Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

FORM 10-K

(Mark one)

OR

[  ]		TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
		For the transition period from      to

Commission file number 0-26339

JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:   None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:   Common stock, $0.00001 par value

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filings requirements for the past 90 days. Yes [X] No [  ]

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of the Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. [X]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined by Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). Yes [X] No [  ]

As of February 28, 2003 there were 376,289,841 shares of the Registrant’s Common Stock outstanding. The aggregate market value of the Common Stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was approximately $1,333,111,000 (based on the closing price for the Common Stock on the NASDAQ National Market on June 28, 2002).

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

The information called for by Part III is incorporated by reference to specified portions of the Registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement to be issued in conjunction with the Registrant’s 2003 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which is expected to be filed not later than 120 days after the Registrant’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2002.

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

PART I

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Report”), including the “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”, contains forward-looking statements regarding future events and the future results of Juniper Networks that are based on current expectations, estimates, forecasts, and projections about the industry in which Juniper Networks operates and the beliefs and assumptions of the management of Juniper Networks. Words such as ‘expects,’ ‘anticipates,’ ‘targets,’ ‘goals,’ ‘projects,’ ’intends,’ ‘plans,’ ‘believes,’ ‘seeks,’ ‘estimates,’ variations of such words, and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are only predictions and are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual results may differ materially and adversely from those expressed in any forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in this Report under the section entitled “Risk Factors” and elsewhere, and in other reports Juniper Networks files with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), specifically the most recent reports on Form 10-Q, each as it may be amended from time to time. Juniper Networks undertakes no obligation to revise or update publicly any forward-looking statements for any reason.

ITEM 1. Business

     Overview

     We are a leading provider of network infrastructure solutions that transform the business of networking by converting bandwidth — a commodity — into a dependable, secure and highly valuable corporate asset. Our products, services and solutions enable service providers and other network-intensive businesses to support and deliver services and applications on a highly efficient and low cost integrated network. Our products are designed and purpose-built for service provider networks and offer our customers best-in-class performance with less complexity and cost than legacy alternatives. Unlike conventional routers, originally developed for enterprise applications and increasingly inadequate for use in the highly scaled public and private networks, our products are specifically designed to accommodate substantial size, scope and security demands.

     We lead the industry in transforming packets into profit for network service providers, wireless and cable operators, government agencies, research and education networks and information-intensive enterprises. Our acquisition of Unisphere Networks, Inc., completed in July 2002, has enabled us to extend our ability to supply shared access applications expertise to the leading service providers, carriers and PTTs throughout the world.

     We were incorporated in California in 1996 and reincorporated in Delaware in 1997 with our corporate headquarters in Sunnyvale, California. Our corporate mailing address is 1194 North Mathilda Avenue, Sunnyvale, California 94089 and the telephone number at that location is (408) 745-2000. Our website is www.juniper.net.

     Industry Background

     The Internet has evolved from an academic research project into a network of hundreds of separately administered, public and private networks interconnected using Internet Protocol (IP). IP traffic continues to grow, driven by increasing numbers of new users, connected devices and Internet transactions. The result of the widespread use of IP is a ubiquitous network that today carries a large and growing amount of data traffic enabling millions of users to share information and conduct electronic commerce. Industry research firms forecast continued growth worldwide in the Internet and Internet traffic. The importance of IP continues to increase as the number of users, connected devices and transactions over the highly scaled public and private networks increases.

     The rapid adoption of the Internet and the tremendous growth of IP traffic have prompted service providers to construct large-scale data networks. These highly scaled public and private networks are being optimized to transport data traffic as compared to traditional telephone networks, which were

1

Table of Contents

optimized to transport voice traffic. The architecture of these next generation networks is being driven by two key technologies: packet/cell switching and optical networking.

     Advantages of Packet/Cell Switching. Packet/cell switching technology, which divides data traffic into distinct units called packets or cells and routes each packet or cell independently, provides superior use of available network capacity compared to traditional circuit switching technology. In a circuit switched network, each data stream, such as a voice telephone call between two points, is provided with a dedicated channel, or circuit, for the duration of the telephone call. This approach leads to inefficient use of network resources because a channel is fully dedicated to each transaction, whether or not data is actually flowing at any given moment. As a result, circuit switched architecture is highly inefficient for Internet applications which tend to create large bursts of data traffic followed by long periods of silence. Packet/cell switching architectures enable greater utilization out of a fixed capacity circuit by combining traffic that has different capacity demands of the circuit at different times. Packet/cell switches more efficiently fill the available network bandwidth with packets of data from many users, thereby reducing the wasted bandwidth due to silence from any one particular user. The use of packet/cell switching is driving the architecture of the Internet to be fundamentally different from traditional circuit switched voice based networks. In packet/cell switched networks, IP has emerged as the de facto standard for providing services to end users. Other packet/cell switching products include frame relay switches, asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) switches and routers.

     Rapid Advances in Optical Networking. Optical networking technology uses pulses of light, rather than pulses of electricity, to transmit data in a network, and uses fiber optic connections instead of wires. Optical networking can be used to transmit much more information over a given connection than electrical signals can convey. Optical networking advances, such as dense wavelength division multiplexing, or DWDM, which allows transmission of several frequencies of light over one strand of optical fiber, have enabled still higher data transmission rates and improved efficiency of bandwidth utilization. Packet/cell technologies have not kept up with optical technologies and traditional packet switching equipment is not capable of forwarding packets at rates sufficient to keep pace with optical transmission speeds. Our IP-based products are purpose-built to meet these requirements.

