COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	9 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2012
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	NOTE 9. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Purchase Commitments. In October 2008, we entered into an original equipment manufacturing ("OEM") agreement with SMB of Denmark to purchase VSpro specialty analyzers and related cartridges. Effective January 2011, we amended and restated our OEM agreement, including the terms of our minimum purchase commitments. Under the amended agreement, we committed to purchase a minimum number of VSpro specialty analyzers and related cartridges on an annual basis during each calendar year 2011 through 2015. Our purchase obligations in the future may be adjusted if our minimum purchase commitments are not met during a calendar year period. At December 31, 2012, our total remaining outstanding commitment due is approximately $9.4 million. In December 2011, we executed a term sheet to enter into a development and supply equipment agreement with Diatron MI PLC ("Diatron") of Hungary to purchase Diatron hematology instruments. Effective July 2012, we entered into a development and supply agreement with Diatron and under the agreement terms, we committed to purchase a minimum number of hematology instruments on an annual basis through fiscal year 2015. At December 31, 2012, our total remaining outstanding commitment due is approximately $7.9 million. Furthermore, at December 31, 2012, we prepaid $1.5 million to Diatron for future purchases of hematology instruments and reagents, which was recorded in prepaid expenses and other currents assets on the consolidated balance sheet. The commitment amount is based on the minimum number of hematology instruments that we are required to purchase, the cost of the instruments and the Euro exchange rate at period-end. Because the exchange rate will fluctuate in the future, the amount of the purchase commitment in dollars will change accordingly. Patent Licensing Agreement. Effective January 2009, we entered into a license agreement with Alere. Under our license agreement, we licensed co-exclusively certain worldwide patent rights related to lateral flow immunoassay technology in the field of animal health diagnostics in the professional marketplace. The license agreement provides that Alere shall not grant any future rights to any third parties under its current lateral flow patent rights in the animal health diagnostics field in the professional marketplace. The license agreement enables us to develop and market products under rights from Alere to address animal health and laboratory animal research markets. In exchange for the license rights, we (i) paid an up-front license fee of $5.0 million to Alere in January 2009, (ii) agreed to pay royalties during the term of the agreement, based solely on sales of products in a jurisdiction country covered by valid and unexpired claims in that jurisdiction under the licensed Alere patent rights, and (iii) agreed to pay a yearly minimum license fee of between $500,000 to $1.0 million per year, which fee will be creditable against any royalties due during such calendar year. The royalties, if any, are payable through the date of the expiration of the last valid patent licensed under the agreement that includes at least one claim in a jurisdiction covering products we sell in that jurisdiction. The yearly minimum fees became payable starting in fiscal 2011 for so long as we desire to maintain exclusivity under the agreement. Litigation. On June 28, 2010, we filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Cepheid. On September 24, 2012, the parties agreed to terminate all pending and future claims connected with the litigation in exchange for a one-time payment by Cepheid of $17.3 million, which we recognized as an offset to operating expenses during the second quarter of fiscal 2013. On October 1, 2012, St. Louis Police Retirement System, a purported shareholder of Abaxis, filed a lawsuit against certain officers and each of our directors in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California alleging, among other things, that the directors violated Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and breached their fiduciary duties by allegedly failing to disclose material information in our 2010 proxy statement, breached their fiduciary duties by allegedly violating the terms of our 2005 Equity Incentive Plan, and breached their fiduciary duties by failing to disclose alleged material information in our 2012 proxy statement regarding (1) the events leading up to our proposal to amend the 2005 Equity Incentive Plan to eliminate the limit on the number of shares that may be issued pursuant to restricted stock units, and (2) the effects of the proposed amendment on certain settled and outstanding restricted stock units. The plaintiff seeks, among other things, damages, disgorgement and attorney's fees. In addition, the plaintiff sought, and on October 23, 2012 the court issued, an order preliminarily enjoining our shareholder vote on Proposal 2 in our 2012 proxy statement, regarding an amendment to the 2005 Equity Incentive Plan, until such time as additional disclosures could be made. The Company filed with the SEC and mailed to shareholders supplemental proxy materials approved by the court, the injunction was lifted and our shareholders approved the proposal to amend our 2005 Equity Incentive Plan. The defendants have filed motions to dismiss the claims. A hearing on the motions is currently scheduled for March 5, 2013. Management believes the claims raised by the plaintiff are without merit and intends to contest them vigorously. We are involved from time to time in various litigation matters in the normal course of business. There can be no assurance that existing or future legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business or otherwise will not have a material adverse effect on our business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

NOTE 9. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Purchase Commitments. In October 2008, we entered into an original equipment manufacturing ("OEM") agreement with SMB of Denmark to purchase VSpro specialty analyzers and related cartridges. Effective January 2011, we amended and restated our OEM agreement, including the terms of our minimum purchase commitments. Under the amended agreement, we committed to purchase a minimum number of VSpro specialty analyzers and related cartridges on an annual basis during each calendar year 2011 through 2015. Our purchase obligations in the future may be adjusted if our minimum purchase commitments are not met during a calendar year period. At December 31, 2012, our total remaining outstanding commitment due is approximately $9.4 million.

