Legal Proceedings	12 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2012
Legal Proceedings	21. Legal Proceedings *Legal Settlement* In 2009, James Dooley, former Chief Executive Officer, initiated arbitration against the Company seeking severance in connection with his 2003 termination for cause. On December 10, 2010, the arbitrator ruled that, despite having pled guilty to violating federal securities laws by willfully and knowingly making false statements to the Company’s accountants, Dooley’s actions did not satisfy the definition of cause under his employment agreement. As a result, the arbitrator determined that Dooley is entitled to severance benefits under his employment agreement, plus interest from June 2005. This proceeding was subject to binding arbitration under the terms of the employment agreement. Accordingly, the Company recognized approximately $1.4 million in legal settlement costs in 2011. On December 27, 2010, the Company filed a complaint seeking declaratory relief to vacate the arbitration award with the United States District Court, District of Oregon. On May 17, 2011, the court ruled in favor of Mr. Dooley. On May 19, 2011, the Company filed a motion for the court to admit into evidence certain testimony of Mr. Dooley, arguing that the court was in error in not admitting it in the proceeding, and asking the court to reconsider its ruling based on that evidence. On June 14, 2011, the court ruled in favor of admitting the testimony into evidence, but also reaffirmed its original ruling upholding the arbitrator’s award. The Company did not further appeal and paid the award in the first quarter of 2012. *All Ring Patent Infringement Prosecution* In August 2005, the Company commenced a proceeding in the Kaohsiung District Court of Taiwan (the Court) directed against All Ring Tech Co., Ltd. (All Ring) of Taiwan. The Company alleged that All Ring’s Capacitor Tester Model RK-T6600 (the Capacitor Tester) infringes ESI’s Taiwan Patent No. 207469, entitled “Circuit Component Handler” (the 207469 patent). As part of this proceeding, the Court issued a Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) in August 2005, restricting the use of some of All Ring’s assets. All Ring then filed a bond with the Court to obtain relief from the attachment of its assets. In July 2007, the Court issued a second PAO and approximately $6.0 million was restricted in All Ring’s accounts. The second PAO remains in effect and cannot be revoked. In October 2005, the Company filed a formal patent infringement action against All Ring in the Court. Also in October 2005, the Court executed a Preliminary Injunction Order (PIO) that prohibits All Ring from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale or using the Capacitor Tester until final judgment is entered in the formal patent infringement action. The Court dismissed All Ring’s application to revoke the PIO on January 18, 2008, and the PIO remains in place. On June 3, 2011 the Court orally announced its judgment, finding that the Capacitor Tester, as well as All Ring’s RK-T2000 and RK-L50 systems, had infringed the 207469 patent, ordering All Ring to pay the Company approximately $24 million in damages, plus interest accrued from November 4, 2005 through the payment date at a rate of 5%, and enjoining All Ring from selling the infringing systems. The written judgment was issued on June 13, 2011. On June 16, 2011, All Ring posted a cash bond for approximately $24.0 million to prevent the provisional execution of the judgment. All Ring appealed this judgment to the Intellectual Property Court on June 28, 2011 and on October 31, 2011, the Company filed its response to All Ring’s appeal. The Company and All Ring have each filed additional briefs with the Intellectual Property Court. The Intellectual Property Court is expected to hold its final hearing in this matter in October 2012. As a part of these proceedings, the Company established three letters of credit for approximately $19.5 million in July 2009, September 2009 and June 2011, which are collateralized by $22.3 million of restricted cash. The total restricted cash balance of $22.3 million was included in Restricted cash on the Consolidated Balance Sheets at March 31, 2012 as a current asset. In the ordinary course of business, the Company is involved in various other legal matters, either asserted or unasserted, and investigations. In the opinion of management, ultimate resolution of these matters will not have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

21. Legal Proceedings

Legal Settlement

In 2009, James Dooley, former Chief Executive Officer, initiated arbitration against the Company seeking severance in connection with his 2003 termination for cause. On December 10, 2010, the arbitrator ruled that, despite having pled guilty to violating federal securities laws by willfully and knowingly making false statements to the Company’s accountants, Dooley’s actions did not satisfy the definition of cause under his employment agreement. As a result, the arbitrator determined that Dooley is entitled to severance benefits under his employment agreement, plus interest from June 2005. This proceeding was subject to binding arbitration under the terms of the employment agreement. Accordingly, the Company recognized approximately $1.4 million in legal settlement costs in 2011. On December 27, 2010, the Company filed a complaint seeking declaratory relief to vacate the arbitration award with the United States District Court, District of Oregon. On May 17, 2011, the court ruled in favor of Mr. Dooley. On May 19, 2011, the Company filed a motion for the court to admit into evidence certain testimony of Mr. Dooley, arguing that the court was in error in not admitting it in the proceeding, and asking the court to reconsider its ruling based on that evidence. On June 14, 2011, the court ruled in favor of admitting the testimony into evidence, but also reaffirmed its original ruling upholding the arbitrator’s award. The Company did not further appeal and paid the award in the first quarter of 2012.

All Ring Patent Infringement Prosecution

In August 2005, the Company commenced a proceeding in the Kaohsiung District Court of Taiwan (the Court) directed against All Ring Tech Co., Ltd. (All Ring) of Taiwan. The Company alleged that All Ring’s Capacitor Tester Model RK-T6600 (the Capacitor Tester) infringes ESI’s Taiwan Patent No. 207469, entitled “Circuit Component Handler” (the 207469 patent). As part of this proceeding, the Court issued a Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) in August 2005, restricting the use of some of All Ring’s assets. All Ring then filed a bond with the Court to obtain relief from the attachment of its assets. In July 2007, the Court issued a second PAO and approximately $6.0 million was restricted in All Ring’s accounts. The second PAO remains in effect and cannot be revoked.

In October 2005, the Company filed a formal patent infringement action against All Ring in the Court. Also in October 2005, the Court executed a Preliminary Injunction Order (PIO) that prohibits All Ring from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale or using the Capacitor Tester until final judgment is entered in the formal patent infringement action. The Court dismissed All Ring’s application to revoke the PIO on January 18, 2008, and the PIO remains in place.

On June 3, 2011 the Court orally announced its judgment, finding that the Capacitor Tester, as well as All Ring’s RK-T2000 and RK-L50 systems, had infringed the 207469 patent, ordering All Ring to pay the Company approximately $24 million in damages, plus interest accrued from November 4, 2005 through the payment date at a rate of 5%, and enjoining All Ring from selling the infringing systems. The written judgment was issued on June 13, 2011. On June 16, 2011, All Ring posted a cash bond for approximately $24.0 million to prevent the provisional execution of the judgment. All Ring appealed this judgment to the Intellectual Property Court on June 28, 2011 and on October 31, 2011, the Company filed its response to All Ring’s appeal. The Company and All Ring have each filed additional briefs with the Intellectual Property Court. The Intellectual Property Court is expected to hold its final hearing in this matter in October 2012.

As a part of these proceedings, the Company established three letters of credit for approximately $19.5 million in July 2009, September 2009 and June 2011, which are collateralized by $22.3 million of restricted cash. The total restricted cash balance of $22.3 million was included in Restricted cash on the Consolidated Balance Sheets at March 31, 2012 as a current asset.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company is involved in various other legal matters, either asserted or unasserted, and investigations. In the opinion of management, ultimate resolution of these matters will not have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.