     Fundamental Requirements for Highly Scaled Public and Private Networks

     The reliability and performance of current network infrastructure equipment have become and continue to be critical issues for service providers as they support dramatic growth in IP traffic and increasingly seek to offer new revenue generating, mission-critical and other services. The need for high reliability, high performance, high performance under stressful conditions, scalability, interoperability and cost effectiveness are fundamental requirements in meeting the needs associated with the growth in IP traffic. New requirements will continue to arise for next generation networks, which will drive a set of new requirements for network infrastructure equipment.

     High Reliability. As businesses and consumers increasingly rely on the Internet for mission-critical applications, high network reliability becomes essential. Service providers are increasingly expected to provide a similar degree of reliability on the Internet that users have become accustomed to on the traditional telephone network. The “five nines” (99.999%) reliability standard of the traditional telephone network is becoming the target to which suppliers of next-generation Internet platforms are being compared. As service providers begin to bundle voice and data on their networks, this high degree of reliability is becoming even more critical.

     High Performance. To handle the rapid growth in IP traffic, today’s networks increasingly require routers that can operate at higher speeds. The processing of data packets at these high speeds requires sophisticated forwarding technology to inspect each packet and assign it to a destination based on priority, data type and other considerations. Since a large number of IP packets, many of which perform critical administrative functions, are small in size, high performance Internet routers need to achieve their specified transmission speeds even for small packet sizes. Since smaller packets increase packet processing demands, routing large numbers of smaller packets tends to be more resource intensive than routing of larger packets. A wire speed router, which achieves its specified transmission rate for any type

2

Table of Contents

of traffic passing through it, can accomplish this task. Thus, provisioning of mission-critical services increasingly requires the high performance enabled by wire speed processing.

     High Performance Under Stressful Conditions. In a large and complex network, individual components inevitably fail. However, the failure of an individual device or link must not compromise the network as a whole. In a typical network, when a failure occurs, the network loses some degree of capacity and, in turn, a greater load falls on the remaining network routers, which must provide alternate routes. Routers must quickly adjust to the new state of the network to maintain packet forwarding rates and avoid dropping significant numbers of packets when active routes are lost or when large numbers of routes change. Routing protocols are used to accomplish this convergence, a process that places even greater stress on the router. Given the complexity of Internet infrastructure, particularly compared to enterprise networks, the convergence process is far more complex and places a far greater load on the routing software, thereby requiring a much more sophisticated device.

     Scalability. Due to the rapid growth in IP traffic, service providers must continuously expand their networks, both in terms of increased numbers of access points of presence (PoPs), and also greater capacity per PoP. To facilitate this expansion process, network infrastructure equipment must be highly scalable. Next generation routers therefore need to be upgradeable and configurable to function within constantly changing networks while incurring minimal downtime.

     Interoperability. Service providers do not have the time or inclination to change their existing networks to favor introduction of new products; rather, new products must be compatible with the existing environment. Given the open and inter-connected nature of the Internet, the complexity of running an Internet backbone network requires a service provider to control and police relations with other service providers. For example, service providers must carefully control what traffic is accepted under what conditions from other providers. The software in each router must offer 100% compatibility with the interior protocols and standards used within each service provider’s backbone network. The compatibility level must be maintained despite changes to software equipment configuration and network architecture and upgrades to the various protocol standards. Thus, routing software must be flexible and quickly upgradeable to support any necessary revisions. This level of compatibility, in turn, cannot impact the performance, scalability or reliability of the equipment. Attaining this sophisticated level of interoperability is highly challenging and requires significant testing to ensure compatibility.

     Cost Effectiveness. Growth in IP traffic and intense price competition in the telecommunications market continues to require service providers to seek solutions that significantly reduce the capital expenditures required to build and operate their networks. In addition to the basic cost of equipment such as routers, service providers incur substantial ancillary costs in terms of space required to deploy the equipment, power consumption and on-going operations and maintenance. Service providers therefore want to deploy dense and varied equipment configurations in limited amounts of rack and floor space. Therefore, in order to continue to scale their networks toward higher data speeds in a cost effective manner, service providers need the ability to mix and match easily many different speed connections at appropriate densities, without significantly increasing the consumption of space or power.

     There is a clear need for next generation routers that can support high speeds and offer new IP-based services. Network operators are eagerly seeking new solutions that increase the level of scalability and reliability within their networks and reduce the cost of their architectures.

     The Juniper Networks Solution

     We developed, marketed and sold the first commercially available purpose-built Internet backbone router optimized for the specific high performance needs of service providers. As the need for core bandwidth continued to increase, the need for service rich platforms at the edge of the network was created. Our products are designed to address the needs at the core and the edge of the network as well as for wireless and cable access by combining the features of high-performance ASIC-based packet forwarding technology, our software and a network-optimized architecture.

3

Table of Contents

     Software. Our software has been designed to meet the IP network routing, operations and control requirements of the world’s largest service providers and is an integral embedded component of our product family system architecture. The ability of our software to manage the complex network sharing relationships among service providers allows our products to be placed at critical points in the core of a service provider’s network. Our software allows our products to have widespread network placement due to its interoperability with Cisco’s Internetwork Operating System, or IOS, currently the most broadly deployed routing operating system.

