us from offering our products and services to others. In order to avoid these restrictions, we may have to seek a license for the technology. This license may not be available on reasonable terms, could require us to pay significant royalties and may significantly increase our operating expenses. The technologies also may not be available for license to us at all. As a result, we may be required to develop alternative non-infringing technologies, which could require significant effort and expense. If we cannot license or develop technologies for any infringing aspects of our business, we may be forced to limit our product and service offerings and may be unable to compete effectively. In addition, at times in the past, we have chosen to defend our licensees from third-party intellectual property infringement claims even where such defense was not contractually required, and we may choose to take on such defense in the future. Any of these results could harm our brand, our operating results and our financial condition. In addition, from time to time we are engaged in disputes regarding the licensing of our intellectual property rights, including matters related to our royalty rates and other terms of our licensing arrangements. These types of disputes can be asserted by our customers or prospective customers or by other third parties as part of negotiations with us or in private actions seeking monetary damages or injunctive relief, or in regulatory actions. In the past, licensees have threatened to initiate litigation against us regarding our licensing royalty rate practices, including potential antitrust claims. Damages and requests for injunctive relief asserted in claims like these could be material, and could have a significant impact on our business. Any disputes with our customers or potential customers or other third parties could adversely affect our business, results of operations and prospects.

Our ability to develop proprietary technology in markets in which “open standards” are adopted may be limited, which could adversely affect our ability to generate revenue.

Standards-setting bodies, such as those for digital cinema technologies, may require the use of so-called “open standards,” meaning that the technologies necessary to meet those standards are publicly available. The use of open standards may reduce our opportunity to generate revenue, as open standards technologies are based upon non-proprietary technology platforms in which no one company maintains ownership over the dominant technologies.

Events and conditions in the motion picture and broadcast industries may affect sales of our professional products and production services.

Sales of our professional products and production services tend to fluctuate based on the underlying trends in the motion picture industry. For example, when box office receipts for the motion picture industry increase, we have typically seen sales of our professional products increase as well, as cinema owners are more likely to build new theatres and upgrade existing theatres with our more advanced cinema products when they are doing well financially. Conversely, when box office receipts are down cinema owners tend to scale back on plans to upgrade their systems or build new theatres. Our professional product sales are also subject to fluctuations based on events and conditions in the theatre industry generally that may or may not be tied to box office receipts in particular periods. For example, the growth in piracy of motion pictures adversely affects the construction of new screens, the renovation of existing theatres and the continued production of new motion pictures. Technological advances and the conversion of motion pictures into digital formats have made it easier to create, transmit and “share” high-quality unauthorized copies of motion pictures, including on pirated DVDs and on the internet. In 2005, events within the U.S. cinema industry, including recent restructuring and consolidations, and a decline in box office sales appear to have delayed purchasing decisions by exhibitors. The launch of new digital services by broadcasters also influences the sale of our professional products. On the other hand, our production services revenue, both in the United States and internationally, is tied to the number of films being made by studios and independent filmmakers. A number of factors can affect the number of films that are produced, including strikes and work stoppages within the motion picture industry, as well as by the tax incentive arrangements that many foreign governments provide filmmakers to promote local filmmaking.

We may be unable to significantly expand our current professional product sales in the cinema industry because our professional products are already used by the vast majority of major cinema operators and major motion picture studios in the United States and much of the rest of the world. If the cinema industry does not expand, or if it contracts, the demand for our professional products will be adversely affected.

Our ability to further penetrate the market for motion picture sound technologies is limited because of the widespread use of our current professional products by major motion picture content creators, distributors and cinema operators. As a result, our future revenue from our professional products for the cinema industry will depend, in part, upon events and conditions in that industry—specifically, the continued production and distribution of motion pictures, and the construction of new theatres and the renovation of existing theatres, using our products and services. For example, in the late 1990s cinema operators in the United States built a large number of new cinema megaplexes. This initially resulted in increased sales of our cinema processors, but also resulted in an oversupply of screens in some markets. This oversupply led to significant declines in new theatre construction in the United States in the early 2000s, resulting in a corresponding decline in sales of our cinema processors. As a result, future growth in sales of our existing cinema products may be limited, and may decrease in the future, as the number of new cinemas being built and the number of existing cinemas without our products continues to decline.

The demand for our current professional products and production services could decline if the film industry broadly adopts digital cinema.

If the film industry broadly adopts digital cinema, the demand for our current professional products and production services could decline. Such a decline in our products and services business could also adversely affect our technology licensing business, because the strength of our brand and our ability to use professional developments to advance our consumer licensing technologies would be impaired. If, in such circumstances, we are unable to adapt our professional products and production services or introduce new products for the market for digital cinema successfully, our business could be materially adversely affected.

