Legal Proceedings	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Legal Proceedings	Legal Proceedings Although the Company expects to incur legal fees in connection with the below legal proceedings, the Company is unable to estimate the amount of such legal fees and therefore, such fees will be expensed in the period the legal services are performed. FCPA Matter In January 2011, the Company reached settlements with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) with respect to charges asserted by the SEC and DOJ relating to the anti-bribery, books and records, internal controls, and disclosure provisions of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) and other securities laws violations. The Company paid the monetary penalties under these settlements in installments such that all monetary penalties were paid in full by January 2013. With respect to the DOJ charges, a judgment of dismissal was issued in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on March 28, 2014. On October 15, 2013, the Company received an informal notice from the DOJ that an indictment against the former Senior Vice President and General Manager of its Swiss subsidiary had been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The indictment is against the individual, a former officer, and not against the Company and the Company does not foresee that further penalties or fines could be assessed against it as a corporate entity for this matter. However, the Company may be required throughout the term of the action to advance the legal fees and costs incurred by the individual defendant and to incur other financial obligations. While the Company maintains directors’ and officers’ insurance policies which are intended to cover legal expenses related to its indemnification obligations in situations such as these, the Company cannot determine if and to what extent the insurance policy will cover the ongoing legal fees for this matter. Accordingly, the legal fees that may be incurred by the Company in defending this former officer could have a material impact on its financial condition and results of operation. Swiss Bribery Matter In August 2013, the Company’s Swiss subsidiary was served with a search warrant from the Swiss federal prosecutor’s office. At the end of the search, the Swiss federal prosecutor presented the Company with a listing of the materials gathered by the representatives and then removed the materials from its premises for keeping at the prosecutor’s office. Based upon the Company’s exposure to the case, the Company believes this action to be related to the same or similar facts and circumstances as the FCPA action previously settled with the SEC and the DOJ. During initial discussions, the Swiss prosecutor has acknowledged both the existence of the Company’s deferred prosecution agreement with the DOJ and its cooperation efforts thereunder, both of which should have a positive impact on discussions going forward. Additionally, other than the activities previously reviewed in conjunction with the SEC and DOJ matters under the FCPA, the Company has no reason to believe that additional facts or circumstances are under review by the Swiss authorities. To date, the Swiss prosecutor has not issued its formal decision as to whether the charges will be brought against individuals or the Company or whether the proceeding will be abandoned. At this stage in the investigation, the Company is currently unable to determine the extent to which it will be subject to fines in accordance with Swiss bribery laws and what additional expenses will be incurred in order to defend this matter. As such, the Company cannot determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that a loss will be incurred nor can it estimate the range of any such potential loss. Accordingly, the Company has not accrued an amount for any potential loss associated with this action, but an adverse result could have a material adverse impact on its financial condition and results of operation. Government Investigations In early 2013, the Company voluntarily provided information to the SEC and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California related to its announcement that it intended to file restated financial statements for fiscal years 2011 and 2012. On June 11, 2015 and June 16, 2016, the Company received subpoenas from the SEC requesting certain documents related to, among other things, the facts and circumstances surrounding the restated financial statements. The Company has provided documents and information to the SEC in response to the subpoenas. In September 2016, the Company entered into a tolling agreement effective for the period beginning on September 12, 2016, and running through June 30, 2017, with the SEC related to these matters. In June 2017, the Company entered into an amended and restated version of this tolling agreement effective for the period beginning on September 12, 2016, and running through October 31, 2017. In November 2017, the Company entered into an amended and restated version of this tolling agreement effective for the period beginning on September 12, 2016, and running through December 22, 2017. The Company is cooperating with the investigation and recently made an offer of settlement to resolve the matter, which is subject to approval by the SEC Commissioners. The proposed settlement would be entered into by the Company without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings and would resolve alleged violations of certain anti-fraud and books and records provisions of the federal securities laws and related rules. Under the terms of the proposed settlement, the Company would pay $2.8 million in a civil penalty and agree not to commit or cause any violations of certain anti-fraud and books and records provisions of the federal securities laws and related rules. In the third quarter of 2017, the Company has made a corresponding accrual for the settlement amount as an operating expense in its financial statements.

