Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	Note 15. Contingencies Litigation Overview From time to time, the Company may be subject to legal proceedings and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business, including, but not limited to, inquiries, investigations, audits and other regulatory proceedings, such as described below. The Company records a loss provision when it believes it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. Unless otherwise disclosed, the Company is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss for the legal proceeding described below. Except for the lawsuit described below, the Company believes that there are no claims or actions pending or threatened against it, the ultimate disposition of which would have a material adverse effect on it. Class Action and Shareholder Derivative Litigation On August 5, 2017, a lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against the Company and two of its officers in Mona Abouzied v. Applied Optoelectronics, Inc., Chih-Hsiang (Thompson) Lin, and Stefan J. Murry, et al., Case No. 4:17-cv-02399. The complaint in this matter seeks class action status on behalf of the Company’s shareholders, alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act against the Company, its chief executive officer, and its chief financial officer, arising out of its announcement on August 3, 2017 that “we see softer than expected demand for our 40G solutions with one of our large customers that will offset the sequential growth and increased demand we expect in 100G.” A second, related action was filed by Plaintiff Chad Ludwig on August 16, 2017 (Case No. 4:17-cv-02512) in the Southern District of Texas. The two cases were consolidated before Judge Vanessa D. Gilmore. On January 22, 2018, the court appointed Lawrence Rougier as Lead Plaintiff and Levi & Korinsky LLP as Lead Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended consolidated class action complaint on March 6, 2018. The amended complaint requests unspecified damages and other relief. The Company disputes the allegations and intends to vigorously contest the matter. We filed a motion to dismiss on April 4, 2018. Lead Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to the motion to dismiss on May 4, 2018, and briefing was completed on May 21, 2018. Further deadlines in this matter have been stayed until the court issues a decision on the pending motion to dismiss.

Note 15. Contingencies

Litigation

Overview

From time to time, the Company may be subject to legal proceedings and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business, including, but not limited to, inquiries, investigations, audits and other regulatory proceedings, such as described below. The Company records a loss provision when it believes it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. Unless otherwise disclosed, the Company is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss for the legal proceeding described below.

Except for the lawsuit described below, the Company believes that there are no claims or actions pending or threatened against it, the ultimate disposition of which would have a material adverse effect on it.

Class Action and Shareholder Derivative Litigation

On August 5, 2017, a lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against the Company and two of its officers in Mona Abouzied v. Applied Optoelectronics, Inc., Chih-Hsiang (Thompson) Lin, and Stefan J. Murry, et al., Case No. 4:17-cv-02399. The complaint in this matter seeks class action status on behalf of the Company’s shareholders, alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act against the Company, its chief executive officer, and its chief financial officer, arising out of its announcement on August 3, 2017 that “we see softer than expected demand for our 40G solutions with one of our large customers that will offset the sequential growth and increased demand we expect in 100G.” A second, related action was filed by Plaintiff Chad Ludwig on August 16, 2017 (Case No. 4:17-cv-02512) in the Southern District of Texas. The two cases were consolidated before Judge Vanessa D. Gilmore. On January 22, 2018, the court appointed Lawrence Rougier as Lead Plaintiff and Levi & Korinsky LLP as Lead Counsel. Lead Plaintiff filed an amended consolidated class action complaint on March 6, 2018. The amended complaint requests unspecified damages and other relief. The Company disputes the allegations and intends to vigorously contest the matter. We filed a motion to dismiss on April 4, 2018. Lead Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to the motion to dismiss on May 4, 2018, and briefing was completed on May 21, 2018. Further deadlines in this matter have been stayed until the court issues a decision on the pending motion to dismiss.