     Unconstrained by legacy routing software, we developed our software using a modular design, in which distinct functions are implemented as separate modules with well defined interfaces and interactions, simplifying troubleshooting and maintenance. These features keep functionality distinct, and minimize the impact of any failure that may occur to the specific software application in which the failure occurs. Also, we believe the modularity of our software will enable the continuous upgrade of new enhanced capabilities, while protecting reliability and compatibility with existing networks.

     High Performance ASIC-Based Packet Forwarding Technology. Our products utilize high performance ASIC-based technology. The result is a platform that is substantially faster than today’s general purpose microprocessor based routers in its ability to process and forward IP packets, allowing our products to deliver high performance at wire speed. The ability to enhance and implement large scale ASICs will be a long-term differentiator for us, particularly as the sophistication required to forward traffic across higher speed networks increases.

     Network Optimized Architecture. Our products employ an architecture designed exclusively for the highly scaled public and private networks. The system architecture provides a clean separation between the routing and packet-forwarding functions. Separating these two functions enables us to develop independently a full-featured routing protocol and traffic engineering functionality through our software and wire speed packet forwarding performance through high performance ASICs.

     Juniper Networks Products. Our products have been developed or acquired as part of our strategy to provide the reliable delivery of core, edge, wireless and cable Internet services at scale for the New Public Network.

     As part of our product and services offerings, our Model for Integrated Network Transformation (MINT) provides a business and network framework that enable service providers to transition from a commodity transport business model to a more lucrative, value-added services model. Technologies such as IP routing, multi-protocol label switching (MPLS) and Packet Processing have been successfully deployed in a number of service provider networks for a number of years and have now been enhanced and matured to a degree that they can now be applied to solving issues such as the supply of new IP based services and consolidating legacy networks.

     The MINT provides an operational approach to apply the technologies appropriate to the revenue opportunities being presented to our customers. The MINT advocates a software based approach in the provision of services similar to the model that has proved to be successful in the telephony market. It defines a new operational model for service providers to address the data communications market by:

	•		addressing underserved markets with new services and a low touch/low cost operational model improving the profitability of these service; and
	•		supporting existing services such as Frame Relay, ATM, Internet access with a better cost model – the same service but a better cost model.

     Our M-series and T-series product platforms share common software and services, and common family of ASIC technology for full compatibility and scalability. Critical service provider applications including high-speed access, peering, and hosting are served by our platforms. Physical interfaces are interchangeable between most platforms, increasing user flexibility and allowing common sparing. Our solution provides several key benefits to our customers: carrier class reliability, wire speed performance, scalability, interoperability, flexibility, reduced complexity and cost effectiveness. The M-series and T-

4

Table of Contents

series products leverage our third generation of high-density silicon and the same proven JUNOS software that is common across all of our M-series and T-series platforms to ensure continuous and predictable service delivery, while minimizing capital and operational costs. This ensures network service providers migrating ATM and FR traffic to MPLS transport are able to do so smoothly and seamlessly without disruption to customer applications.

     Our E-series products are designed to allow simultaneous delivery of high-speed services over dedicated connections, such as T1, T3 and optical interfaces, as well as over DSL, cable and wireless connections from a single system. By delivering multiple high-speed access services from a single system, our products reduce the need to purchase, install and operate multiple pieces of equipment. The combination of our software and hardware allows communications service providers to deploy new high-value data services. Our E-series products support value-added data services for business-critical applications across the Internet, such as virtual private networks and priority service levels, or IP quality of service.

     Our J-series product, developed together with Ericsson A.B., provides a scalable solution for both GPRS and WCDMA networks and supports wireless operators in their evolution from voice-centric GSM networks to the new multimedia-rich 3G networks. Through the use of consistent software features in our M-series routers and the new Ericsson GGSN application software, operators gain scalability advantages, including the ability to natively offer the latest IPv6 standard for IP networking—which includes advanced quality of service (QoS) features, as well as vast new IP addressing capabilities. The J-series products natively support high packet-forwarding performance and robust, standards-based QoS capabilities—including support for Differentiated Services (DiffServ), Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS), and all four 3GPP R3 QoS classes. The result is the first carrier-class GGSN capable of handling demanding high-speed data multimedia services such as streaming video, real-time gaming, videoconferencing and live application sharing. The J-series products can be integrated into an existing backbone network and the operator gains with ease of deployment and cost-of-ownership benefits through using the same infrastructure for GPRS/WCDMA and other types of IP access. We sell the J-series products exclusively through our reseller Ericsson.

     The G-series products, based on CableLabs® DOCSIS™ 1.1 and interim PacketCable specifications, combine the CMTS with our M-series routers allowing cable operators to efficiently deliver advanced IP services, including VoIP through two-way cable plants, and offer interoperability with call management servers, media gateways, billing and provisioning systems and multimedia terminal adapters. The G-series products utilize a purpose-built DOCSIS-compliant integrated circuit – the Broadband Cable Processor ASIC, to allow cable operators to deliver more bandwidth for advanced IP services and with superior RF performance and thereby simultaneously supporting a higher number of cable modems and to lower capital expenses.