Fluctuations in our quarterly and annual operating results may significantly affect the value of our stock.

A number of factors, many of which are outside our control, may cause or contribute to significant fluctuations in our quarterly and annual revenue and operating results. These fluctuations may make financial planning and forecasting more difficult. In addition, these fluctuations may result in unanticipated decreases in our available cash, which could negatively impact our business and prospects. As discussed more fully below, these fluctuations also could increase the volatility of our stock price. Factors that may cause or contribute to fluctuations in our operating results and revenue include:

One or more of the foregoing or other factors may cause our operating expenses to be disproportionately higher or lower or may cause our revenue and operating results to fluctuate significantly in any particular quarterly or annual period. Results from prior periods are thus not necessarily indicative of the results of future periods.

Some of our customers are also our current or potential competitors, and if those customers were to choose to use their competing technologies rather than ours, our business and operating results would be adversely affected.

We face competitive risks in situations where our customers are also current or potential competitors. For example, Sony is a significant licensee customer and is a significant purchaser of our professional products and production services, but Sony is also a competitor with respect to some of our professional and consumer technologies. To the extent that our customers choose to utilize competing technologies they have developed or in which they have an interest, rather than use our technologies, our business and operating results could be adversely affected.

Surround sound technologies could be treated as a commodity in the future, which could adversely affect our business, operating results and prospects.

We believe that the success we have had licensing our surround sound technologies to consumer electronics product manufacturers is due, in part, to the strength of our brand and the perception that our technologies provide a high-quality solution for surround sound. However, as applications that incorporate surround sound technologies become increasingly prevalent, we expect more competitors to enter this field with other solutions. Furthermore, to the extent that competitors’ solutions are perceived, accurately or not, to provide the same advantages as our technologies, at a lower or comparable price, there is a risk that sound encoding technologies such as ours will be treated as commodities, resulting in loss of status of our technologies, decline in their use, and significant pricing pressure. To the extent that our audio technologies become a commodity, rather than a premium solution, our business, operating results and prospects could be adversely affected.

Licensing some of our technologies in joint licensing programs, or “patent pools,” is a different business model for us, and we may face many challenges in conducting this business.

In fiscal 2002, we began licensing some of our patents through our wholly-owned subsidiary Via Licensing Corporation in joint licensing programs, or “patent pools,” with other companies in an effort to ensure that our technologies are compatible with other technologies in the entertainment industry and to promote our technologies as industry standards. These patent pools allow product manufacturers streamlined access to selected foundational technologies and are comprised of a group of patents held by a number of companies, including us in some cases, and administered by Via Licensing. If we do not identify new or changing market trends and technologies at an early enough stage to capitalize on market opportunities for joint licensing programs, we may not continue to be successful with this business model. Also, to the extent that Dolby technologies are included in patent pools, we have less control over the licensing of those technologies through the patent pools compared to licensing through our traditional business model in which we license our patents as bundles of technologies and interact directly with our customers. In addition, we may have less control over the application and quality control of our technologies included in these pools.

The loss of or interruption in operations of one or more of our key suppliers could materially delay or stop the production of our professional products and impair our ability to generate revenue.

Our reliance on outside suppliers for some of the key materials and components we use in manufacturing our professional products involves risks, including limited control over the price, timely delivery and quality of such components. We have no agreements with our suppliers to ensure continued supply of materials and components. Although we have identified alternate suppliers for most of our key materials and components, any required changes in our suppliers could cause material delays in our production operations and increase our production costs. In addition, our suppliers may not be able to meet our future production demands as to volume, quality or timeliness. Moreover, we rely on sole source suppliers for some of the components that we use to manufacture our professional products, including specific charged coupled devices, light emitting diodes and digital signal processors. These sole source suppliers may become unable or unwilling to deliver these components to us at an acceptable cost or at all, which could force us to redesign those specific products. Our inability to obtain timely delivery of key components of acceptable quality, any significant increases in the prices of components, or the redesign of our professional products could result in material production delays, increased costs and reductions in shipments of our products, any of which could increase our operating costs, harm our customer relationships or materially and adversely affect our business and operating results.

Revenue from our professional products may suffer if our production processes encounter problems or if we are not able to match our production capacity to fluctuating levels of demand.

Our professional products are highly complex, and production difficulties or inefficiencies can interrupt production, resulting in our inability to deliver products on time in a cost effective manner, which could harm our competitive position. If production is interrupted at one of our two manufacturing facilities, we may not be able to shift production to the other facility on a timely basis, and customers may purchase products from our competitors. A shortage of manufacturing capacity for our professional products could adversely affect our operating results and damage our customer relationships. We generally cannot quickly adapt our manufacturing capacity to rapidly changing market conditions. Likewise, we may be unable to respond to fluctuations in customer demand. At times we underutilize our manufacturing facilities as a result of reduced demand for some of our professional products. Any inability to respond to fluctuations in customer demand for our professional products may adversely affect our gross margins.

