Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Oct. 02, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
CONTINGENCIES	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 hazards, product liability and warranty, safety and health, employment and contractual matters. On November 23, 2015, PMC delivered to the Company a notice terminating the Amended and Restated Merger Agreement. Prior to the termination of the Amended and Restated Merger Agreement, between October 8, 2015 and October 21, 2015, three putative class action lawsuits challenging the then-proposed Merger were filed on behalf of PMC stockholders in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and in the Superior Court of California in Santa Clara County. The actions are captioned Pietrus Industries Ltd. v. PMC-Sierra, Inc., et al., CA. No. 11610-VCG (Delaware Court of Chancery), Bhakta v. PMC-Sierra, et al., Case No. 1-15-CV-286967 (Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County), and Azzalini v. Lang, et al., Case No. 1-15-CV-287124 (Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County). The lawsuits name the Company, PMC, the directors of PMC, and others as defendants. In general, they allege that the directors of PMC breached their fiduciary duties to PMC stockholders in connection with the Merger by, among other things, failing to fully inform themselves of the market value of PMC, maximize stockholder value, and act in the best interest of public stockholders, and by placing their personal financial interests before the interests of stockholders. These actions further allege that the Company and PMC, among others, aided and abetted the directors’ purported breach of their fiduciary duties. Among other things, they seek (i) injunctive relief preliminarily and permanently enjoining the Merger, (ii) in the event that the Merger is consummated, rescission or an award of rescissory damages, (iii) plaintiffs’ costs and fees, including attorneys’ expenses and experts’ fees; and (iv) an accounting for damages sustained. The two actions pending in the Superior Court of California have been assigned to the Complex Civil Litigation Department, and all discovery in those matters has been stayed. The court in those actions has scheduled a case management conference for February 19, 2016. 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. The Company monitors the status of legal proceedings and other contingencies on an ongoing basis to ensure amounts are recognized and/or disclosed in our financial statements and footnotes as required by Accounting Standards Codification 450, Loss Contingencies. At the time of this filing, the Company had not recorded any accrual for loss contingencies associated with its legal proceedings as losses resulting from such matters were determined not to be probable. The Company does not believe there are any pending legal proceedings that are reasonably possible to result in a material loss. We are engaged in various legal actions in the normal course of business and, while there can be no assurances, the Company believes the outcome of all pending litigation involving the Company will not have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on its business.

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 hazards, product liability and warranty, safety and health, employment and contractual matters.

On November 23, 2015, PMC delivered to the Company a notice terminating the Amended and Restated Merger Agreement. Prior to the termination of the Amended and Restated Merger Agreement, between October 8, 2015 and October 21, 2015, three putative class action lawsuits challenging the then-proposed Merger were filed on behalf of PMC stockholders in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and in the Superior Court of California in Santa Clara County. The actions are captioned Pietrus Industries Ltd. v. PMC-Sierra, Inc., et al., CA. No. 11610-VCG (Delaware Court of Chancery), Bhakta v. PMC-Sierra, et al., Case No. 1-15-CV-286967 (Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County), and Azzalini v. Lang, et al., Case No. 1-15-CV-287124 (Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County). The lawsuits name the Company, PMC, the directors of PMC, and others as defendants. In general, they allege that the directors of PMC breached their fiduciary duties to PMC stockholders in connection with the Merger by, among other things, failing to fully inform themselves of the market value of PMC, maximize stockholder value, and act in the best interest of public stockholders, and by placing their personal financial interests before the interests of stockholders. These actions further allege that the Company and PMC, among others, aided and abetted the directors’ purported breach of their fiduciary duties. Among other things, they seek (i) injunctive relief preliminarily and permanently enjoining the Merger, (ii) in the event that the Merger is consummated, rescission or an award of rescissory damages, (iii) plaintiffs’ costs and fees, including attorneys’ expenses and experts’ fees; and (iv) an accounting for damages sustained. The two actions pending in the Superior Court of California have been assigned to the Complex Civil Litigation Department, and all discovery in those matters has been stayed. The court in those actions has scheduled a case management conference for February 19, 2016.

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.

The Company monitors the status of legal proceedings and other contingencies on an ongoing basis to ensure amounts are recognized and/or disclosed in our financial statements and footnotes as required by Accounting Standards Codification 450, Loss Contingencies. At the time of this filing, the Company had not recorded any accrual for loss contingencies associated with its legal proceedings as losses resulting from such matters were determined not to be probable. The Company does not believe there are any pending legal proceedings that are reasonably possible to result in a material loss. We are engaged in various legal actions in the normal course of business and, while there can be no assurances, the Company believes the outcome of all pending litigation involving the Company will not have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on its business.