Litigation	3 Months Ended
Mar. 24, 2013
Litigation [Abstract]
Litigation	16. Litigation EPC/Lidow Litigation. In September 2008, the Company filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against Efficient Power Conversion Corp. ("EPC"), certain of EPC's employees and other defendants (including Alex Lidow, a former chief executive officer and director of the Company, and now a principal of EPC) alleging improper and unauthorized use and/or misappropriation of certain Company confidential information, trade secrets and technology related to the Company's Gallium Nitride development program. In 2009, the Company refiled the suit in the Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC409749. Alex Lidow and EPC asserted claims against the Company arising out of Lidow's employment with and separation from the Company, for violations of the California Labor Code and California Business and Professions Code, and alleging the Company unfairly competed and interfered with EPC. Those claims have been consolidated with and in the Company's action. In January 2012, the trial court granted summary adjudication in favor of the Company on the wrongful termination cause of action filed by Lidow; however, on June 23, 2012, the Court of Appeal filed a writ of mandate directing that the trial court's order be vacated and that a new order denying summary adjudication be entered. The Company subsequently filed a petition for review in the California Supreme Court, which was denied. Discovery is ongoing, and the Company intends to vigorously pursue all rights and defenses available to it in these matters. Angeles v. Omega. See Note 15, "Environmental Matters." In addition to the above, the Company is involved in certain legal matters that arise in the ordinary course of business. The Company intends to pursue its rights and defend against any claims brought by third parties vigorously. However, because of the nature and inherent uncertainties of litigation, should the outcome of these actions be unfavorable, the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.

16. Litigation

EPC/Lidow Litigation.

In September 2008, the Company filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against Efficient Power Conversion Corp. ("EPC"), certain of EPC's employees and other defendants (including Alex Lidow, a former chief executive officer and director of the Company, and now a principal of EPC) alleging improper and unauthorized use and/or misappropriation of certain Company confidential information, trade secrets and technology related to the Company's Gallium Nitride development program. In 2009, the Company refiled the suit in the Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC409749. Alex Lidow and EPC asserted claims against the Company arising out of Lidow's employment with and separation from the Company, for violations of the California Labor Code and California Business and Professions Code, and alleging the Company unfairly competed and interfered with EPC. Those claims have been consolidated with and in the Company's action.

In January 2012, the trial court granted summary adjudication in favor of the Company on the wrongful termination cause of action filed by Lidow; however, on June 23, 2012, the Court of Appeal filed a writ of mandate directing that the trial court's order be vacated and that a new order denying summary adjudication be entered. The Company subsequently filed a petition for review in the California Supreme Court, which was denied.

Discovery is ongoing, and the Company intends to vigorously pursue all rights and defenses available to it in these matters.

Angeles v. Omega. See Note 15, "Environmental Matters."

In addition to the above, the Company is involved in certain legal matters that arise in the ordinary course of business. The Company intends to pursue its rights and defend against any claims brought by third parties vigorously. However, because of the nature and inherent uncertainties of litigation, should the outcome of these actions be unfavorable, the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.