Our professional products, from time to time, experience quality problems that can result in decreased sales and higher operating expenses.

Our professional products are complex and sometimes contain undetected software or hardware errors, particularly when first introduced or when new versions are released. In addition, our professional products are sometimes combined with or incorporated into products from other vendors, sometimes making it difficult to identify the source of a problem. These errors could result in a loss of or delay in market acceptance of our professional products or cause delays in delivering them and meeting customer demands, any of which could reduce our revenue and raise significant customer relations issues. In addition, if our professional products contain errors we could be required to replace or reengineer them, which would increase our costs. Moreover, if any such errors cause unintended consequences, we could face claims for product liability. Although we generally attempt to contractually limit liability for defective products to the cost of repairing or replacing these products, if these contract provisions are not enforced, or are unenforceable for any reason, or if liabilities arise that are not effectively limited, we could incur substantial costs in defending and settling product liability claims.

Awareness of our brand depends to a significant extent upon decisions by our customers to display our trademarks on their products, and if our customers do not display our trademarks on their products, our ability to increase our brand awareness may be harmed.

Because we engage in relatively little direct brand advertising, the promotion of our brand depends upon entertainment industry participants displaying our trademarks on their products that incorporate our technologies, such as film prints and consumer electronics products. Although we do not require our customers to place our brand on their products, we actively encourage them to do so. For example, we rely on consumer electronics product manufacturers that license our technologies to display our trademarks on their products in order to promote our brand. If our customers choose for any reason not to display our trademarks on their products, our ability to maintain or increase our brand awareness may be harmed, which would have an adverse effect on our business and prospects. In addition, if we fail to maintain high quality standards for our professional products, or if we fail to maintain high quality standards for the products that incorporate our technologies through the quality-control certification process that we require of our licensees, the strength of our brand could be adversely affected.

Licensee products that incorporate our technologies, from time to time, experience quality problems that could damage our brand, decrease revenues and increase operating expenses.

Licensee products that incorporate our technologies often are complex and sometimes contain undetected software or hardware errors, particularly when first introduced or when new versions are released. In addition, those products are often combined with, or incorporated into, products from other companies, sometimes making it difficult to identify the source of a problem. Any negative publicity or negative impact relating to these product problems could adversely affect the perception of our brand. In addition, these errors could result in loss of, or delay in, market acceptance of those products or Dolby technologies, or cause delays in delivering them and meeting customer demands, any of which could reduce our revenue and raise significant customer relations issues. Although we generally attempt to contractually limit our liability for our licensees’ defective products, we may elect to help reengineer those products, which could adversely affect our operating results.

A loss of one or more of our key customers or licensees in any of our markets could adversely affect our operating results.

From time to time, one or a small number of our customers or licensees may represent a significant percentage of our professional products and services or licensing revenue. Although we have agreements with many of these customers, these agreements typically do not require any minimum purchases or minimum royalty fees and do not prohibit customers from purchasing products and services from competitors. A decision by any of our major customers or licensees not to use our technologies, or their failure or inability to pay amounts owed to us in a timely manner, or at all, whether due to strategic redirections or adverse changes in their businesses or for other reasons, could have a significant effect on our operating results.

We are subject to various environmental laws and regulations that could impose substantial costs upon us and may adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

Some of our operations use substances regulated under various federal, state, local and international laws governing the environment, including those governing the discharge of pollutants into the air and water, the management, disposal and labeling of hazardous substances and wastes and the cleanup of contaminated sites. We could incur costs, fines and civil or criminal sanctions, third-party property damage or personal injury claims, or

could be required to incur substantial investigation or remediation costs, if we were to violate or become liable under environmental laws. Liability under environmental laws can be joint and several and without regard to comparative fault. The ultimate costs under environmental laws and the timing of these costs are difficult to predict.

We also face increasing complexity in our product design as we adjust to new and future requirements relating to the materials composition of our products, including the restrictions on lead and other hazardous substances that apply to specified electronic products put on the market in the European Union as of July 1, 2006 (Restriction on the Use of Hazardous Substances Directive 2002/95/EC, also known as the “RoHS Directive”) and similar legislation proposed for China. We have redesigned our products regulated under the RoHS Directive in order to be able to continue to offer them for sale within the European Union.

