NETLIST INC - FORM 10-Q - November 16, 2010

Attached files

file	filename
EX-10.6 - EX-10.6 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d6.htm
EX-10.7 - EX-10.7 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d7.htm
EX-10.1 - EX-10.1 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d1.htm
EX-10.4 - EX-10.4 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d4.htm
EX-31.1 - EX-31.1 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex31d1.htm
EX-10.2 - EX-10.2 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d2.htm
EX-10.5 - EX-10.5 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d5.htm
EX-10.8 - EX-10.8 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d8.htm
EX-31.2 - EX-31.2 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex31d2.htm
EX-10.3 - EX-10.3 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d3.htm
EX-10.9 - EX-10.9 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d9.htm
EX-10.11 - EX-10.11 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d11.htm
EX-32 - EX-32 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex32.htm
EX-10.10 - EX-10.10 - NETLIST INC	a10-17448_1ex10d10.htm

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

x QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended October 2, 2010

o 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 001-33170

NETLIST, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware		95-4812784
State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

51 Discovery, Suite 150

Irvine, CA 92618

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

(949) 435-0025

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

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 filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (section 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check One):

Large accelerated filer o		Accelerated filer o

Non-accelerated filer o		Smaller reporting company x
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes o No x

The number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock as of the latest practicable date:

Common Stock, par value $0.001 per share

25,305,603 shares outstanding at November 1, 2010

Table of Contents

NETLIST, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q

FOR THE THREE AND NINE MONTHS ENDED OCTOBER 2, 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

		Page
PART I.	FINANCIAL INFORMATION	3
Item 1.	Financial Statements	3
	Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at October 2, 2010 (unaudited) and January 2, 2010 (audited)	3
	Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Three and Nine Months Ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009	4
	Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Nine Months Ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009	5
	Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements	6
Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	22
Item 4.	Controls and Procedures	34

PART II.	OTHER INFORMATION	34
Item 1.	Legal Proceedings	34
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	34
Item 5.	Other Information	50
Item 6.	Exhibits	51

Table of Contents

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1. Financial Statements

NETLIST, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(in thousands, except par value)

	(unaudited)			(audited)
	October 2,			January 2,
	2010			2010

ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	14,722		$	9,942
Investments in marketable securities	3,426			3,949
Accounts receivable, net	6,951			4,273
Inventories	3,861			2,232
Prepaid expenses and other current assets	1,522			854
Total current assets	30,482			21,250

Property and equipment, net	4,275			4,779
Long-term investments in marketable securities	894			941
Other assets	172			221
Total assets	$	35,823		$	27,191

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	6,234		$	4,057
Accrued payroll and related liabilities	1,884			2,332
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities	566			605
Accrued engineering charges	573			661
Current portion of long-term debt	640			108
Deferred gain on sale and leaseback transaction	20			108
Total current liabilities	9,917			7,871
Long-term debt, net of current portion	1,078			51
Total liabilities	10,995			7,922
Commitments and contingencies
Stockholders’ equity:
Common stock, $0.001 par value - 90,000 shares authorized; 25,306 (2010) and 20,111 (2009) shares issued and outstanding	25			20
Additional paid-in capital	88,812			71,332
Accumulated deficit	(63,904		)	(52,026		)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss	(105		)	(57		)
Total stockholders’ equity	24,828			19,269
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	35,823		$	27,191

See accompanying notes.

Table of Contents

NETLIST, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations

(in thousands, except per share amounts)

	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,			October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009			2010			2009

Net sales	$	10,565		$	6,446		$	27,759		$	11,781
Cost of sales(1)	7,545			4,879			21,103			10,507
Gross profit	3,020			1,567			6,656			1,274
Operating expenses:
Research and development(1)	4,958			1,975			11,156			5,619
Selling, general and administrative(1)	2,986			2,115			8,163			6,170
Total operating expenses	7,944			4,090			19,319			11,789
Operating loss	(4,924		)	(2,523		)	(12,663		)	(10,515		)
Other income (expense):
Interest income (expense), net	(3		)	(25		)	1			75
Other income, net	—			4			71			134
Total other income (expense), net	(3		)	(21		)	72			209
Loss before provision (benefit) for income taxes	(4,927		)	(2,544		)	(12,591		)	(10,306		)
Provision (benefit) for income taxes	12			(458		)	(713		)	(409		)
Net loss	$	(4,939	)	$	(2,086	)	$	(11,878	)	$	(9,897	)
Net loss per common share:
Basic and diluted	$	(0.20	)	$	(0.11	)	$	(0.51	)	$	(0.50	)

Weighted-average common shares outstanding:
Basic and diluted	24,799			19,855			23,422			19,855

(1) Amounts include stock-based compensation expense as follows:

Cost of sales	$	11	$	146	$	33	$	213
Research and development	134		156		297		262
Selling, general and administrative	268		329		891		753

See accompanying notes.

