Subsequent Event	12 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2014
Subsequent Events [Abstract]
Subsequent Event	Subsequent Event On October 21, 2014 the Company entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”), by and among the Company, BTU International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“BTU”), and BTU Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Merger Sub”), pursuant to which Merger Sub will be merged with and into BTU (the “Merger”), with BTU surviving as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. The Merger Agreement has been approved by the Boards of Directors of both the Company and BTU and is subject to the Company Stockholder Approval (as defined below) and the BTU Stockholder Approval (as defined below). Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, at the effective time of the Merger, each share of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, of BTU (“BTU Shares”), issued and outstanding immediately prior to the effective time of the Merger will be converted into the right to receive and become exchangeable for 0.3291 (the “Exchange Ratio”) shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, of the Company (“Company Shares”). Any outstanding BTU stock option shall be assumed by the Company and shall be converted into an option to purchase shares of Company common stock on substantially the same terms and conditions as were applicable to such Company stock option, with appropriate adjustments based upon the Exchange Ratio to the exercise price and the number of shares of Company common stock subject to such stock option. Each BTU restricted stock unit that remains unvested immediately prior to the effective time of the Merger will become a fully vested and unrestricted share of BTU common stock. The Merger Agreement contains customary representations and warranties of the Company and BTU relating to their respective businesses and public filings. Additionally, the Merger Agreement provides for customary pre-closing covenants of the Company and BTU, including covenants (i) for each to conduct its business in the ordinary course consistent with past practice and to refrain from taking certain actions without consent, (ii) with respect to BTU, not to solicit proposals relating to alternative transactions or, subject to certain exceptions, enter into discussions concerning or provide information in connection with alternative transactions, and (iii) subject to certain exceptions, for each to recommend that its stockholders adopt the Merger Agreement. Consummation of the Merger is subject to various conditions, including, among others, customary conditions relating to the adoption and approval of the Merger and the issuance of the Company Shares pursuant to the Merger Agreement by the requisite vote of the Company’s stockholders (the “Company Stockholder Approval”) and the adoption and approval of the Merger pursuant to the Merger Agreement by the requisite vote of BTU’s stockholders (the “BTU Stockholder Approval”). The Merger Agreement provides certain termination rights for both the Company and BTU and further provides that upon termination of the Merger Agreement under certain circumstances (i) (including BTU entering into an alternative transaction), BTU will be obligated to pay the Company a termination fee of $1.3 million and/or an expense reimbursement amount of $1.0 million or (ii) the Company will be obligated to pay BTU a termination fee of $1.3 million and/or an expense reimbursement amount of $1.0 million. In addition, either the Company or BTU can terminate the Merger Agreement if the Merger has not been consummated on or before 120 days following the date the registration statement on Form S-4 containing the joint proxy statement is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, if the failure to close is not caused by the breach of the Merger Agreement by the party electing to terminate. The foregoing description of the Merger Agreement does not purport to be complete and is qualified in its entirety by the full text of the Merger Agreement, which was filed Exhibit 2.1 to the Company Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC October 23, 2014, and is incorporated by reference herein Shortly after the Company entered into the Merger Agreement with BTU, the Company learned that two separate putative stockholder class action complaints were filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The first was filed on November 4, 2014, purportedly on behalf of BTU’s public stockholders, against the members of the BTU Board, Amtech and Merger Sub. The complaint generally alleges, among other things, that the members of BTU’s board of directors breached their fiduciary duties owed to BTU’s public stockholders by causing BTU to enter into the Merger Agreement and by approving the merger, and that the Company and Merger Sub aided and abetted such alleged breaches of fiduciary duties. In addition, the complaint alleges that the Merger Agreement improperly favors the Company and unduly restricts BTU’s ability to negotiate with other potential bidders. The complaint generally seeks, among other things, declaratory and injunctive relief concerning the alleged fiduciary breaches, injunctive relief prohibiting the Company, Merger Sub, and BTU from consummating the Merger, other forms of equitable relief, and compensatory damages. The Company believes that the claims are without merit and it intends to defend against the litigation vigorously on behalf of the Company and Merger Sub. The second was filed on November 17, 2014, purportedly on behalf of BTU’s public stockholders, against BTU, the BTU board, Amtech and Merger Sub. The complaint generally alleges, among other things, that the members of BTU’s board of directors breached their fiduciary duties owed to BTU’s public stockholders by failing to engage in a competitive sale and bidding process, and that the Company and Merger Sub aided and abetted such alleged breaches of fiduciary duties. The complaint further alleges that these fiduciary breaches gave the Company an unfair advantage by failing to solicit other potential acquirers. The complaint generally seeks, among other things, injunctive relief prohibiting the defendants from consummating the Merger, compensatory damages for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties, and other forms of equitable relief. While the Company also believes these claims are without merit, it intends to defend against the litigation vigorously.