For some products, substituting particular components containing regulated hazardous substances is more difficult or costly, and additional redesign efforts could result in production delays. Selected electronic products that we maintain in inventory may be rendered obsolete if not in compliance with the RoHS Directive, which could negatively impact our ability to generate revenue from those products. We could also face significant costs and liabilities in connection with product take-back legislation. The European Union Directive 2002/96/EC as amended by 2003/108/EC (Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive also known as the “WEEE Directive”) requires producers of particular electrical and electronic equipment, including broadcast equipment, to be financially responsible for specified collection, recycling, treatment and disposal of past and future covered products. As of December 2006, not all member states within the EU have enacted enabling legislation under the WEEE Directive, and in the absence of such legislation, it is difficult to determine the costs to comply with the WEEE Directive.

Other countries, such as China and the United States, may enact similar product-content and take-back legislation, the cumulative impact of which could significantly increase our operating costs and adversely affect our operating results. We also expect that our operations, whether manufacturing or licensing, will be affected by other new environmental laws and regulations on an ongoing basis. Although we cannot predict the ultimate impact of any such new laws and regulations, they will likely result in additional costs or decreased revenue, and could require that we redesign or change how we manufacture our products, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Any inability to protect our intellectual property rights could reduce the value of our products, services and brand.

Our business is dependent upon our patents, trademarks, trade secrets, copyrights and other intellectual property rights. We derived 73%, 75% and 77% of our total revenue from licensing revenue in the fiscal years 2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively. Effective intellectual property rights protection, however, may not be available under the laws of every country in which our products and services and those of our licensees are distributed. Also, the efforts we have taken to protect our proprietary rights may not be sufficient or effective. Any significant impairment of our intellectual property rights could harm our business or our ability to compete. In addition, protecting our intellectual property rights is costly and time consuming. We have taken steps in the past to enforce our intellectual property rights and expect to continue to do so in the future. However, it may not be practicable or cost effective for us to enforce our intellectual property rights fully, particularly in particular countries or where the initiation of a claim might harm our business relationships. For example, we have many times experienced, and expect to continue to experience, problems with consumer electronics product manufacturers incorporating our technologies into their products without our authorization. If we are unable to successfully identify and stop unauthorized use of our intellectual property, we could experience increased operational and enforcement costs, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. We generally seek patent protection for our innovations. It is possible, however, that some of these innovations may not be protectable. In addition, given the costs of obtaining patent protection, we may choose not to protect particular innovations that later turn out to be important. Moreover, we have limited or no patent protection in particular foreign jurisdictions. For example, in China we have only limited patent protection, especially with respect to our Dolby Digital technologies, and in India we have no issued patents. Furthermore, there is always the possibility, despite our efforts, that the scope of the protection gained will be insufficient or that an issued patent may later be found to be invalid or unenforceable. Moreover, we seek to maintain select intellectual property as trade secrets. These trade secrets could be compromised by third parties, or intentionally or accidentally by our employees, which would cause us to lose the competitive advantage resulting from them.

It is possible that we may be treated as a personal holding company, which could adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.

The Internal Revenue Service may assert that we or any of our subsidiaries are currently, or previously have been, liable for personal holding company tax, plus interest and penalties, if applicable. In addition, we and our subsidiaries may be liable for personal holding company tax in the future. For United States federal income tax purposes, a corporation is generally considered to be a “personal holding company” under the United States Internal Revenue Code if (i) at any time during the last half of its taxable year more than 50% of its stock by value is owned, directly or indirectly, by virtue of the application of certain stock ownership attribution rules set forth in the Internal Revenue Code for purposes of applying the personal holding company rules, by five or fewer individuals and (ii) at least 60% of its adjusted ordinary gross income, as defined for United States federal income tax purposes, is “personal holding company income.” Personal holding company income is generally passive income, including royalty income, subject to particular exceptions such as qualifying software royalties. A personal holding company is subject to an additional tax on its undistributed after-tax income, calculated at the statutory tax rate, which is currently 15%. Since the personal holding company tax is imposed only on undistributed income, a personal holding company can avoid or mitigate liability for the tax, but not interest or penalties, by paying a dividend to its stockholders.

More than 50% of the value of our stock is held by Ray Dolby and stockholders considered affiliated with him pursuant to the stock ownership attribution rules applicable to personal holding companies. We expect this will continue to be the case in the foreseeable future. In addition, a significant portion of our income is from licensing fees, which may constitute personal holding company income. Currently, however, less than 60% of Dolby Laboratories’ adjusted ordinary gross income is personal holding company income.