Table of Contents

NETLIST, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

(in thousands)

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009

Cash flows from operating activities:
Net loss	$	(11,878	)	$	(9,897	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization	1,691			1,710
Amortization of deferred gain on sale and leaseback transaction	(88		)	(89		)
Gain on disposal of assets	—			(118		)
Stock-based compensation	1,221			1,228
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable	(2,678		)	(815		)
Inventories	(1,629		)	(57		)
Income taxes receivable	—			1,880
Prepaid expenses and other current assets	(668		)	126
Other assets	49			(18		)
Accounts payable	1,907			183
Income taxes payable	—			78
Accrued payroll and related expenses	(448		)	320
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities	(39		)	179
Accrued engineering charges	(88		)	511
Net cash used in operating activities	(12,648		)	(4,779		)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Acquisition of property and equipment	(718		)	(89		)
Proceeds from sales of equipment	—			342
Purchase of investments in marketable securities	(2,395		)	(10,837		)
Proceeds from maturities and sales of investments in marketable securities	2,917			12,170
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities	(196		)	1,586
Cash flows from financing activities:
Borrowings on line of credit	3,000			12,784
Payments on line of credit	(3,000		)	(12,784		)
Proceeds from public offering, net	16,210			—
Proceeds from exercise of stock options and warrants	54			—
Proceeds of bank term loan	1,500			—
Payments on debt	(140		)	(520		)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities	17,624			(520		)
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents	4,780			(3,713		)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period	9,942			15,214
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	14,722		$	11,501

Supplemental disclosure of non-cash investing activities:
Unrealized losses from investments in marketable securities	$	48		$	32
Purchase of assets under capital lease	$	199		$	108
Increase in purchases of property and equipment accrued in accounts payable	$	270		$	—

See accompanying notes.

Table of Contents

NETLIST, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

October 2, 2010

Note 1—Description of Business

Netlist, Inc. (the “Company” or “Netlist”) designs, manufactures and sells high-performance, logic-based memory subsystems for the server, storage and communications equipment markets. The Company’s memory subsystems consist of combinations of dynamic random access memory integrated circuits, NAND flash memory, application-specific integrated circuits (“ASICs”) and other components assembled on printed circuit boards. The Company primarily markets and sells its products to leading original equipment manufacturer (“OEM”) customers. Netlist’s solutions are targeted at applications where memory plays a key role in meeting system performance requirements.

Note 2—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation

The interim unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (the “U.S.”) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Form 10-Q and Article 8 of SEC Regulation S-X. These financial statements do not include all of the information and footnotes required by accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. for complete financial statements. Therefore, these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto for the year ended January 2, 2010, included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on February 19, 2010.

The condensed consolidated financial statements included herein as of October 2, 2010 are unaudited; however, they contain all normal recurring accruals and adjustments that, in the opinion of the Company’s management, are necessary to present fairly the condensed consolidated financial position of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries as of October 2, 2010, the condensed consolidated results of its operations for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009, and the condensed consolidated cash flows for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009. The results of operations for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year or any future interim periods.

Reclassifications

Certain amounts in the 2009 financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.

Principles of Consolidation

The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Netlist, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Fiscal Year

The Company operates under a 52/53-week fiscal year ending on the Saturday closest to December 31. For fiscal 2010, the Company’s fiscal year is scheduled to end on January 1, 2011 and will consist of 52 weeks. Each of the Company’s first three quarters in a fiscal year is comprised of 13 weeks.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the condensed consolidated financial statements, and the reported amounts of net sales and expenses during the reporting period. By their nature, these estimates and assumptions are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty. Significant estimates made by management include, among others, provisions for uncollectible receivables and sales returns, warranty liabilities, valuation of inventories, fair value of financial instruments, impairment of long-lived assets, stock-based compensation expense and realization of deferred tax assets. The Company bases its estimates on historical experience, knowledge of current conditions and our beliefs of what could occur in the future considering available information. The Company reviews its estimates on an on-going basis. The actual results experienced by the Company may differ materially and adversely from its estimates. To the extent there are material differences between the estimates and the actual results, future results of operations will be affected.

