Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jul. 27, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments And Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies From time to time in the ordinary course of its business, the Company is involved in various claims, litigation, and other legal actions that are normal to the nature of its business, including with respect to Intellectual Property (“IP”), contract, product liability, employment, and environmental matters. In accordance with accounting standards regarding loss contingencies, the Company accrues an undiscounted liability for those contingencies where the incurrence of a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. The Company also discloses the amount accrued and the amount of a reasonably possible loss in excess of the amount accrued, if such disclosure is necessary for its financial statements not to be misleading. The Company does not record liabilities when the likelihood that the liability has been incurred is probable but the amount cannot be reasonably estimated, or when the liability is believed to be only reasonably possible or remote. The Company evaluates, at least quarterly, developments in its legal matters that could affect the amount of liability that has been previously accrued, and makes adjustments as appropriate. Significant judgment is required to determine both probability and the estimated amount. The Company may be unable to estimate a possible loss or range of possible loss due to various reasons, including, among others: (i) if the damages sought are indeterminate; (ii) if the proceedings are in early stages, (iii) if there is uncertainty as to the outcome of pending appeals, motions or settlements, (iv) if there are significant factual issues to be determined or resolved, and (v) if there are novel or unsettled legal theories presented. In such instances, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the ultimate resolution of such matters, including a possible eventual loss, if any. Because litigation outcomes are inherently unpredictable, the Company’s evaluation of legal proceedings often involves a series of complex assessments by management about future events and can rely heavily on estimates and assumptions. While the consequences of certain unresolved proceedings are not presently determinable, and an estimate of the probable and reasonably possible loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued for such proceedings cannot be reasonably made, an adverse outcome from such proceedings could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s earnings in any given reporting period. However, in the opinion of management, after consulting with legal counsel, and taking into account insurance coverage, any ultimate liability related to current outstanding claims and lawsuits, individually or in the aggregate, is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements, as a whole. However, legal matters are inherently unpredictable and subject to significant uncertainties, some of which are beyond the Company’s control. As such, even though the Company intends to vigorously defend itself with respect to its legal matters, there can be no assurance that the final outcome of these matters will not materially and adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. Environmental Matters In 2001, the Company was notified by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (“State”) that it may have liability associated with the clean-up of the one-third acre Davis Chemical Company site in Los Angeles, California. The Company has been included in the clean-up program because it was one of the companies that used the Davis Chemical Company site for waste recycling and/or disposal between 1949 and 1990. The Company joined with other potentially responsible parties and entered into a Consent Order with the State that required the group to perform a soils investigation at the site and submit a remediation plan. The State has approved the remediation plan, which addressed the group’s obligations under the Consent Order. Although the Consent Order does not require the group to remediate the site and the State has indicated it intends to look to other parties for remediation, the State has not yet issued “no further action” letters to the group members and has not been able to obtain reimbursement from the former site owner. To date, the Company’s share of the group’s expenses has not been material and has been expensed as incurred. The Company has used an environmental firm, specializing in hydrogeology, to perform monitoring of the groundwater at the Company’s former facility in Newbury Park, California that was leased for approximately forty years. The Company vacated the building in May 2002. Certain contaminants have been found in the local groundwater and site soils. Responsibility for soil contamination remains under investigation. The location of key soil contamination (and some related site groundwater impact associated with the soil contamination) is concentrated in and found to emanate from an area of an underground storage tank that the Company believes to have been installed and primarily used in the early 1960s by a former tenant at the site who preceded the Company’s tenancy. There are no claims pending with respect to environmental matters at the Newbury Park site. The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board having authority over the site issued joint instructions in November 2008, ordering the Company and the current owner of the site to perform additional assessments and surveys, and to create ongoing groundwater monitoring plans before any final regulatory action for “no further action” may be approved. In September 2009, the regulatory agency issued supplemental instructions to the Company and the current site owner regarding previously ordered site assessments, surveys and groundwater monitoring. In October 2013, an order was issued including a scope of proposed additional site work, monitoring, and proposed remediation activities. The Company has filed an appeal of the October 2013 order seeking reconsideration of the removal of two other potentially responsible parties, and seeking clarification of certain other factual findings by the regulatory agency. Other parties have filed their own responses to the October 2013 order. The parties are expected to work cooperatively in responding to and determining the appropriate scope and extent of additional site investigative and categorization work, as well as in relation to any ultimate proposed clean up and abatement work. The Company has retained the services of an environmental firm which has engaged with the regulatory agency and has begun activities to comply with the order. The Company has accrued liabilities where it is probable that a loss will be incurred and the cost or amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Based on the Company’s preliminary assessment following a November 2012 draft cleanup and abatement order, which has been reviewed under the October 2013 order pending the current appeal by the Company and other impacted parties, the Company has determined a likely range of probable loss between $2.5 million and $5.7 million. Given the yet unresolved status of the clean up and abatement order and uncertainties associated with environmental assessment and the remediation activities, the Company is unable to determine a best estimate within the range of loss. Therefore, the Company recorded the minimum amount of $2.5 million in the third quarter of fiscal year 2013, and such reserve remains on the Company’s books under “Other long-term liabilities” on the condensed consolidated balance sheets. These estimates could change as a result of changes in planned remedial actions, further actions from the regulatory agency, remediation technology, and other factors. Commercial Disputes The Company periodically is involved in disputes arising in the normal course of business regarding products or services provided to the Company by vendors or service providers. Historically, the cost of commercial disputes has been immaterial to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. Indemnification The Company has entered into agreements with its current executive and some former officers and directors indemnifying them against certain liabilities incurred in connection with the performance of their duties. The Company’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws contain comparable indemnification obligations with respect to the Company’s current directors and employees. Product Warranties The Company’s general warranty policy provides for repair or replacement of defective parts. In some cases, a refund of the purchase price is offered. In certain instances the Company has agreed to other warranty terms, including some indemnification provisions. The product warranty accrual reflects the Company’s best estimate of probable liability under its product warranties. The Company accrues for known warranty issues if a loss is probable and can be reasonably estimated, and accrues for estimated incurred but unidentified issues based on historical experience. Historically, warranty expense has been immaterial to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. Earnout Liability Pursuant to the earn-out arrangement with stockholders of Cycleo SAS (“Cycleo”), which the Company acquired on March 7, 2012, the Company potentially may make payments totaling up to approximately $16.0 million based on the achievement of a combination of certain revenue and operating income milestones by Cycleo over a period of four years beginning on April 30, 2012. For certain of the Cycleo stockholders, payment of the earn-out liability is contingent upon employment at the end of the four-year period and is accounted for as post-acquisition compensation expense over the service period. The portion of the earn-out liability that is not dependent on continued employment was included in the purchase price allocation at March 7, 2012. The Company has recorded a cumulative liability of $0.9 million and $0.9 million as of July 27, 2014 and January 26, 2014, respectively.