However, the Internal Revenue Service may assert that we or one of our subsidiaries are currently, or previously have been, liable for personal holding company tax, plus interest and penalties, if applicable. In addition, we or our subsidiaries may be liable for personal holding company tax in the future. The treatment of select items of our income and the income of our subsidiaries, for purposes of the personal holding company tax, may be subject to challenge. In the event that we or any of our subsidiaries is determined to be a personal holding company, or for prior taxable years, to have been a personal holding company, we or our subsidiary could be liable for additional taxes, and possibly interest and penalties, based on the undistributed income and the tax rate in effect at that time, but only if we or our subsidiary, as the case may be, decides not to fully abate the tax by the payment of a dividend, although such a dividend will not eliminate interest and penalties. In addition, we believe that there exists a meaningful risk that in the relatively near future the mix of our revenue will change so that more of our adjusted ordinary gross income may be classified as personal holding company income. In such event, it is possible that we or one of our subsidiaries could become liable for the personal holding company tax, assuming the ownership test continues to be met. In that case, we or our subsidiary, as the case may be, may be required to pay additional tax in the event we or the subsidiary decides not to fully abate the tax by the payment of a dividend. Because no claim or assessment has been made against us with respect to personal holding company taxes, we are unable to quantify the amount of any additional taxes, and possibly interest and penalties, for which we may be liable in the future for past periods or the amount of the dividend that we may pay to abate the tax. Furthermore, we are unable to quantify the amount of personal holding company tax that we may be liable for or the dividend that we may elect to pay for future periods as such amounts, if any, would be based upon the application of the rules discussed above to the results of our future operations. We have explored options to reduce our exposure and the exposure of our subsidiaries to the personal holding company tax in the future, as well as continue to actively monitor our current exposure.

If we or any of our subsidiaries were to pay personal holding company tax (and possibly interest and penalties), this could significantly increase our consolidated tax expense and adversely affect our operating results. In addition, if the statutory tax rate increases in the future, the amount of any personal holding company tax we or any of our subsidiaries may have to pay could increase significantly, further impairing our operating results. In that regard, the statutory tax rate, which is currently 15%, is scheduled to return to ordinary income tax rate levels for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2011. If we are deemed to be a personal holding company and, instead of paying the personal holding company tax, we elect to pay a dividend to our stockholders in an amount equal to all or a significant part of our undistributed personal holding company income, we may consume a significant amount of cash resources and be unable to retain or generate working capital. This would adversely affect our financial condition. As a result, if we pay such a dividend, we may decide to seek additional financing, although that financing may not be available to us when and as required on commercially reasonable terms, if at all.

Failure to comply with applicable current and future government regulations could have a negative effect on our business.

Our operations and business practices are subject to federal, state and local government laws and regulations, as well as international laws and regulations, including those relating to consumer and other safety-related compliance

for electronic equipment, as well as compulsory license requirements as a prerequisite to being included as part of the industry standards, such as the United States HDTV standard. Any failure by us to comply with the laws and regulations applicable to us or our products could result in our inability to sell those products, additional costs to redesign products to meet such laws and regulations, fines or other administrative actions by the agencies charged with enforcing compliance and, possibly, damages awarded to persons claiming injury as the result of our non-compliance. Changes in or enactment of new statutes, rules or regulations applicable to us could have a material adverse effect on our business.

The loss of members of our management team could substantially disrupt our business operations.

Our success depends to a significant degree upon the continued individual and collective contributions of our management team. A limited number of individuals have primary responsibility for managing our business, including our relationships with key customers and licensees. We have key executives and senior technical people who have been with us for a number of years, including over 150 employees who have been with us for over 10 years. These individuals, as well as the rest of our management team and key employees, are at-will employees, and we do not maintain any key-person life insurance policies. Losing the services of any key member of our team, whether from retirement, competing offers or other causes, could prevent us from executing our business strategy, cause us to lose key customer or licensee relationships, or otherwise materially affect our operations.

We rely on highly skilled personnel, and if we are unable to retain or motivate key personnel or hire qualified personnel, we may not be able to maintain our operations or grow effectively.

Our performance is largely dependent on the talents and efforts of highly skilled individuals. Our future success depends on our continuing ability to identify, hire, develop, motivate and retain highly skilled personnel for all areas of our organization. In this regard, we currently plan to hire a number of employees throughout fiscal 2007 in response to our growth and our current initiatives. We have maintained a rigorous, highly selective and time-consuming hiring process, which we believe has significantly contributed to our success to date, but has made it more difficult for us to hire a sufficient number of qualified employees. As we grow, our hiring process may prevent us from hiring the personnel we need in a timely manner. In addition, we are aware that some of our competitors have directly targeted our employees. If we are unable to hire and train a sufficient number of qualified employees or retain and motivate existing employees, our existing operations may suffer and we may be unable to grow effectively.

If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate financial statements could be impaired, which could adversely affect our operating results, our ability to operate our business and our investors’ views of us.

