Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Jun. 29, 2012
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Legal Matters From time to time, various lawsuits, claims and proceedings have been, and may in the future be, instituted or asserted against the Company, including those pertaining to patent infringement, intellectual property, environmental, product liability and warranty, safety and health, employment and contractual matters. Additionally, the semiconductor industry is characterized by vigorous protection and pursuit of intellectual property rights. From time to time, third parties have asserted and may in the future assert patent, copyright, trademark and other intellectual property rights to technologies that are important to the Company's business and have demanded and may in the future demand that the Company license their technology. The outcome of any such litigation cannot be predicted with certainty and some such lawsuits, claims or proceedings may be disposed of unfavorably to the Company. Generally speaking, intellectual property disputes often have a risk of injunctive relief, which, if imposed against the Company, could materially and adversely affect the Company's financial condition, or results of operations. From time to time the Company may also be involved in legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business. Legal costs are expensed as incurred. On June 6 and 7, 2011, two putative stockholder class action lawsuits (Case No. 111CV202403 (the “Bushansky action”) and Case No. 111CV202501 (the “Venette action”), respectively) were filed in California Superior Court in Santa Clara County naming AATI, members of AATI's board of directors, the Company and PowerCo Acquisition Corp. (“Merger Sub”) as defendants. The lawsuits related to conduct surrounding the Company's acquisition of AATI. On July 26, 2011, the Court issued an order consolidating the Bushansky action and Venette action into a single, consolidated action captioned In re Advanced Analogic Technologies Inc. Shareholder Litigation, Lead Case No. 111CV202403, and designating an amended complaint filed on July 14, 2011 in the Venette action as the operative complaint in the litigation. On November 30, 2011, following confidential arbitration proceedings in the Delaware Court of Chancery, the Company announced that it and AATI had amended their previously announced merger agreement whereby the Company would acquire AATI at a reduced price through a tender offer. The Company and AATI completed the transaction on January 9, 2012. On March 2, 2012, the Court stayed all discovery in the matter and ordered that Plaintiffs file an amended complaint by April 20, 2012. On April 20, 2012, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint (“First Amended Complaint”) against each of the original defendants with the exception of Merger Sub. The First Amended Complaint alleges, among other things, that (1) members of AATI's board of directors breached their fiduciary duties by (a) failing to take steps to maximize the value of AATI to its public shareholders by failing to adequately consider potential acquirers, (b) agreeing to the merger for inadequate consideration on unfair terms; (c) causing the filing of a materially misleading Schedule 14D-9 that failed to (i) disclose a basis for the price reduction, (ii) describe the arbitration proceedings, and (iii) include any financial valuation or fairness opinion concerning whether the revised merger consideration was fair; and (d) causing the issuance of amendments to the Schedule 14D-9 that failed to respond adequately to the SEC's disclosure directives; and (2) Skyworks and AATI allegedly aided and abetted these purported breaches of fiduciary duties. During the three and nine months ended June 29, 2012, the Company recorded a $5.0 million charge to selling, general and administrative expenses to recognize a contingent liability associated with the probable settlement of a warranty claim. The Company has assessed the possibility of additional charges associated with the warranty claim and other outstanding litigation matters and has determined that there were no additional material losses that were reasonably possible of occurring. The Company monitors the status of these contingencies on an ongoing basis to ensure amounts are recognized and/or disclosed in our financial statements and footnotes as required by ASC 450, Loss Contingencies. Guarantees and Indemnifications The Company has made no contractual guarantees for the benefit of third parties. However, the Company generally indemnifies its customers from third-party intellectual property infringement litigation claims related to its products, and, on occasion, also provides other indemnities related to product sales. In connection with certain facility leases, the Company has indemnified its lessors for certain claims arising from the Company's activities at the facility or out of the lease. The Company indemnifies its directors and officers to the maximum extent permitted under the laws of the state of Delaware. The duration of the indemnities varies, and in many cases is indefinite. The indemnities to customers in connection with product sales generally are subject to limits based upon the amount of the related product sales and in many cases are subject to geographic and other restrictions. In certain instances, the Company's indemnities do not provide for any limitation of the maximum potential future payments the Company could be obligated to make. The Company has not recorded any liability for these indemnities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and does not expect that such obligations will have a material adverse impact on its financial condition or results of operations.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Legal Matters

From time to time, various lawsuits, claims and proceedings have been, and may in the future be, instituted or asserted against the Company, including those pertaining to patent infringement, intellectual property, environmental, product liability and warranty, safety and health, employment and contractual matters.

