Litigation	6 Months Ended
Aug. 03, 2013
Litigation [Abstract]
Litigation	Litigation The Company is involved from time to time in various claims and lawsuits in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the claims and suits individually and in the aggregate will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operations or consolidated financial statements. In the third quarter of fiscal 2009, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency commenced an investigation into an undervaluation and corresponding underpayment of the customs duty owed by one of the Company's vendors relating to a particular shipment of goods to the Company. After a lengthy investigation, the vendor was criminally charged and recently pleaded guilty in federal court to using fraudulent invoices to defraud U.S. Customs of duties. After the vendor refused a request to indemnify the Company for its risk, in December 2009, the Company commenced litigation against the vendor in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota for breach of contract. The vendor then filed counterclaims for payments it claimed were owed by the Company. The case has been stayed by the court. The Company believes that the funds it is withholding from the vendor will be sufficient to cover any costs or possible liabilities against it that may result from the settlement of this case.

Litigation

The Company is involved from time to time in various claims and lawsuits in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the claims and suits individually and in the aggregate will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operations or consolidated financial statements.

In the third quarter of fiscal 2009, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency commenced an investigation into an undervaluation and corresponding underpayment of the customs duty owed by one of the Company's vendors relating to a particular shipment of goods to the Company. After a lengthy investigation, the vendor was criminally charged and recently pleaded guilty in federal court to using fraudulent invoices to defraud U.S. Customs of duties. After the vendor refused a request to indemnify the Company for its risk, in December 2009, the Company commenced litigation against the vendor in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota for breach of contract. The vendor then filed counterclaims for payments it claimed were owed by the Company. The case has been stayed by the court. The Company believes that the funds it is withholding from the vendor will be sufficient to cover any costs or possible liabilities against it that may result from the settlement of this case.