Subsequent Event

On October 21, 2014 the Company entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”), by and among the Company, BTU International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“BTU”), and BTU Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Merger Sub”), pursuant to which Merger Sub will be merged with and into BTU (the “Merger”), with BTU surviving as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. The Merger Agreement has been approved by the Boards of Directors of both the Company and BTU and is subject to the Company Stockholder Approval (as defined below) and the BTU Stockholder Approval (as defined below).

Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, at the effective time of the Merger, each share of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, of BTU (“BTU Shares”), issued and outstanding immediately prior to the effective time of the Merger will be converted into the right to receive and become exchangeable for 0.3291 (the “Exchange Ratio”) shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, of the Company (“Company Shares”).

Any outstanding BTU stock option shall be assumed by the Company and shall be converted into an option to purchase shares of Company common stock on substantially the same terms and conditions as were applicable to such Company stock option, with appropriate adjustments based upon the Exchange Ratio to the exercise price and the number of shares of Company common stock subject to such stock option. Each BTU restricted stock unit that remains unvested immediately prior to the effective time of the Merger will become a fully vested and unrestricted share of BTU common stock.

The Merger Agreement contains customary representations and warranties of the Company and BTU relating to their respective businesses and public filings. Additionally, the Merger Agreement provides for customary pre-closing covenants of the Company and BTU, including covenants (i) for each to conduct its business in the ordinary course consistent with past practice and to refrain from taking certain actions without consent, (ii) with respect to BTU, not to solicit proposals relating to alternative transactions or, subject to certain exceptions, enter into discussions concerning or provide information in connection with alternative transactions, and (iii) subject to certain exceptions, for each to recommend that its stockholders adopt the Merger Agreement.

Consummation of the Merger is subject to various conditions, including, among others, customary conditions relating to the adoption and approval of the Merger and the issuance of the Company Shares pursuant to the Merger Agreement by the requisite vote of the Company’s stockholders (the “Company Stockholder Approval”) and the adoption and approval of the Merger pursuant to the Merger Agreement by the requisite vote of BTU’s stockholders (the “BTU Stockholder Approval”).

The Merger Agreement provides certain termination rights for both the Company and BTU and further provides that upon termination of the Merger Agreement under certain circumstances (i) (including BTU entering into an alternative transaction), BTU will be obligated to pay the Company a termination fee of $1.3 million and/or an expense reimbursement amount of $1.0 million or (ii) the Company will be obligated to pay BTU a termination fee of $1.3 million and/or an expense reimbursement amount of $1.0 million. In addition, either the Company or BTU can terminate the Merger Agreement if the Merger has not been consummated on or before 120 days following the date the registration statement on Form S-4 containing the joint proxy statement is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, if the failure to close is not caused by the breach of the Merger Agreement by the party electing to terminate.

The foregoing description of the Merger Agreement does not purport to be complete and is qualified in its entirety by the full text of the Merger Agreement, which was filed Exhibit 2.1 to the Company Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC October 23, 2014, and is incorporated by reference herein

Shortly after the Company entered into the Merger Agreement with BTU, the Company learned that two separate putative stockholder class action complaints were filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The first was filed on November 4, 2014, purportedly on behalf of BTU’s public stockholders, against the members of the BTU Board, Amtech and Merger Sub. The complaint generally alleges, among other things, that the members of BTU’s board of directors breached their fiduciary duties owed to BTU’s public stockholders by causing BTU to enter into the Merger Agreement and by approving the merger, and that the Company and Merger Sub aided and abetted such alleged breaches of fiduciary duties. In addition, the complaint alleges that the Merger Agreement improperly favors the Company and unduly restricts BTU’s ability to negotiate with other potential bidders. The complaint generally seeks, among other things, declaratory and injunctive relief concerning the alleged fiduciary breaches, injunctive relief prohibiting the Company, Merger Sub, and BTU from consummating the Merger, other forms of equitable relief, and compensatory damages. The Company believes that the claims are without merit and it intends to defend against the litigation vigorously on behalf of the Company and Merger Sub.

The second was filed on November 17, 2014, purportedly on behalf of BTU’s public stockholders, against BTU, the BTU board, Amtech and Merger Sub. The complaint generally alleges, among other things, that the members of BTU’s board of directors breached their fiduciary duties owed to BTU’s public stockholders by failing to engage in a competitive sale and bidding process, and that the Company and Merger Sub aided and abetted such alleged breaches of fiduciary duties. The complaint further alleges that these fiduciary breaches gave the Company an unfair advantage by failing to solicit other potential acquirers. The complaint generally seeks, among other things, injunctive relief prohibiting the defendants from consummating the Merger, compensatory damages for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties, and other forms of equitable relief. While the Company also believes these claims are without merit, it intends to defend against the litigation vigorously.