LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2011
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS [Abstract]
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	11. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS The Company is, from time to time, a party to litigation arising in the normal course of its business, including various claims of patent infringement. See the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 for the details of Bel's material pending lawsuits. Updates to pending litigation since the Company's Form 10-K filing are described below. The Company is a defendant in a lawsuit captioned SynQor, Inc. v. Artesyn Technologies, Inc., et al. brought in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas in November 2007. The plaintiff alleged that eleven defendants, including Bel, infringed its patents covering certain power products. With respect to the Company, the plaintiff claimed that the Company infringed its patents related to unregulated bus converters and/or point-of-load (POL) converters used in intermediate bus architecture power supply systems. The case went to trial in December 2010 and a judgment was entered on December 29, 2010. The jury found that certain products of the defendants directly and/or indirectly infringe the SynQor patents. The jury awarded damages of $8.1 million against the Company, which was recorded by the Company as a litigation charge in the statement of operations in the fourth quarter of 2010. On July 11, 2011, the Court awarded supplemental damages of $2.5 million against the Company. Of this amount, $1.9 million is covered through an indemnification agreement with one of Bel's customers. The additional expense to Bel of $0.6 million was recorded as a litigation charge in the statements of operations during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011. The Company is in the process of appealing the verdict and judgment. The Company has been advised that the full amount of the damage awards will need to be placed in escrow upon filing of the notice of appeal. The form of escrow is not yet determined. The Company was a defendant in a lawsuit captioned Halo Electronics, Inc. (“Halo”) v. Bel Fuse Inc., Pulse Engineering, Inc. and Technitrol, Inc. brought in Nevada Federal District Court. The plaintiff claimed that the Company had infringed its patents covering certain surface mount discrete magnetic products made by the Company. Halo sought unspecified damages, which it claimed should be trebled. In December 2007, this case was dismissed by the Nevada Federal District Court for lack of personal jurisdiction. Halo then re-filed this suit, with similar claims against the Company, in the Northern California Federal District Court, captioned Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Bel Fuse Inc., Elec & Eltek (USA) Corporation, Wurth Electronics Midcom, Inc., and Xfmrs, Inc. In June 2011, a memorandum of understanding was signed by the Company and Halo with regard to this lawsuit, whereby the Company has agreed to pay Halo a royalty on past sales. The Company recorded a $2.6 million liability related to past sales during the second quarter of 2011. This is included as a litigation charge in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011. Bel has also agreed to take a license with respect to the Halo patents at issue in the lawsuit and pay an 8% royalty on all net worldwide sales of the above-mentioned products from June 7, 2011 through August 10, 2015. The Company is a plaintiff in a lawsuit captioned Bel Fuse Inc. v. Halo Electronics, Inc. brought in the United States District Court of New Jersey during June 2007. The Company claims that Halo has infringed a patent covering certain integrated connector modules made by Halo. The Company is seeking an unspecified amount of damages plus interest, costs and attorney fees. In June 2011, a memorandum of understanding was signed by the Company and Halo with regard to this lawsuit, whereby Halo has agreed to pay the Company a 10% royalty related to its net worldwide sales of its integrated connector modules in exchange for a fully paid-up license of the Bel patent. This royalty income has been included in net sales in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011.

11. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

The Company is, from time to time, a party to litigation arising in the normal course of its business, including various claims of patent infringement. See the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 for the details of Bel's material pending lawsuits. Updates to pending litigation since the Company's Form 10-K filing are described below.

The Company is a defendant in a lawsuit captioned SynQor, Inc. v. Artesyn Technologies, Inc., et al. brought in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas in November 2007. The plaintiff alleged that eleven defendants, including Bel, infringed its patents covering certain power products. With respect to the Company, the plaintiff claimed that the Company infringed its patents related to unregulated bus converters and/or point-of-load (POL) converters used in intermediate bus architecture power supply systems. The case went to trial in December 2010 and a judgment was entered on December 29, 2010. The jury found that certain products of the defendants directly and/or indirectly infringe the SynQor patents. The jury awarded damages of $8.1 million against the Company, which was recorded by the Company as a litigation charge in the statement of operations in the fourth quarter of 2010. On July 11, 2011, the Court awarded supplemental damages of $2.5 million against the Company. Of this amount, $1.9 million is covered through an indemnification agreement with one of Bel's customers. The additional expense to Bel of $0.6 million was recorded as a litigation charge in the statements of operations during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011. The Company is in the process of appealing the verdict and judgment. The Company has been advised that the full amount of the damage awards will need to be placed in escrow upon filing of the notice of appeal. The form of escrow is not yet determined.

The Company was a defendant in a lawsuit captioned Halo Electronics, Inc. (“Halo”) v. Bel Fuse Inc., Pulse Engineering, Inc. and Technitrol, Inc. brought in Nevada Federal District Court. The plaintiff claimed that the Company had infringed its patents covering certain surface mount discrete magnetic products made by the Company. Halo sought unspecified damages, which it claimed should be trebled. In December 2007, this case was dismissed by the Nevada Federal District Court for lack of personal jurisdiction. Halo then re-filed this suit, with similar claims against the Company, in the Northern California Federal District Court, captioned Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Bel Fuse Inc., Elec & Eltek (USA) Corporation, Wurth Electronics Midcom, Inc., and Xfmrs, Inc. In June 2011, a memorandum of understanding was signed by the Company and Halo with regard to this lawsuit, whereby the Company has agreed to pay Halo a royalty on past sales. The Company recorded a $2.6 million liability related to past sales during the second quarter of 2011. This is included as a litigation charge in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011. Bel has also agreed to take a license with respect to the Halo patents at issue in the lawsuit and pay an 8% royalty on all net worldwide sales of the above-mentioned products from June 7, 2011 through August 10, 2015.

The Company is a plaintiff in a lawsuit captioned Bel Fuse Inc. v. Halo Electronics, Inc. brought in the United States District Court of New Jersey during June 2007. The Company claims that Halo has infringed a patent covering certain integrated connector modules made by Halo. The Company is seeking an unspecified amount of damages plus interest, costs and attorney fees. In June 2011, a memorandum of understanding was signed by the Company and Halo with regard to this lawsuit, whereby Halo has agreed to pay the Company a 10% royalty related to its net worldwide sales of its integrated connector modules in exchange for a fully paid-up license of the Bel patent. This royalty income has been included in net sales in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011.