Commitments and Contingencies

From time to time in the ordinary course of its business, the Company is involved in various claims, litigation, and other legal actions that are normal to the nature of its business, including with respect to Intellectual Property (“IP”), contract, product liability, employment, and environmental matters.

In accordance with accounting standards regarding loss contingencies, the Company accrues an undiscounted liability for those contingencies where the incurrence of a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. The Company also discloses the amount accrued and the amount of a reasonably possible loss in excess of the amount accrued, if such disclosure is necessary for its financial statements not to be misleading. The Company does not record liabilities when the likelihood that the liability has been incurred is probable but the amount cannot be reasonably estimated, or when the liability is believed to be only reasonably possible or remote. The Company evaluates, at least quarterly, developments in its legal matters that could affect the amount of liability that has been previously accrued, and makes adjustments as appropriate. Significant judgment is required to determine both probability and the estimated amount. The Company may be unable to estimate a possible loss or range of possible loss due to various reasons, including, among others: (i) if the damages sought are indeterminate; (ii) if the proceedings are in early stages, (iii) if there is uncertainty as to the outcome of pending appeals, motions or settlements, (iv) if there are significant factual issues to be determined or resolved, and (v) if there are novel or unsettled legal theories presented. In such instances, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the ultimate resolution of such matters, including a possible eventual loss, if any.

Because litigation outcomes are inherently unpredictable, the Company’s evaluation of legal proceedings often involves a series of complex assessments by management about future events and can rely heavily on estimates and assumptions. While the consequences of certain unresolved proceedings are not presently determinable, and an estimate of the probable and reasonably possible loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued for such proceedings cannot be reasonably made, an adverse outcome from such proceedings could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s earnings in any given reporting period. However, in the opinion of management, after consulting with legal counsel, and taking into account insurance coverage, any ultimate liability related to current outstanding claims and lawsuits, individually or in the aggregate, is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial statements, as a whole. However, legal matters are inherently unpredictable and subject to significant uncertainties, some of which are beyond the Company’s control. As such, even though the Company intends to vigorously defend itself with respect to its legal matters, there can be no assurance that the final outcome of these matters will not materially and adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

Environmental Matters

In 2001, the Company was notified by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (“State”) that it may have liability associated with the clean-up of the one-third acre Davis Chemical Company site in Los Angeles, California. The Company has been included in the clean-up program because it was one of the companies that used the Davis Chemical Company site for waste recycling and/or disposal between 1949 and 1990. The Company joined with other potentially responsible parties and entered into a Consent Order with the State that required the group to perform a soils investigation at the site and submit a remediation plan. The State has approved the remediation plan, which addressed the group’s obligations under the Consent Order. Although the Consent Order does not require the group to remediate the site and the State has indicated it intends to look to other parties for remediation, the State has not yet issued “no further action” letters to the group members and has not been able to obtain reimbursement from the former site owner. To date, the Company’s share of the group’s expenses has not been material and has been expensed as incurred.