     The Juniper Networks Strategy

     Our objective and strategy is to transform the business of networking by converting bandwidth, which is a commodity, into a dependable, secure and highly valuable corporate asset. Our technological leadership and problem solving abilities combined with our experience and fundamental understanding of high performance Packet Processing will help us in meeting our objectives. Key elements of our strategy are described below.

     Maintain and Extend Technology Leadership. Our ASIC technology, software and network-optimized product architecture have been key elements to establishing our technology leadership. We believe that these elements are highly leverageable into future products we are currently developing. We intend to maintain and extend our technological leadership in the network infrastructure market through continued significant investment to enhance the feature richness of our products and to develop future differentiated offerings for service providers.

     Leverage Early Lead as Supplier of Purpose-Built Network Infrastructure. From inception we have focused on designing and building network infrastructure for service providers and have integrated purpose-built software and hardware into a network optimized architecture that specifically meets service

5

Table of Contents

providers’ needs. We believe that many of these customers will deploy network infrastructure equipment from only a few vendors. The purpose-built advantages of our products provide us with a time-to-market lead, which is a critical advantage in gaining rapid penetration as one of these selected vendors. Once our products are widely deployed in a service provider’s network as the primary or even secondary network infrastructure equipment, we believe we create a significant barrier to entry to potential competitors who do not currently offer commercially-viable next generation routing solutions.

     Work Very Closely With Key Customers. In developing our products, including our software, we worked very closely with customers to design and build a product specifically to meet their complex needs and, over the last four years, we have expanded our understanding of the challenges facing these carriers, enabling us to subsequently design additional features and capabilities into both our software and hardware. We believe our close relationships with, and constant feedback from, our customers have been key elements in our design wins and rapid deployment to date. We plan to continue to work very closely with our key customers to implement enhancements to current products as well as to design future products that specifically meet their evolving needs. We are also actively involved with these customers in developing key standards, such as MPLS, and are an active participant in standards organizations such as the Internet Engineering Task Force and the Optical Internetworking Forum.

     Increase Penetration at Major Service Providers. Our initial focus was to penetrate several of the largest service providers, where operators have the technical sophistication, resources and desire to test and evaluate our solution against potential alternatives. We believe that there is a significant opportunity to further penetrate these large and complex networks given the advantages of our products.

     Enable New IP-Based Services. Our platform enables service providers to build networks cost effectively and to offer new differentiated services for their customers more efficiently than conventional products. We believe that the delivery of IP-based services and applications, including web hosting, outsourced Internet and intranet services, VPNs, outsourced enterprise applications and voice-over IP, will continue to grow and are cost-effectively enabled by our network infrastructure solutions.

     Technology

     Our core technology consists of our backbone router architecture, software and ASIC hardware expertise. Our general-purpose architecture was initially embodied in the M40, but also is designed to serve as the platform for our future generations of core products. We have products based on our M-series and T-series platforms, our E-series platforms, our J-series platform and our G-series platform.

     Our software offers a full suite of scalable, Internet-tested routing protocols. Protocols and software tools, which are used to control and direct network traffic, are critical to a network routing solution. Software control is made more important by the fact that the size and complexity of backbone networks are increasing at a time when service providers are looking to differentiate themselves through value-added service offerings.

     Customers

     Our customers include end users and value added resellers. We recognize revenue from the shipment of products at the time of shipment unless we have future obligations for network interoperability or if we have to obtain customer acceptance. In those cases, we defer recognition of the revenue and related costs until we have met our obligations.

     Ericsson accounted for approximately 17% of our recognized product revenues for the year ended December 31, 2002.

     Sales and Marketing

     We sell and market our products primarily through our direct sales organization and value-added resellers.

6

Table of Contents

     Direct Sales. Our North American direct sales organization is divided into regional operations with our direct sales efforts focused on the largest service providers. The direct sales account managers cover the market on an assigned account basis and work as a team with account oriented systems engineers. They are directed by a regional operations manager who reports to the North American Vice President of Sales. We also have technical engineers that consult with and provide our customers with guidance and assistance on the evolution of their networks as it relates to the deployment of our products. These consulting engineers also help in defining the features that are required for our products to be successful in specific applications. A key feature of our sales effort is the relationship we establish at various levels in our customers’ organization. Our sales team maintains contact with key individuals who have service planning and infrastructure buildout responsibility.

     Value Added Resellers. We have complemented our direct sales effort in the United States through the addition of several highly focused value added resellers. Our arrangements with value added resellers typically have been non-exclusive and provide the value added reseller with discounts based upon the volume of their orders.

     Strategic Distribution Relationships. We have established a strategic distribution relationship with both Ericsson A.B. and Siemens A.G. We believe that both Ericsson and Siemens have significant customer relationships in place and offer products that complement ours. Our agreements with Ericsson and Siemens allow them to distribute our products on a worldwide, non-exclusive basis with discounts based upon the volume. Ericsson and Siemens provide the first level of support to its customers.

     International Resellers. We have established, in addition to Ericsson and Siemens, strategic value added reseller relationships with Nortel and Alcatel to sell and service our products on a worldwide non-exclusive basis. To further our international sales objectives, we also have established a number of country specific value added resellers. These resellers have expertise in deploying complex network infrastructure equipment in their respective markets and provide the first level of support required by our international customers.

     As of December 31, 2002, we employed 410 people in our sales and marketing organizations.