We have a complex business organization that is international in scope. Ensuring that we have adequate internal financial and accounting controls and procedures in place to help ensure that we can produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis is a costly and time-consuming effort that needs to be re-evaluated frequently. On an ongoing basis, we document, review and, if appropriate, improve our internal controls and procedures in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires annual management assessments of the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting and a report by our independent auditors addressing these assessments. Both we and our independent auditors periodically test our internal controls in connection with the Section 404 requirements and could, as part of that documentation and testing, identify areas for further attention or improvement. Implementing any appropriate changes to our internal controls may require specific compliance training of our directors, officers and employees, entail substantial costs in order to modify our existing accounting systems, and take a significant period of time to complete. Such changes may not, however, be effective in maintaining the adequacy of our internal controls, and any failure to maintain that adequacy, or consequent inability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis, could increase our operating costs and could materially impair our ability to operate our business. In addition, investors’ perceptions that our internal controls are inadequate or that we are unable to produce accurate financial statements may seriously affect our stock price.

For the foreseeable future, Ray Dolby or his affiliates will be able to control the selection of all members of our board of directors, as well as virtually every other matter that requires stockholder approval, which will severely limit the ability of other stockholders to influence corporate matters.

At December 29, 2006, Ray Dolby and persons and entities affiliated with Ray Dolby owned approximately 63% of our Class A and Class B common stock, representing 93% of the combined voting power of our outstanding Class A and Class B common stock. Under our charter, holders of Class B common stock are entitled to ten votes per share while holders of Class A common stock are entitled to one vote per share. Holders of shares of Class B

common stock may generally transfer such shares to family members, including spouses and descendents or the spouses or domestic partners of such descendents, without having the shares automatically convert into shares of Class A common stock. Because of this dual class structure, Ray Dolby, his affiliates, and his family members and descendents will, for the foreseeable future, have significant influence over our management and affairs, and will be able to control virtually all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors and significant corporate transactions such as mergers or other sales of our company or assets, even if they come to own considerably less than 50% of the total number of outstanding shares of our Class A and Class B common stock. Moreover, these persons may take actions in their own interests that you or our other stockholders do not view as beneficial. There is no threshold or time deadline at which the shares of Class B common stock will automatically convert into shares of Class A common stock. Assuming conversion of all shares of Class B common stock held by persons not affiliated with Ray Dolby into shares of Class A common stock, so long as Ray Dolby and his affiliates continue to hold shares of Class B common stock representing approximately 10% or more of the total number of outstanding shares of our Class A and Class B common stock, they will hold a majority of the combined voting power of the Class A and Class B common stock.

If our founder, officers, directors or employees sell, or indicate an intention to sell, substantial amounts of our Class A common stock, including shares of Class A common stock issuable upon conversion of shares of Class B common stock, in the public market, the trading price of our Class A common stock could decline. As of December 29, 2006, we had outstanding a total of 108,621,037 shares of Class A and Class B common stock. Of these shares, 31,625,000 shares of Class A common stock were sold in our initial public offering by us and the selling stockholders.

As of December 29, 2006, our directors and executive officers held 68,696,206 shares of Class B common stock, 5,064 shares of Class A common stock, vested options to purchase 637,577 shares of Class B common stock and vested options to purchase 86,249 shares of Class A common stock. We expect that any sale of our Class A common stock by our directors and executive officers would be subject to compliance with Rule 144 under the Securities Act.

In the fiscal quarter ended December 29, 2006, we issued an aggregate of 1,290,605 shares of our Class B common stock to certain employees, officers and directors upon the exercise of options awarded under our 2000 Stock Incentive Plan and since December 30, 2006 through January 22, 2007, we issued an aggregate of 281,448 shares of our Class B common stock to certain employees and officers upon the exercise of options awarded under our 2000 Stock Incentive Plan. We received aggregate proceeds of $2.8 million in the fiscal quarter ended December 29, 2006, and $0.6 million in the period since December 30, 2006 through January 22, 2007, as a result of the exercise of these options. We believe these transactions were exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act in reliance on Rule 701 thereunder as transactions pursuant to compensatory benefit plans and contracts relating to compensation as provided under Rule 701. As of January 22, 2007, options to purchase an aggregate of 5,441,189 shares of our Class B common stock remain outstanding. All issuances of shares of our Class B common stock pursuant to the exercise of these options will be made in reliance on Rule 701. All option grants made under the 2000 Stock Incentive Plan were made prior to the effectiveness of our initial public offering. No further option grants will be made under our 2000 Stock Incentive Plan.

None of the foregoing transactions involved any underwriters, underwriting discounts or commissions, or any public offering.

Each share of our Class B common stock is convertible into one share of our Class A common stock at any time at the option of the holder or upon the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the shares of Class B common stock. In addition, each share of Class B common stock shall convert automatically into one share of Class A common stock upon any transfer, except for certain transfers described in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.


DOLBY LABORATORIES, INC.

