Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	Contingencies Legal Proceedings We are currently involved in various legal proceedings. As required under ASC 450, Contingencies, we accrue for contingencies when we believe that a loss is probable and that we can reasonably estimate the amount of any such loss. We have not recorded any accrual for contingent liabilities associated with the legal proceedings described below based on our belief that any potential loss, while reasonably possible, is not probable. Further, any possible range of loss in these matters cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. We believe that we have valid defenses with respect to legal proceedings pending against us. However, litigation is inherently unpredictable, and it is possible that cash flows or results of operations could be materially affected in any particular period by the unfavorable resolution of this contingency or because of the diversion of management's attention and the creation of significant expenses. Pending legal proceedings as of June 30, 2015 are as follows: On September 12, 2014, MV Circuit Design, Inc., an Ohio company ("MV Circuit"), brought an action to correct the inventorship of certain patents owned by Omnicell, as well as related state-law claims against Omnicell in the Northern District of Ohio (Case No. 1:14-cv-02028-DAP) regarding allegations of fraud in the filing and prosecution of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,180,485, 8,773,270, 8,812,153, PCT/US2007/003765, PCT/US2011/063597, and PCT/US2011/0635505 (the “Action”). On November 14, 2014, we filed a Motion to Dismiss the Action. MV Circuit responded on January 29, 2015, and we replied in support of our Motion to Dismiss on February 17, 2015. On March 24, 2015, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part the Motion to Dismiss. Specifically, the Court granted Omnicell's Motion to Dismiss with respect to Counts 4, 5, and 6 (declaratory judgments regarding PCT/US2007/003765, PCT/US2011/063597, and PCT/US2011/0635505) and count 13 (civil conspiracy). The Court denied the Company's Motion to Dismiss with respect to Count 9 (fraud), Count 7 (fraudulent concealment) and Count 8 (negligent misrepresentation). We Answered the Complaint on April 8, 2015. The Court held a Case Management Conference on April 22, 2015. At the Case Management Conference, the Court assigned this case to a “complex” track and ordered production of initial discovery regarding inventorship and sales of the relevant Omnicell products. No procedural schedule has been set. A status Conference with the court is scheduled for August 26, 2015. We intend to defend the matter vigorously. On March 19, 2015, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against the Company and two executive officers in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, captioned Nelson v. Omnicell, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-01280-HSG.The complaint purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of purchasers of the Company’s stock between May 2, 2014 and March 2, 2015. It alleged that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by purportedly making false and misleading statements regarding the existence of a “side letter” arrangement and the adequacy of internal controls that allegedly resulted in false and misleading financial statements. The Company believed that the claims had no merit and intended to defend the lawsuit vigorously. The Company and the individual defendants were not served with the complaint and on May 20, 2015, the plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the lawsuit without prejudice.

Contingencies

Legal Proceedings

We are currently involved in various legal proceedings. As required under ASC 450, Contingencies, we accrue for contingencies when we believe that a loss is probable and that we can reasonably estimate the amount of any such loss. We have not recorded any accrual for contingent liabilities associated with the legal proceedings described below based on our belief that any potential loss, while reasonably possible, is not probable. Further, any possible range of loss in these matters cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. We believe that we have valid defenses with respect to legal proceedings pending against us. However, litigation is inherently unpredictable, and it is possible that cash flows or results of operations could be materially affected in any particular period by the unfavorable resolution of this contingency or because of the diversion of management's attention and the creation of significant expenses.

Pending legal proceedings as of June 30, 2015 are as follows:

On September 12, 2014, MV Circuit Design, Inc., an Ohio company ("MV Circuit"), brought an action to correct the inventorship of certain patents owned by Omnicell, as well as related state-law claims against Omnicell in the Northern District of Ohio (Case No. 1:14-cv-02028-DAP) regarding allegations of fraud in the filing and prosecution of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,180,485, 8,773,270, 8,812,153, PCT/US2007/003765, PCT/US2011/063597, and PCT/US2011/0635505 (the “Action”). On November 14, 2014, we filed a Motion to Dismiss the Action. MV Circuit responded on January 29, 2015, and we replied in support of our Motion to Dismiss on February 17, 2015. On March 24, 2015, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part the Motion to Dismiss. Specifically, the Court granted Omnicell's Motion to Dismiss with respect to Counts 4, 5, and 6 (declaratory judgments regarding PCT/US2007/003765, PCT/US2011/063597, and PCT/US2011/0635505) and count 13 (civil conspiracy). The Court denied the Company's Motion to Dismiss with respect to Count 9 (fraud), Count 7 (fraudulent concealment) and Count 8 (negligent misrepresentation). We Answered the Complaint on April 8, 2015. The Court held a Case Management Conference on April 22, 2015. At the Case Management Conference, the Court assigned this case to a “complex” track and ordered production of initial discovery regarding inventorship and sales of the relevant Omnicell products. No procedural schedule has been set. A status Conference with the court is scheduled for August 26, 2015. We intend to defend the matter vigorously.

On March 19, 2015, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against the Company and two executive officers in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, captioned Nelson v. Omnicell, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-01280-HSG.The complaint purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of purchasers of the Company’s stock between May 2, 2014 and March 2, 2015. It alleged that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by purportedly making false and misleading statements regarding the existence of a “side letter” arrangement and the adequacy of internal controls that allegedly resulted in false and misleading financial statements. The Company believed that the claims had no merit and intended to defend the lawsuit vigorously. The Company and the individual defendants were not served with the complaint and on May 20, 2015, the plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the lawsuit without prejudice.