     Customer Service and Support

     We believe that a broad range of support services is essential to the successful installation and ongoing support of our products and we have hired support engineers with proven network experience to provide those services. We offer the following services: 24 hours a day, seven days a week technical assistance (on-line, telephone and on-site), professional services, educational services, logistics services and web-based information.

     We offer a variety of flexible and comprehensive support programs, including basic hardware and software warranty services, next day onsite parts and labor, 24 hours a day, seven days a week same day parts and labor and on-site resident engineers. We deliver these services directly to major end users and also utilize a multi-tiered support model, leveraging the capabilities of our partners and third party organizations. We also train our partners in the delivery of education and support services.

     Customer service and support provide front line product support and is the problem resolution interface to our partners and direct end users. If customer service and support are unable to resolve an issue themselves, they duplicate the problem scenario and provide the failure information, such as logs, traces and system configuration to appropriate subject matter experts in our engineering department.

     Based on the severity of the problem and the impact to our customers’ network, there are strict escalation guidelines to ensure that the appropriate technical resources and management attention is brought to bear on the problem in a timeframe commensurate with problem priority. The overall goal is to fix the problem, at the appropriate level, in the right timeframe in order to ensure our customers’ satisfaction.

7

Table of Contents

     As of December 31, 2002, we employed 165 people in our worldwide customer service and support organization.

     Research and Development

     We have assembled a team of skilled engineers with extensive experience in the fields of high end computing, network system design, Internet routing protocols and embedded software. These individuals have been drawn from leading computer data networking and telecommunications companies. In addition to building complex hardware and software systems, the engineering team has experience in delivering very large, highly integrated ASICs and extremely scalable software.

     We believe that strong product development capabilities are essential to our strategy of enhancing our core technology, developing additional applications, incorporating that technology and maintaining the competitiveness of our product and service offerings. We are leveraging our third generation ASICs, developing additional network interfaces targeted to our customer applications and continuing to develop next generation technology to support the anticipated growth in network bandwidth requirements. We continue to expand the functionality of our software to improve performance and scalability, and to provide an enhanced user interface.

     Our research and development process is driven by the availability of new technology, market demand and customer feedback. We have invested significant time and resources in creating a structured process for undertaking all product development projects. This process involves all functional groups and all levels within our Company. Following an assessment of market demand, our research and development team develops a full set of comprehensive functional product specifications based on inputs from the product management and sales organizations. This process is designed to provide a framework for defining and addressing the steps, tasks and activities required to bring product concepts and development projects to market.

     As of December 31, 2002, we employed 704 people in our research and development organization.

     Our research and development expenses totaled $161.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, $155.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2001 and $87.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2000.

     Manufacturing

     Our manufacturing operation is outsourced. We currently have manufacturing relationships with Solectron, Celestica and Plexus, under which we have subcontracted our manufacturing activity. This subcontracting activity extends from prototypes to full production and includes activities such as material procurement, final assembly, test, control and shipment to our customers. We design, specify and monitor all of the tests that are required to meet internal and external quality standards. These arrangements provide us with the following benefits:

	•		we conserve the working capital that would be required for funding inventory;
	•		we can adjust manufacturing volumes quickly to meet changes in demand;
	•		we can quickly deliver products to customers with turnkey manufacturing and drop shipment capabilities; and
	•		we operate without dedicating any space to manufacturing operations.

     Our ASICs are manufactured by IBM who is responsible for all aspects of the production of the ASICs using our proprietary designs.

8

Table of Contents

     Competition

     Competition in the network infrastructure market is intense. Cisco Systems, Inc. has historically dominated the market, with other companies such as Nortel Networks and Lucent Technologies Inc. providing products to a smaller segment of the market. In addition, a number of public and private companies have announced plans for new products to address the same problems that our products address.

     Cisco traditionally has been the dominant supplier of solutions to this market. We believe this is the result of its early leadership position in the enterprise router market. As both large public and private networks and traffic over the Internet has grown rapidly, Cisco has leveraged this position and has developed a broad product line of routers that support all major local area and wide area interfaces. We believe that our ability to compete with Cisco depends upon our ability to demonstrate that our products are superior in meeting the needs of service providers and are extremely compatible with Cisco’s current and future products. Although we believe that we are currently among the top providers of network infrastructure solutions worldwide, we cannot assure you that we will be able to compete successfully with Cisco, currently the leading provider in this market.

     We expect that, over time, large companies with significant resources, technical expertise, market experience, customer relationships and broad product lines, such as Lucent and Nortel, will introduce new products which are designed to compete more effectively in this market. As a result, we expect to face increased competition in the future from larger companies with significantly more resources than we have. Although we believe that our technology and the purpose-built features of our products make them unique and will enable us to compete effectively with these companies, we cannot assure you that we will be successful.

     Many of our current and potential competitors, such as Cisco, Lucent and Nortel, have significantly broader product lines than we do and may bundle their products with other networking products in a manner that may discourage customers from purchasing our products. Also, many of our current and potential competitors have greater name recognition and more extensive customer bases that could be leveraged. Increased competition could result in price reduction, fewer customer orders, reduced gross margins and loss of market share, any of which could seriously harm our operating results.