By:		/s/ Kevin J. Yeaman
		Kevin J. Yeaman
		Chief Financial Officer
		(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer and Duly Authorized Officer)


Delaware		90-0199783
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)


PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.	Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

	Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 29, 2006 and December 29, 2006	2

	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Fiscal Quarters Ended December 30, 2005 and December 29, 2006	3

	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Fiscal Quarters Ended December 30, 2005 and December 29, 2006	4

	Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements	5

Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	14

Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	24

Item 4.	Controls and Procedures	25

PART II – OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1.	Legal Proceedings	26

Item 1A.	Risk Factors	26

Item 2.	Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds	44

Item 6.	Exhibits	44

Signatures		45


	September 29, 2006		December 29, 2006
	(unaudited)
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	412,487	$	409,265
Short-term investments		73,212		119,129
Accounts receivable, net of allowances		23,550		16,886
Inventories		11,104		11,585
Income tax receivable		1,371		1,586
Deferred income taxes		44,568		44,980
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		6,340		8,358

Total current assets		572,632		611,789

Property, plant and equipment, net		76,995		77,179
Intangible assets, net		14,954		14,426
Goodwill		23,188		24,331
Long-term investments		32,909		50,078
Long-term deferred income taxes		11,100		10,013
Other non-current assets		7,510		7,797

Total assets	$	739,288	$	795,613

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	$	79,336	$	81,130
Income taxes payable		5,719		6,336
Current portion of debt		1,441		1,483
Deferred revenue		6,358		7,559

Total current liabilities		92,854		96,508

Long-term debt		10,893		10,697
Other non-current liabilities		21,342		21,661

Total liabilities		125,089		128,866

Controlling interest		19,911		20,754

Stockholders’ equity:
Class A common stock		37		39
Class B common stock		70		69
Additional paid-in capital		323,449		341,400
Retained earnings		266,918		296,811
Accumulated other comprehensive income		3,814		7,674

Total stockholders’ equity		594,288		645,993

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	739,288	$	795,613


	Fiscal Quarter Ended
	December 30, 2005			December 29, 2006
	(unaudited)
Revenue:
Licensing	$	68,982		$	82,375
Product sales		16,004			15,210
Services		6,039			6,857

Total revenue		91,025			104,442

Cost of revenue:
Cost of licensing		6,601			7,660
Cost of product sales (1)		12,681			8,686
Cost of services (1)		2,889			2,683

Total cost of revenue		22,171			19,029

Gross margin		68,854			85,413

Operating expenses:
Selling, general and administrative (1)		36,537			37,311
Research and development (1)		7,942			8,836

Total operating expenses		44,479			46,147

Operating income		24,375			39,266
Other income, net		3,699			5,427

Income before provision for income taxes and controlling interest		28,074			44,693
Provision for income taxes		10,486			14,452

Income before controlling interest		17,588			30,241
Controlling interest in net income, net of tax		(319	)		(348	)

Net income	$	17,269		$	29,893

Basic earnings per share	$	0.17		$	0.28
Diluted earnings per share	$	0.16		$	0.27

Weighted-average shares outstanding (basic)		104,295			107,947
Weighted-average shares outstanding (diluted)		110,190			112,767

Expense for rent payable to related party included in selling, general and administrative expenses	$	873		$	337


(1) Stock-based compensation included above was classified as follows:
Cost of product sales	$	202		$	218
Cost of services		130			37
Selling, general and administrative		4,104			3,859
Research and development		673			747


	Fiscal Quarter Ended
	December 30, 2005			December 29, 2006
	(unaudited)
Operating activities:

Net income	$	17,269		$	29,893

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		3,110			3,224
Stock-based compensation expense		5,109			4,861
Excess tax benefit from exercise of stock options		(3,449	)		(8,567	)
Provision for doubtful accounts		75			54
Deferred income taxes		(2,698	)		(552	)
Other non-cash items affecting net income		(84	)		532
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable		(5,405	)		6,860
Inventories		1,219			(265	)
Prepaid expenses and other assets		1,911			(2,035	)
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities		586			1,411
Income taxes, net		8,852			10,773
Deferred revenues		2,135			1,040
Other non-current liabilities		77			(64	)

Cash flows from by operating activities	$	28,707		$	47,165

Investing activities:
Purchases of available-for-sale securities		—			(77,765	)
Proceeds from sale of available-for-sale securities		—			14,597
Purchases of property, plant and equipment		(1,910	)		(1,798	)
Other investing activities		—			54

Cash flows from investing activities	$	(1,910	)	$	(64,912	)

Financing activities:
Payments on debt		(329	)		(359	)
Proceeds from the exercise of stock options		1,258			3,743
Issuance of Class A common stock from ESPP purchase		1,501			479
Excess tax benefit from exercise of stock options		3,449			8,567

