Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Oct. 01, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	Contingencies The Company is subject to a variety of investigations, claims, suits and other legal proceedings that arise from time to time in the ordinary course of business, including but not limited to, intellectual property, employment, tort and breach of contract matters. The Company currently believes that the outcomes of such proceedings, individually and in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse impact on its business, cash flows, financial position, or results of operations. Any legal proceedings are subject to inherent uncertainties, and the Company's view of these matters and its potential effects may change in the future. In connection with the acquisition of the Enterprise business from Motorola Solutions, Inc., the Company acquired Symbol Technologies, Inc., a subsidiary of Motorola Solutions (“Symbol”). A putative federal class action lawsuit, Waring v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al., was filed on August 16, 2005 against Symbol Technologies, Inc. and two of its former officers in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York by Robert Waring. After the filing of the Waring action, several additional purported class actions were filed against Symbol and the same former officers making substantially similar allegations (collectively, the New Class Actions”). The Waring action and the New Class Actions were consolidated for all purposes and on April 26, 2006, the Court appointed the Iron Workers Local # 580 Pension Fund as lead plaintiff and approved its retention of lead counsel on behalf of the putative class. On August 30, 2006, the lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”), and named additional former officers and directors of Symbol as defendants. The lead plaintiff alleges that the defendants misrepresented the effectiveness of Symbol’s internal controls and forecasting processes, and that, as a result, all of the defendants violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and the individual defendants violated Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The lead plaintiff alleges that it was damaged by the decline in the price of Symbol’s stock following certain purported corrective disclosures and seeks unspecified damages. The court has certified a class of investors that includes those that purchased Symbol common stock between March 12, 2004 and August 1, 2005. The parties have substantially completed fact and expert discovery. However, there are certain discovery motions pending that could, if granted, reopen fact discovery. The court has held in abeyance all other deadlines, including the deadline for the filing of dispositive motions, and has not set a date for trial. The current lead Directors and Officers insurer continues to maintain its position of not agreeing to reimburse defense costs incurred by the Company in connection with this matter. The Company establishes an accrued liability for loss contingencies related to legal matters when the loss is both probable and estimable. In addition, for some matters for which a loss is probable or reasonably possible, an estimate of the amount of loss or range of loss is not possible, and we may be unable to estimate the possible loss or range of losses that could potentially result from the application of non-monetary remedies. Currently, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate the amount of reasonably possible losses for the above mentioned matter.

Contingencies

The Company is subject to a variety of investigations, claims, suits and other legal proceedings that arise from time to time in the ordinary course of business, including but not limited to, intellectual property, employment, tort and breach of contract matters. The Company currently believes that the outcomes of such proceedings, individually and in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse impact on its business, cash flows, financial position, or results of operations. Any legal proceedings are subject to inherent uncertainties, and the Company's view of these matters and its potential effects may change in the future.

In connection with the acquisition of the Enterprise business from Motorola Solutions, Inc., the Company acquired Symbol Technologies, Inc., a subsidiary of Motorola Solutions (“Symbol”). A putative federal class action lawsuit, Waring v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al., was filed on August 16, 2005 against Symbol Technologies, Inc. and two of its former officers in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York by Robert Waring. After the filing of the Waring action, several additional purported class actions were filed against Symbol and the same former officers making substantially similar allegations (collectively, the New Class Actions”). The Waring action and the New Class Actions were consolidated for all purposes and on April 26, 2006, the Court appointed the Iron Workers Local # 580 Pension Fund as lead plaintiff and approved its retention of lead counsel on behalf of the putative class. On August 30, 2006, the lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”), and named additional former officers and directors of Symbol as defendants. The lead plaintiff alleges that the defendants misrepresented the effectiveness of Symbol’s internal controls and forecasting processes, and that, as a result, all of the defendants violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and the individual defendants violated Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The lead plaintiff alleges that it was damaged by the decline in the price of Symbol’s stock following certain purported corrective disclosures and seeks unspecified damages. The court has certified a class of investors that includes those that purchased Symbol common stock between March 12, 2004 and August 1, 2005. The parties have substantially completed fact and expert discovery. However, there are certain discovery motions pending that could, if granted, reopen fact discovery. The court has held in abeyance all other deadlines, including the deadline for the filing of dispositive motions, and has not set a date for trial. The current lead Directors and Officers insurer continues to maintain its position of not agreeing to reimburse defense costs incurred by the Company in connection with this matter.

The Company establishes an accrued liability for loss contingencies related to legal matters when the loss is both probable and estimable. In addition, for some matters for which a loss is probable or reasonably possible, an estimate of the amount of loss or range of loss is not possible, and we may be unable to estimate the possible loss or range of losses that could potentially result from the application of non-monetary remedies. Currently, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate the amount of reasonably possible losses for the above mentioned matter.