     There are also many small public and private companies that claim to have products with greater capabilities than our products. Consolidation in this industry has begun, with one or more of these smaller private companies being acquired by large, established suppliers of network infrastructure products, and we believe it is likely to continue. As a result, we expect to face increased competition in the future from larger companies with significantly more resources than we have.

     Several companies also provide solutions that can substitute for some uses of routers. For example, high bandwidth ATM switches are used in the core of certain major backbone service providers. ATM switches can carry a variety of traffic types, including voice, video and data, using fixed, 53 byte cells. Companies that use ATM switches are enhancing their products with new software technologies such as MPLS, which can potentially simplify the task of mixing routers and switches in the same network. These substitutes can reduce the need for large numbers of routers.

     Intellectual Property

     Our success and ability to compete are substantially dependent upon our internally developed technology and know-how. Our engineering teams have significant expertise in ASIC design and we own all rights to the design of the ASICs, which form the core of our products. Our software was developed internally and is protected by United States and other copyright laws.

     While we rely on patent, copyright, trade secret and trademark law to protect our technology, we also believe that factors such as the technological and creative skills of our personnel, new product

9

Table of Contents

developments, frequent product enhancements and reliable product maintenance are essential to establishing and maintaining a technology leadership position. There can be no assurance that others will not develop technologies that are similar or superior to our technology.

     Our success will depend upon our ability to obtain necessary intellectual property rights and protect our intellectual property rights. While we have filed patent applications, we cannot be certain that these applications will issue into patents, that we will be able to obtain the necessary intellectual property rights or that other parties will not contest our intellectual property rights.

     Employees

     As of December 31, 2002, we had 1,542 full-time employees, 704 of whom were engaged in research and development, 410 in sales and marketing, 165 in customer service and 263 in finance, administration, IT and operations. None of our employees are represented by a labor union. We have not experienced any work stoppages and we consider our relations with our employees to be good.

     Our future performance depends in significant part upon the continued service of our key technical, sales and senior management personnel, none of who is bound by an employment agreement requiring service for any defined period of time. The loss of the services of one or more of our key employees could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Our future success also depends on our continuing ability to attract, train and retain highly qualified technical, sales and managerial personnel. Competition for such personnel is intense, and there can be no assurance that we can retain our key personnel in the future.

     Available Information

     We file our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 with the SEC electronically. The public may read or copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The address of that site is http://www.sec.gov.

     You may obtain a free copy of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports on the day of filing with the SEC on our website on the World Wide Web at http://www.juniper.net, by contacting the Investor Relations Department at our corporate offices by calling (888) 586-4737 or by sending an e-mail message to investor-relations@juniper.net.

ITEM 2. Properties

     Our corporate headquarters consists of leased facilities located in Sunnyvale, California where we lease approximately 424,825 square feet located in three buildings. Each building is on an individual lease with various option, extension and expansion rights and expire on the following schedule: Building #1 (144,315 square feet) expires June 30, 2012, Building #2 (122,435 square feet) expires February 14, 2013 and Building #3 (158,075 square feet) expires May 31, 2014. We also own approximately 80 acres of land adjacent to the leased corporate headquarters sites.

     In addition, we have leased facilities in Westford, Massachusetts, with a lease for approximately 225,000 square feet, which expires in 2011. We also lease various sales office locations throughout the U.S. Outside the U.S., we have operations in leased sites in EMEA, Asia Pacific and the Americas. Larger site locations include Ireland, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Hong Kong, China, Japan and Australia. We believe that our existing properties are in good condition and suitable for the conduct of our business. For additional information regarding our obligations under leases, see Note 8 of Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8.

10

Table of Contents

ITEM 3. Legal Proceedings

     The Company is subject to legal claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business, including the matters described below. The outcome of these matters is currently not determinable. However, the Company does not expect that such legal claims and litigation will ultimately have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations.

     IPO Allocation Case

     In December 2001, a class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation, FleetBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc., Royal Bank of Canada (Dain Rauscher Wessels), SG Cowen Securities Corporation, UBS Warburg LLC (Warburg Dillon Read LLC), Chase (Hambrecht & Quist LLC), J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Lehman Brothers, Inc., Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated (collectively, the “Underwriters”), the Company and certain of the Company’s officers. This action was brought on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s common stock in the Company’s initial public offering in June 1999 and its secondary offering in September 1999. Specifically, among other things, this complaint alleged that the prospectus pursuant to which shares of common stock were sold in the Company’s initial public offering and its subsequent secondary offering contained certain false and misleading statements or omissions regarding the practices of the Underwriters with respect to their allocation of shares of common stock in these offerings and their receipt of commissions from customers related to such allocations. Various plaintiffs have filed actions asserting similar allegations concerning the initial public offerings of approximately 300 other companies. These various cases pending in the Southern District of New York have been coordinated for pretrial proceedings as In re Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, 21 MC 92. In April 2002, plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint in the action against the Company, alleging violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Defendants in the coordinated proceeding filed motions to dismiss. In October 2002, the Company’s officers were dismissed from the case without prejudice pursuant to a stipulation. On February 19, 2003, the Court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, but declined to dismiss the claims against the Company. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses to the claims against it and intends to defend itself vigorously.