Cash flows from financing activities	$	5,879		$	12,430

Effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents		(577	)		2,095

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents		32,099			(3,222	)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of fiscal year		372,403			412,487

Cash and cash equivalents at end of fiscal quarter	$	404,502		$	409,265

Supplemental disclosure:
Cash paid for income taxes	$	4,320		$	4,232
Cash paid for interest		242			295


	September 29, 2006		December 29, 2006
	(in thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents:
Cash	$	108,653	$	111,216
Cash equivalents:
Money market funds		224,331		171,729
U.S. government agency securities		30,553		77,860
Municipal debt securities		48,950		48,460

Cash and cash equivalents		412,487		409,265

Investments:
U.S. government agency securities		17,011		78,520
Municipal debt securities		25,466		38,143
Auction rate certificates		62,850		51,750
Equity investment		794		794

Total investments		106,121		169,207

Cash, cash equivalents and investments	$	518,608	$	578,472


	Maturity
	90 Days or Less				91 Days to One Year					Greater than One Year
	Fair Value		Net Unrealized Gain		Fair Value		Net Unrealized Loss			Fair Value		Net Unrealized Loss
	(in thousands)
Money market funds	$	171,729	$	—	$	—	$	—		$	—	$	—
U.S. government agency securities		77,860		14		53,528		—			24,992		(8	)
Municipal debt securities		48,460		—		13,851		(2	)		24,292		(12	)
Auction rate certificates		—		—		51,750		(47	)		—		—

Equity investment		—		—		—		—			794		—

Cash equivalents and investments	$	298,049	$	14	$	119,129	$	(49	)	$	50,078	$	(20	)


	Revenue
	Fiscal Quarter Ended
	December 30, 2005		December 29, 2006
	(in thousands)
Technology licensing	$	68,982	$	82,375
Products and services		22,043		22,067

Total revenue	$	91,025	$	104,442


	Gross Margin
	Fiscal Quarter Ended
	December 30, 2005		December 29, 2006
	(in thousands)
Technology licensing	$	62,381	$	74,715
Products and services		6,473		10,698

Total gross margin	$	68,854	$	85,413


	Reconciliation to Income before Provision for Income Taxes and Controlling Interest
	Fiscal Quarter Ended
	December 30, 2005			December 29, 2006
	(in thousands)
Total segment gross margin	$	68,854		$	85,413
Operating expenses		(44,479	)		(46,147	)
Other income, net		3,699			5,427

Total income before provision for income taxes and controlling interest	$	28,074		$	44,693


	Revenue by Geographic Region
	Fiscal Quarter Ended
	December 30, 2005		December 29, 2006
	(in thousands)
United States	$	22,991	$	24,061
International		68,034		80,381

Total revenue	$	91,025	$	104,442


	Fiscal Quarter Ended
	December 30, 2005		December 29, 2006
United States	25	%	23	%
Japan	25	%	21	%
Europe	20	%	20	%
Taiwan	9	%	11	%
China	9	%	14	%
Other	12	%	11	%


	Long-Lived Tangible Assets by Geographic Region
	September 29, 2006		December 29, 2006
	(in thousands)
United States	$	55,236	$	54,556
International		21,759		22,623

Total long-lived tangible assets, net of accumulated depreciation	$	76,995	$	77,179


	Shares		Weighted Average Exercise Price		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life	Aggregate Intrinsic Value
	(in thousands)				(in years)	(in thousands)
Options outstanding at September 29, 2006	8,881		$	5.47
Grants	1,498			28.23
Exercises	(1,342	)		2.79
Forfeitures	(141	)		9.00

Options outstanding at December 29, 2006	8,896			9.65	7.3	$	190,132

Options vested and expected to vest at December 29, 2006	8,609			9.35	7.2	$	186,544

Options exercisable at December 29, 2006	3,035			3.48	5.8	$	83,568


	Fiscal Quarter Ended						Change
	December 30, 2005			December 29, 2006			$			%
	($ in thousands)
Revenue:
Licensing	$	68,982		$	82,375		$	13,393		19	%
Percentage of total revenue		76	%		79	%
Product sales		16,004			15,210			(794	)	(5	)%
Percentage of total revenue		17	%		14	%
Services		6,039			6,857			818		14	%
Percentage of total revenue		7	%		7	%

Total revenue	$	91,025		$	104,442		$	13,417		15	%


		Incorporated by Reference Herein
Exhibit Number	Description	Form	Date

10.1*	2007 Dolby Executive Annual Incentive Plan	Current Report on Form 8–K	November 20, 2006

31.1	Certification by the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or 15d-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2	Certification by the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or 15d-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.1 ‡	Certification by the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.