In December 2011, we executed a term sheet to enter into a development and supply equipment agreement with Diatron MI PLC ("Diatron") of Hungary to purchase Diatron hematology instruments. Effective July 2012, we entered into a development and supply agreement with Diatron and under the agreement terms, we committed to purchase a minimum number of hematology instruments on an annual basis through fiscal year 2015. At December 31, 2012, our total remaining outstanding commitment due is approximately $7.9 million. Furthermore, at December 31, 2012, we prepaid $1.5 million to Diatron for future purchases of hematology instruments and reagents, which was recorded in prepaid expenses and other currents assets on the consolidated balance sheet. The commitment amount is based on the minimum number of hematology instruments that we are required to purchase, the cost of the instruments and the Euro exchange rate at period-end. Because the exchange rate will fluctuate in the future, the amount of the purchase commitment in dollars will change accordingly.

Patent Licensing Agreement. Effective January 2009, we entered into a license agreement with Alere. Under our license agreement, we licensed co-exclusively certain worldwide patent rights related to lateral flow immunoassay technology in the field of animal health diagnostics in the professional marketplace. The license agreement provides that Alere shall not grant any future rights to any third parties under its current lateral flow patent rights in the animal health diagnostics field in the professional marketplace. The license agreement enables us to develop and market products under rights from Alere to address animal health and laboratory animal research markets.

In exchange for the license rights, we (i) paid an up-front license fee of $5.0 million to Alere in January 2009, (ii) agreed to pay royalties during the term of the agreement, based solely on sales of products in a jurisdiction country covered by valid and unexpired claims in that jurisdiction under the licensed Alere patent rights, and (iii) agreed to pay a yearly minimum license fee of between $500,000 to $1.0 million per year, which fee will be creditable against any royalties due during such calendar year. The royalties, if any, are payable through the date of the expiration of the last valid patent licensed under the agreement that includes at least one claim in a jurisdiction covering products we sell in that jurisdiction. The yearly minimum fees became payable starting in fiscal 2011 for so long as we desire to maintain exclusivity under the agreement.

Litigation. On June 28, 2010, we filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Cepheid. On September 24, 2012, the parties agreed to terminate all pending and future claims connected with the litigation in exchange for a one-time payment by Cepheid of $17.3 million, which we recognized as an offset to operating expenses during the second quarter of fiscal 2013.

On October 1, 2012, St. Louis Police Retirement System, a purported shareholder of Abaxis, filed a lawsuit against certain officers and each of our directors in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California alleging, among other things, that the directors violated Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and breached their fiduciary duties by allegedly failing to disclose material information in our 2010 proxy statement, breached their fiduciary duties by allegedly violating the terms of our 2005 Equity Incentive Plan, and breached their fiduciary duties by failing to disclose alleged material information in our 2012 proxy statement regarding (1) the events leading up to our proposal to amend the 2005 Equity Incentive Plan to eliminate the limit on the number of shares that may be issued pursuant to restricted stock units, and (2) the effects of the proposed amendment on certain settled and outstanding restricted stock units. The plaintiff seeks, among other things, damages, disgorgement and attorney's fees. In addition, the plaintiff sought, and on October 23, 2012 the court issued, an order preliminarily enjoining our shareholder vote on Proposal 2 in our 2012 proxy statement, regarding an amendment to the 2005 Equity Incentive Plan, until such time as additional disclosures could be made. The Company filed with the SEC and mailed to shareholders supplemental proxy materials approved by the court, the injunction was lifted and our shareholders approved the proposal to amend our 2005 Equity Incentive Plan. The defendants have filed motions to dismiss the claims. A hearing on the motions is currently scheduled for March 5, 2013. Management believes the claims raised by the plaintiff are without merit and intends to contest them vigorously.

We are involved from time to time in various litigation matters in the normal course of business. There can be no assurance that existing or future legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business or otherwise will not have a material adverse effect on our business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.