Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	NOTE 8 – Commitments and Contingencies Purchase commitments – As of March, 2016, we had approximately $18.5 million in non-cancelable purchase contracts related to capital expenditures, primarily related to Asia manufacturing facilities. Contingencies – From time to time, we are involved in various legal proceedings that arise in the normal course of business. While we intend to defend any lawsuit vigorously, we presently believe that the ultimate outcome of any current pending legal proceeding will not have any material adverse effect on our financial position, cash flows or operating results. However, litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable rulings could occur. An unfavorable ruling could include monetary damages, which could impact on our business and operating results for the period in which the ruling occurs or future periods. Based on information available, we evaluate the likelihood of potential outcomes. We record the appropriate liability when the amount is deemed probable and reasonably estimable. In addition, we do not accrue for estimated legal fees and other directly related costs as they are expensed as incurred. Legal proceedings that we believe are material are disclosed below. On September 15, 2014, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued an order regarding the putative securities class action entitled Local 731 I.B. of T. Excavators and Pavers Pension Trust Fund v. Diodes, Inc., Civil Action No. 6:13- cv-00247 (E.D. Tex. filed Mar. 15, 2013) (the “Class Action”), granting defendants’ motion to dismiss the Class Action with prejudice. On October 13, 2014, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the order dismissing the Class Action to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. On January 13, 2016, the Court of Appeals issued an order and opinion affirming the dismissal of the Class Action with prejudice. Plaintiffs-appellants did not file a petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court by the deadline of April 12, 2016, and therefore the case is concluded. On February 20, 2014, a purported stockholder derivative action was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, entitled Persson v. Keh-Shew Lu, Case No. 4:14-cv-00108-RC-ALM (E.D. Tex. filed Feb. 20, 2014), on behalf of the Company against its directors, in which plaintiff alleges that the Board breached their fiduciary duties by allowing the Company to make allegedly misleading public statements in 2011 regarding the labor market in China and its impact on the Company’s business and prospects, by failing to maintain internal controls and by selling shares of Diodes stock while allegedly in possession of material nonpublic information regarding the labor market in China and its impact on the Company’s business and prospects. The complaint does not seek any damages or other relief from the Company. On April 17, 2014, the Court granted the parties’ unopposed motion to stay this action until such time that the Court rules on defendants’ motion to dismiss in the Class Action. On October 2, 2014, the Court granted the parties’ unopposed motion to extend the stay of this action until 30 days after either the expiration of the appeal period or a final decision by the highest court of appeals regarding the defendants’ motion to dismiss in the Class Action. The defendants intend to defend the action vigorously. In the course of the restructuring of Diodes’ Asian and UK subsidiaries, Diodes may have inadvertently breached the Company’s credit agreement. A borrowing on the swing line under the credit agreement also constituted technical breaches of the credit agreement. Any breaches that occurred as a result of these matters have been cured or waived, and the borrowing on the swing line has been repaid.

NOTE 8 – Commitments and Contingencies

Purchase commitments – As of March, 2016, we had approximately $18.5 million in non-cancelable purchase contracts related to capital expenditures, primarily related to Asia manufacturing facilities.

Contingencies – From time to time, we are involved in various legal proceedings that arise in the normal course of business. While we intend to defend any lawsuit vigorously, we presently believe that the ultimate outcome of any current pending legal proceeding will not have any material adverse effect on our financial position, cash flows or operating results. However, litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable rulings could occur. An unfavorable ruling could include monetary damages, which could impact on our business and operating results for the period in which the ruling occurs or future periods. Based on information available, we evaluate the likelihood of potential outcomes. We record the appropriate liability when the amount is deemed probable and reasonably estimable. In addition, we do not accrue for estimated legal fees and other directly related costs as they are expensed as incurred. Legal proceedings that we believe are material are disclosed below.

On September 15, 2014, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued an order regarding the putative securities class action entitled Local 731 I.B. of T. Excavators and Pavers Pension Trust Fund v. Diodes, Inc., Civil Action No. 6:13- cv-00247 (E.D. Tex. filed Mar. 15, 2013) (the “Class Action”), granting defendants’ motion to dismiss the Class Action with prejudice. On October 13, 2014, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the order dismissing the Class Action to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. On January 13, 2016, the Court of Appeals issued an order and opinion affirming the dismissal of the Class Action with prejudice. Plaintiffs-appellants did not file a petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court by the deadline of April 12, 2016, and therefore the case is concluded.

On February 20, 2014, a purported stockholder derivative action was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, entitled Persson v. Keh-Shew Lu, Case No. 4:14-cv-00108-RC-ALM (E.D. Tex. filed Feb. 20, 2014), on behalf of the Company against its directors, in which plaintiff alleges that the Board breached their fiduciary duties by allowing the Company to make allegedly misleading public statements in 2011 regarding the labor market in China and its impact on the Company’s business and prospects, by failing to maintain internal controls and by selling shares of Diodes stock while allegedly in possession of material nonpublic information regarding the labor market in China and its impact on the Company’s business and prospects. The complaint does not seek any damages or other relief from the Company. On April 17, 2014, the Court granted the parties’ unopposed motion to stay this action until such time that the Court rules on defendants’ motion to dismiss in the Class Action. On October 2, 2014, the Court granted the parties’ unopposed motion to extend the stay of this action until 30 days after either the expiration of the appeal period or a final decision by the highest court of appeals regarding the defendants’ motion to dismiss in the Class Action. The defendants intend to defend the action vigorously.

In the course of the restructuring of Diodes’ Asian and UK subsidiaries, Diodes may have inadvertently breached the Company’s credit agreement. A borrowing on the swing line under the credit agreement also constituted technical breaches of the credit agreement. Any breaches that occurred as a result of these matters have been cured or waived, and the borrowing on the swing line has been repaid.