     Federal Securities Class Action Suit

     During the quarter ended March 31, 2002, a number of essentially identical shareholder class action lawsuits were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against the Company and certain of its officers and former officers purportedly on behalf of those stockholders who purchased the Company’s publicly traded securities between April 12, 2001 and June 7, 2001. In April 2002, the judge granted the defendants’ motion to consolidate all of these actions into one; in May 2002, the court appointed the lead plaintiffs and approved their selection of lead counsel and an amended complaint was filed in July 2002. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants made false and misleading statements, assert claims for violations of the federal securities laws and seek unspecified compensatory damages and other relief. In September 2002, the defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint. In March 2003, the judge granted defendants motion to dismiss with leave to amend. The Company continues to believe the claims are without merit and intends to defend the action vigorously.

     State Derivative Claim Based on the Federal Securities Class Action Suit

     In August 2002, a consolidated amended shareholder derivative complaint purportedly filed on behalf of the Company, captioned In re Juniper Networks, Inc. Derivative Litigation, Civil Action No. CV 807146, was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara. The complaint alleges that certain of the Company’s officers and directors breached their fiduciary duties to the Company by engaging in alleged wrongful conduct including conduct complained of in the securities litigation described above. The complaint also asserts claims against a Juniper Networks investor. The Company is named solely as a nominal defendant against whom the plaintiff seeks no recovery. In October 2002, the Company as a nominal defendant and the individual defendants filed demurrers to the consolidated

11

Table of Contents

amended shareholder derivative complaint. In March 2003, the judge sustained defendants’ demurrers with leave to amend. Plaintiffs must file an amended complaint on or before May 12, 2003. The Company continues to believe the claims are without merit and intends to defend the action vigorously.

ITEM 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

     No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this report.

PART II

ITEM 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters

     Our common stock has been quoted on the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “JNPR” since June 25, 1999. Prior to that time, there was no public market for the common stock. All stock information has been adjusted to reflect the three-for-one split, effected in the form of a stock dividend to each stockholder of record as of December 31, 1999 and a two-for-one split, effected in the form of a stock dividend to each stockholder of record as of May 15, 2000. Juniper Networks has never paid cash dividends on its common stock and has no present plans to do so. There were approximately 1,623 stockholders of record at February 28, 2003. The following table sets forth the high and low closing bid prices as reported on NASDAQ:

     On February 1, 2002, March 14, 2002, June 20, 2002 and October 31, 2002, 126,743, 271,974, 519,510 and 1,000,769 shares respectively, were issued to former stockholders of Pacific Broadband Communications (“PBC”) as part of an earnout associated with our acquisition of PBC in December 2001. The issuance was exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933.

     On July 1, 2002, we issued 36,500,000 shares of common stock to the stockholders of Unisphere Networks, Inc. (“Unisphere Networks”) in connection with the acquisition of Unisphere Networks. The issuance was exempt from registration pursuant to Rule 3a-10 promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933.

ITEM 6. Selected Consolidated Financial Data

     The following selected consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto in Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

     The information presented below reflects the impact of several accounting pronouncements, which makes a direct comparison between 2002 and 2001 difficult. For example, in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 141, “Business Combinations,” we have only included revenue, cost of revenues and operating expenses from Unisphere Networks, Inc., which was acquired in July 2002, for the second half of 2002. The results for 2003 will include a full year of results for the combined companies. For a complete description of matters affecting the results in the tables below, see Note 3 “Acquisitions,” Note 4 “Goodwill and Purchased Intangible Assets” and Note 9 “Long-Term Debt” of Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8.

12

Table of Contents

Consolidated Statement of Operations Data

Consolidated Balance Sheet Data

ITEM 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

     The following discussion is based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingencies. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to sales returns, warranty costs, allowance for doubtful accounts, impairment of long-term assets, especially goodwill and intangibles, contract manufacturer exposures for excess and obsolete material, and litigation. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

     Overview

     Juniper Networks, Inc. (“Juniper Networks” or “we”) was founded in 1996 to develop and sell products that would be able to meet the stringent demands of service providers. The world’s leading network operators, government agencies, research and education institutions, and information intensive enterprises now rely upon us as the foundation for uncompromising networks.

13

Table of Contents

     Critical Accounting Policies

     The preparation of the consolidated financial statements and related disclosures in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires us to establish accounting policies that contain estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. These policies include:

	•		revenue recognition;
	•		the allowance for doubtful accounts, which impacts general and administrative expenses;
	•		the valuation of exposures associated with the contract manufacturing operations and estimating future warranty costs, which impact cost of product revenues and gross margins; and
	•		the initial and continuing valuation of certain long-lived assets, especially goodwill and other purchased intangible assets, which could result in an impairment, which would impact operating expenses.

     We have other equally important accounting policies and practices; however, once adopted, these other policies either generally do not require us to make significant estimates or assumptions or otherwise only require implementation of the adopted policy not a judgment as to policy itself. Despite our intention to establish accurate estimates and assumptions, actual results could differ from those estimates.

     Revenue Recognition

     We recognize product revenue in accordance with Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 101, “Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements.” Specifically, product revenue is recognized when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the fee is fixed or determinable and collectibility is reasonably assured, unless we have future obligations for such things as network interoperability or customer acceptance, in which case revenue and related costs are deferred until those obligations are met. In most cases, we recognize product revenue upon shipment to our customers, including resellers, as it is our policy to ensure an end user has been identified prior to shipment. Our ability to recognize revenue in the future will be impacted by conditions imposed by our customers and by our assessment of collectibility. We assess the probability of collection by reviewing our customers’ payment history, financial condition and credit report. If the probability of collection is not reasonably assured, revenue is deferred until the payment is collected.