Additionally, the semiconductor industry is characterized by vigorous protection and pursuit of intellectual property rights. From time to time, third parties have asserted and may in the future assert patent, copyright, trademark and other intellectual property rights to technologies that are important to the Company's business and have demanded and may in the future demand that the Company license their technology. The outcome of any such litigation cannot be predicted with certainty and some such lawsuits, claims or proceedings may be disposed of unfavorably to the Company. Generally speaking, intellectual property disputes often have a risk of injunctive relief, which, if imposed against the Company, could materially and adversely affect the Company's financial condition, or results of operations. From time to time the Company may also be involved in legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business. Legal costs are expensed as incurred.

On June 6 and 7, 2011, two putative stockholder class action lawsuits (Case No. 111CV202403 (the “Bushansky action”) and Case No. 111CV202501 (the “Venette action”), respectively) were filed in California Superior Court in Santa Clara County naming AATI, members of AATI's board of directors, the Company and PowerCo Acquisition Corp. (“Merger Sub”) as defendants. The lawsuits related to conduct surrounding the Company's acquisition of AATI. On July 26, 2011, the Court issued an order consolidating the Bushansky action and Venette action into a single, consolidated action captioned In re Advanced Analogic Technologies Inc. Shareholder Litigation, Lead Case No. 111CV202403, and designating an amended complaint filed on July 14, 2011 in the Venette action as the operative complaint in the litigation.

On November 30, 2011, following confidential arbitration proceedings in the Delaware Court of Chancery, the Company announced that it and AATI had amended their previously announced merger agreement whereby the Company would acquire AATI at a reduced price through a tender offer. The Company and AATI completed the transaction on January 9, 2012. On March 2, 2012, the Court stayed all discovery in the matter and ordered that Plaintiffs file an amended complaint by April 20, 2012.

On April 20, 2012, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint (“First Amended Complaint”) against each of the original defendants with the exception of Merger Sub. The First Amended Complaint alleges, among other things, that (1) members of AATI's board of directors breached their fiduciary duties by (a) failing to take steps to maximize the value of AATI to its public shareholders by failing to adequately consider potential acquirers, (b) agreeing to the merger for inadequate consideration on unfair terms; (c) causing the filing of a materially misleading Schedule 14D-9 that failed to (i) disclose a basis for the price reduction, (ii) describe the arbitration proceedings, and (iii) include any financial valuation or fairness opinion concerning whether the revised merger consideration was fair; and (d) causing the issuance of amendments to the Schedule 14D-9 that failed to respond adequately to the SEC's disclosure directives; and (2) Skyworks and AATI allegedly aided and abetted these purported breaches of fiduciary duties.

During the three and nine months ended June 29, 2012, the Company recorded a $5.0 million charge to selling, general and administrative expenses to recognize a contingent liability associated with the probable settlement of a warranty claim. The Company has assessed the possibility of additional charges associated with the warranty claim and other outstanding litigation matters and has determined that there were no additional material losses that were reasonably possible of occurring. The Company monitors the status of these contingencies on an ongoing basis to ensure amounts are recognized and/or disclosed in our financial statements and footnotes as required by ASC 450, Loss Contingencies.

Guarantees and Indemnifications

The Company has made no contractual guarantees for the benefit of third parties. However, the Company generally indemnifies its customers from third-party intellectual property infringement litigation claims related to its products, and, on occasion, also provides other indemnities related to product sales. In connection with certain facility leases, the Company has indemnified its lessors for certain claims arising from the Company's activities at the facility or out of the lease.

The Company indemnifies its directors and officers to the maximum extent permitted under the laws of the state of Delaware. The duration of the indemnities varies, and in many cases is indefinite. The indemnities to customers in connection with product sales generally are subject to limits based upon the amount of the related product sales and in many cases are subject to geographic and other restrictions. In certain instances, the Company's indemnities do not provide for any limitation of the maximum potential future payments the Company could be obligated to make. The Company has not recorded any liability for these indemnities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and does not expect that such obligations will have a material adverse impact on its financial condition or results of operations.