Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 28, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Legal Proceedings On February 14, 2012, the Company filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, which was subsequently moved to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The action alleged the infringement of five of the Company’s patents relating to RFICs and switching technology by RF Micro Devices, Inc. (RFMD). The lawsuit alleged that certain of RFMD’s products infringe the Company’s patents relating to silicon on insulator (SOI) design technology for RFICs and sought, in addition to damages, to permanently enjoin RFMD from further infringement. On March 26, 2013, the Company filed an additional lawsuit against RFMD in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California which alleged infringement of a sixth patent relating to RFICs and switching technology by RFMD. On April 25, 2013, the Company consolidated these two U.S. District Court actions into one lawsuit. On September 27, 2013, the U.S. District Court set a trial date for November 12, 2014 and, as a result of various consolidating actions and motions, the Company planned to assert two patents against RFMD at the trial. In addition, on December 12, 2013, RFMD filed a counterclaim alleging the Company violated a patent owned or licensed by RFMD. On July 22, 2014, the Company favorably settled all outstanding claims with RFMD and entered into a patent cross license agreement. On November 14, 2013, representatives of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in collaboration with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California (USAO), executed a federal search warrant at the Company's San Diego facilities in connection with an investigation into exports and temporary imports of certain products sold in the aerospace market. The Company is cooperating fully with the USAO and DHS officials. No claims have been asserted and no amounts have been accrued for this contingency in the consolidated financial statements. The U.S. Department of State, Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance (USDS), is conducting a review of the Company’s compliance with the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and the AECA’s implementation of International Traffic In Arms Regulations (ITAR). The Company is cooperating fully with the review and, on April 11, 2014, the Company submitted information requested by USDS. The USDS has not responded to date. Based on this review the Company could be subject to continued investigation and potential regulatory consequences related to violations of the AECA ranging from a no-action letter, government oversight of facilities and export transactions, monetary penalties of up to $500 per violation, and in certain cases, debarment from government contracting, denial of export privileges, and criminal penalties. No claims have been asserted and no amounts have been accrued for this contingency in the consolidated financial statements. Furthermore, due to the preliminary nature of the investigation and the USDS review, the Company believes it is not possible to estimate the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome or the possible loss or range of losses in the event of an unfavorable outcome. Responding to this investigation and review is costly and could impose a significant burden on management and employees. The Company may receive unfavorable interim rulings in the course of this review and there can be no assurance that a favorable outcome will ultimately be obtained. From time to time, the Company is subject to various claims and suits arising in the ordinary course of business, including commercial, employment and environmental matters. The Company does not expect that the resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position or results of operations.

Commitments and Contingencies

Legal Proceedings

On February 14, 2012, the Company filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, which was subsequently moved to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The action alleged the infringement of five of the Company’s patents relating to RFICs and switching technology by RF Micro Devices, Inc. (RFMD). The lawsuit alleged that certain of RFMD’s products infringe the Company’s patents relating to silicon on insulator (SOI) design technology for RFICs and sought, in addition to damages, to permanently enjoin RFMD from further infringement. On March 26, 2013, the Company filed an additional lawsuit against RFMD in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California which alleged infringement of a sixth patent relating to RFICs and switching technology by RFMD. On April 25, 2013, the Company consolidated these two U.S. District Court actions into one lawsuit. On September 27, 2013, the U.S. District Court set a trial date for November 12, 2014 and, as a result of various consolidating actions and motions, the Company planned to assert two patents against RFMD at the trial. In addition, on December 12, 2013, RFMD filed a counterclaim alleging the Company violated a patent owned or licensed by RFMD. On July 22, 2014, the Company favorably settled all outstanding claims with RFMD and entered into a patent cross license agreement.

On November 14, 2013, representatives of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in collaboration with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California (USAO), executed a federal search warrant at the Company's San Diego facilities in connection with an investigation into exports and temporary imports of certain products sold in the aerospace market. The Company is cooperating fully with the USAO and DHS officials. No claims have been asserted and no amounts have been accrued for this contingency in the consolidated financial statements.

The U.S. Department of State, Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance (USDS), is conducting a review of the Company’s compliance with the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and the AECA’s implementation of International Traffic In Arms Regulations (ITAR). The Company is cooperating fully with the review and, on April 11, 2014, the Company submitted information requested by USDS. The USDS has not responded to date. Based on this review the Company could be subject to continued investigation and potential regulatory consequences related to violations of the AECA ranging from a no-action letter, government oversight of facilities and export transactions, monetary penalties of up to $500 per violation, and in certain cases, debarment from government contracting, denial of export privileges, and criminal penalties. No claims have been asserted and no amounts have been accrued for this contingency in the consolidated financial statements. Furthermore, due to the preliminary nature of the investigation and the USDS review, the Company believes it is not possible to estimate the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome or the possible loss or range of losses in the event of an unfavorable outcome. Responding to this investigation and review is costly and could impose a significant burden on management and employees. The Company may receive unfavorable interim rulings in the course of this review and there can be no assurance that a favorable outcome will ultimately be obtained.

From time to time, the Company is subject to various claims and suits arising in the ordinary course of business, including commercial, employment and environmental matters. The Company does not expect that the resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position or results of operations.