The Company has used an environmental firm, specializing in hydrogeology, to perform monitoring of the groundwater at the Company’s former facility in Newbury Park, California that was leased for approximately forty years. The Company vacated the building in May 2002. Certain contaminants have been found in the local groundwater and site soils. Responsibility for soil contamination remains under investigation. The location of key soil contamination (and some related site groundwater impact associated with the soil contamination) is concentrated in and found to emanate from an area of an underground storage tank that the Company believes to have been installed and primarily used in the early 1960s by a former tenant at the site who preceded the Company’s tenancy. There are no claims pending with respect to environmental matters at the Newbury Park site. The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board having authority over the site issued joint instructions in November 2008, ordering the Company and the current owner of the site to perform additional assessments and surveys, and to create ongoing groundwater monitoring plans before any final regulatory action for “no further action” may be approved. In September 2009, the regulatory agency issued supplemental instructions to the Company and the current site owner regarding previously ordered site assessments, surveys and groundwater monitoring. In October 2013, an order was issued including a scope of proposed additional site work, monitoring, and proposed remediation activities. The Company has filed an appeal of the October 2013 order seeking reconsideration of the removal of two other potentially responsible parties, and seeking clarification of certain other factual findings by the regulatory agency. Other parties have filed their own responses to the October 2013 order. The parties are expected to work cooperatively in responding to and determining the appropriate scope and extent of additional site investigative and categorization work, as well as in relation to any ultimate proposed clean up and abatement work. The Company has retained the services of an environmental firm which has engaged with the regulatory agency and has begun activities to comply with the order.

The Company has accrued liabilities where it is probable that a loss will be incurred and the cost or amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Based on the Company’s preliminary assessment following a November 2012 draft cleanup and abatement order, which has been reviewed under the October 2013 order pending the current appeal by the Company and other impacted parties, the Company has determined a likely range of probable loss between $2.5 million and $5.7 million. Given the yet unresolved status of the clean up and abatement order and uncertainties associated with environmental assessment and the remediation activities, the Company is unable to determine a best estimate within the range of loss. Therefore, the Company recorded the minimum amount of $2.5 million in the third quarter of fiscal year 2013, and such reserve remains on the Company’s books under “Other long-term liabilities” on the condensed consolidated balance sheets. These estimates could change as a result of changes in planned remedial actions, further actions from the regulatory agency, remediation technology, and other factors.

Commercial Disputes

The Company periodically is involved in disputes arising in the normal course of business regarding products or services provided to the Company by vendors or service providers. Historically, the cost of commercial disputes has been immaterial to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Indemnification

The Company has entered into agreements with its current executive and some former officers and directors indemnifying them against certain liabilities incurred in connection with the performance of their duties. The Company’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws contain comparable indemnification obligations with respect to the Company’s current directors and employees.

Product Warranties

The Company’s general warranty policy provides for repair or replacement of defective parts. In some cases, a refund of the purchase price is offered. In certain instances the Company has agreed to other warranty terms, including some indemnification provisions.

The product warranty accrual reflects the Company’s best estimate of probable liability under its product warranties. The Company accrues for known warranty issues if a loss is probable and can be reasonably estimated, and accrues for estimated incurred but unidentified issues based on historical experience. Historically, warranty expense has been immaterial to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Earnout Liability

Pursuant to the earn-out arrangement with stockholders of Cycleo SAS (“Cycleo”), which the Company acquired on March 7, 2012, the Company potentially may make payments totaling up to approximately $16.0 million based on the achievement of a combination of certain revenue and operating income milestones by Cycleo over a period of four years beginning on April 30, 2012. For certain of the Cycleo stockholders, payment of the earn-out liability is contingent upon employment at the end of the four-year period and is accounted for as post-acquisition compensation expense over the service period. The portion of the earn-out liability that is not dependent on continued employment was included in the purchase price allocation at March 7, 2012. The Company has recorded a cumulative liability of $0.9 million and $0.9 million as of July 27, 2014 and January 26, 2014, respectively.