     The amount of product revenue recognized in a given period is also impacted by our judgments taken in establishing our reserve for potential future product returns. Although our arrangements do not include any contractual rights of return, and our general policy is that we do not accept returns, under unique circumstances we have and may in the future accept product returns from our customers. Therefore, we do provide a reserve for our estimate of future returns against revenue in the period the revenue is recorded. Our estimate of future returns is based on such factors as historical return data and current economic condition of our customer base. In addition, we get input from our sales and support organizations with respect to specific customer issues. The amount of revenue we recognize going forward will be directly impacted by our estimates made to establish the reserve for potential future product returns.

     Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

     We make ongoing assumptions relating to the collectibility of our accounts receivable. In determining the amount of the allowance, we consider our historical level of credit losses. We also make judgments about the creditworthiness of significant customers based on ongoing credit evaluations, and assess current economic trends affecting our customers that might impact the level of credit losses in the future and result in different rates of bad debts than previously seen. Our reserves have historically been

14

Table of Contents

adequate to cover our actual credit losses. However, since we cannot predict future changes in the financial stability of our customers or the industries that we sell to, we cannot guarantee that our current level of reserves will continue to be adequate. If actual credit losses were to be significantly greater than the reserves we have established, that would increase our general and administrative expenses. Conversely, if actual credit losses were to be significantly less than our reserves, our general and administrative expenses would decrease.

     Contract Manufacturer Exposures

     We outsource the majority of our manufacturing, repair operations and supply chain management operations to our three independent contract manufacturers. Accordingly, a significant portion of the cost of revenues consists of payments to them. Our independent contract manufacturers procure components and manufacture products based on build forecasts we provide them. Our forecasts are based on our estimates of future demand for our products. Our estimates of future demand for our products are based on historical trends and a bottoms-up analysis from our sales and support organizations, adjusted for overall market conditions. If the actual component usage and product demand are significantly lower than forecast, we have contractual liabilities and exposures with all of the contract manufacturers, such as carrying costs and excess material exposures, which would have an adverse impact on our gross margins and profitability. The majority of the factors that affect component usage and demand for our products are outside of our control.

     Warranty Reserves

     We offer a one-year warranty on all of our hardware products as well as a 90-day warranty on the software embedded in the products. The warranty generally includes parts, labor and 24-hour service center support. The specific terms and conditions of those warranties may vary depending on the products sold and the locations into which they are sold. We estimate the costs that may be incurred under our warranty obligations and record a liability and charge to cost of product sales in the amount of such costs at the time revenue is recognized. Factors that affect our warranty liability include the number of installed units, our estimates of anticipated rates of warranty claims and costs per claim. Our estimates of anticipated rates of warranty claims and costs per claim are primarily based on historical information. We periodically assess the adequacy of our recorded warranty liabilities and adjust the amounts as necessary. If actual warranty claims are significantly higher than forecast, or if the actual costs incurred to provide the warranty is greater than the forecast, our gross margins could be adversely affected.

     Valuation of Goodwill and Purchased Intangible Assets

     Goodwill and purchased intangible assets are carried at cost less accumulated amortization. We adopted SFAS 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets,” on January 1, 2002. SFAS 142 prohibits the amortization of goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite useful lives. For business combinations consummated before July 1, 2001, goodwill was amortized through December 31, 2001 using the straight-line method over an estimated useful life of three years. Goodwill is not amortized for business combinations consummated after June 30, 2001. Amortization of purchased intangibles is computed using the straight-line method over the related expected useful lives of between two and six years.

     When valuing goodwill and purchased intangible assets in connection with the initial purchase price allocation and the ongoing evaluation for impairment, we estimate future cash flows and useful lives. These estimates include discounting to present value the free cash flows expected to be generated by the products with which the technology or other identified intangibles is associated and the periods of time with which the products will be in demand. We perform goodwill impairment tests annually and on an interim basis in certain circumstances. We performed an impairment analysis as of January 1, 2002 and again in November 2002 and determined that there was no impairment of the goodwill at either time. In addition, we review each purchased intangible asset quarterly and assess if the amortization period is still appropriate. Any changes in key assumptions about the business and its prospects, or changes in market conditions or other externalities, could result in an impairment charge and such a charge could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

15

Table of Contents

     Unisphere Business Combination

     In July 2002, we completed our acquisition of Unisphere Networks, Inc. (“Unisphere”), a subsidiary of Siemens Corporation which is a subsidiary of Siemens A.G. (“Siemens”). Following the acquisition and during the remainder of 2002, Siemens, itself and through its local country affiliates, was one of our significant resellers. Unisphere developed, manufactured and sold data networking equipment optimized for applications at the edge of service provider networks. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (“SFAS”) No. 141, “Business Combinations,” we have included in our results of operations for 2002 the results of Unisphere from July 1, 2002. The Unisphere acquisition resulted in significant impacts to revenue, cost of revenues and all operating expenses for the second half of 2002. The results for 2003 will include a full year of results of the combined companies.

     Results of Operations

     Net Revenues

     The following table shows product and service net revenues for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000 (in thousands):