Legal Proceedings

Although the Company expects to incur legal fees in connection with the below legal proceedings, the Company is unable to estimate the amount of such legal fees and therefore, such fees will be expensed in the period the legal services are performed.

FCPA Matter

In January 2011, the Company reached settlements with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) with respect to charges asserted by the SEC and DOJ relating to the anti-bribery, books and records, internal controls, and disclosure provisions of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) and other securities laws violations. The Company paid the monetary penalties under these settlements in installments such that all monetary penalties were paid in full by January 2013. With respect to the DOJ charges, a judgment of dismissal was issued in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on March 28, 2014.

On October 15, 2013, the Company received an informal notice from the DOJ that an indictment against the former Senior Vice President and General Manager of its Swiss subsidiary had been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The indictment is against the individual, a former officer, and not against the Company and the Company does not foresee that further penalties or fines could be assessed against it as a corporate entity for this matter. However, the Company may be required throughout the term of the action to advance the legal fees and costs incurred by the individual defendant and to incur other financial obligations. While the Company maintains directors’ and officers’ insurance policies which are intended to cover legal expenses related to its indemnification obligations in situations such as these, the Company cannot determine if and to what extent the insurance policy will cover the ongoing legal fees for this matter. Accordingly, the legal fees that may be incurred by the Company in defending this former officer could have a material impact on its financial condition and results of operation.

Swiss Bribery Matter

In August 2013, the Company’s Swiss subsidiary was served with a search warrant from the Swiss federal prosecutor’s office. At the end of the search, the Swiss federal prosecutor presented the Company with a listing of the materials gathered by the representatives and then removed the materials from its premises for keeping at the prosecutor’s office. Based upon the Company’s exposure to the case, the Company believes this action to be related to the same or similar facts and circumstances as the FCPA action previously settled with the SEC and the DOJ. During initial discussions, the Swiss prosecutor has acknowledged both the existence of the Company’s deferred prosecution agreement with the DOJ and its cooperation efforts thereunder, both of which should have a positive impact on discussions going forward. Additionally, other than the activities previously reviewed in conjunction with the SEC and DOJ matters under the FCPA, the Company has no reason to believe that additional facts or circumstances are under review by the Swiss authorities. To date, the Swiss prosecutor has not issued its formal decision as to whether the charges will be brought against individuals or the Company or whether the proceeding will be abandoned. At this stage in the investigation, the Company is currently unable to determine the extent to which it will be subject to fines in accordance with Swiss bribery laws and what additional expenses will be incurred in order to defend this matter. As such, the Company cannot determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that a loss will be incurred nor can it estimate the range of any such potential loss. Accordingly, the Company has not accrued an amount for any potential loss associated with this action, but an adverse result could have a material adverse impact on its financial condition and results of operation.

Government Investigations

In early 2013, the Company voluntarily provided information to the SEC and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California related to its announcement that it intended to file restated financial statements for fiscal years 2011 and 2012. On June 11, 2015 and June 16, 2016, the Company received subpoenas from the SEC requesting certain documents related to, among other things, the facts and circumstances surrounding the restated financial statements. The Company has provided documents and information to the SEC in response to the subpoenas. In September 2016, the Company entered into a tolling agreement effective for the period beginning on September 12, 2016, and running through June 30, 2017, with the SEC related to these matters. In June 2017, the Company entered into an amended and restated version of this tolling agreement effective for the period beginning on September 12, 2016, and running through October 31, 2017. In November 2017, the Company entered into an amended and restated version of this tolling agreement effective for the period beginning on September 12, 2016, and running through December 22, 2017. The Company is cooperating with the investigation and recently made an offer of settlement to resolve the matter, which is subject to approval by the SEC Commissioners. The proposed settlement would be entered into by the Company without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings and would resolve alleged violations of certain anti-fraud and books and records provisions of the federal securities laws and related rules. Under the terms of the proposed settlement, the Company would pay $2.8 million in a civil penalty and agree not to commit or cause any violations of certain anti-fraud and books and records provisions of the federal securities laws and related rules. In the third quarter of 2017, the Company has made a corresponding accrual for the settlement amount as an operating expense in its financial statements.