Table of Contents

Revenue Recognition

The Company’s revenues primarily consist of product sales of high-performance memory subsystems to OEMs. Revenues also include sales of excess component inventories to distributors and other users of memory integrated circuits (“ICs”). Such sales amounted to less than $0.1 million for each of the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010, and totaled approximately $0.6 million and $0.7 million, respectively, for each of the three and nine months ended October 3, 2009.

The Company recognizes revenues in accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 605. Accordingly, the Company recognizes revenues when there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, product delivery and acceptance have occurred, the sales price is fixed or determinable, and collectibility of the resulting receivable is reasonably assured.

The Company generally uses customer purchase orders and/or contracts as evidence of an arrangement. Delivery occurs when goods are shipped for customers with FOB Shipping Point terms and upon receipt for customers with FOB Destination terms, at which time title and risk of loss transfer to the customer. Shipping documents are used to verify delivery and customer acceptance. The Company assesses whether the sales price is fixed or determinable based on the payment terms associated with the transaction and whether the sales price is subject to refund. Customers are generally allowed limited rights of return for up to 30 days, except for sales of excess component inventories, which contain no right-of-return privileges. Estimated returns are provided for at the time of sale based on historical experience or specific identification of an event necessitating a reserve. The Company offers a standard product warranty to its customers and has no other post-shipment obligations. The Company assesses collectibility based on the creditworthiness of the customer as determined by credit checks and evaluations, as well as the customer’s payment history.

All amounts billed to customers related to shipping and handling are classified as revenues, while all costs incurred by the Company for shipping and handling are classified as cost of sales.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents consist of cash and short-term investments with original maturities of three months or less, other than short-term investments in securities that lack an active market.

Investments in Marketable Securities

The Company accounts for its investments in marketable securities in accordance with ASC Topic 320. The Company determines the appropriate classification of its investments at the time of purchase and reevaluates such designation at each balance sheet date. The Company’s investments in marketable securities have been classified and accounted for as available-for-sale based on management’s investment intentions relating to these securities. Available-for-sale securities are stated at market value, generally based on market quotes, to the extent they are available. Unrealized gains and losses, net of applicable deferred taxes, are recorded as a component of other comprehensive income (loss). Realized gains and losses and declines in value judged to be other than temporary are determined based on the specific identification method and are reported in other income, net in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations.

The Company generally invests its excess cash in domestic bank-issued certificates of deposit which carry federal deposit insurance, money market funds and highly liquid debt instruments of U.S. municipalities, corporations and the U.S. government and its agencies. All highly liquid investments with stated maturities of three months or less from the date of purchase are classified as cash equivalents; all investments with stated maturities of greater than three months are classified as investments in marketable securities.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The Company’s financial instruments consist principally of cash and cash equivalents, investments in marketable securities, accounts receivable, accounts payable, accrued expenses and debt instruments. Other than for certain investments in auction rate securities (see Note 4) commercial paper and short-term corporate bonds, the fair value of the Company’s cash equivalents and investments in marketable securities is determined based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or Level 1 inputs. Because of their short-term nature, commercial paper and short-term corporate bonds are not frequently traded. Although there are observable quotes for these securities, the markets are not considered active. Accordingly, the fair values of these investments are based on Level 2 inputs. The Company recognizes transfers between Levels 1 through 3 of the fair value hierarchy at the beginning of the reporting period. The Company believes that the carrying values of all other financial instruments approximate their current fair values due to their nature and respective durations.

Table of Contents

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

The Company evaluates the collectibility of accounts receivable based on a combination of factors. In cases where the Company is aware of circumstances that may impair a specific customer’s ability to meet its financial obligations subsequent to the original sale, the Company will record an allowance against amounts due, and thereby reduce the net recognized receivable to the amount the Company reasonably believes will be collected. For all other customers, the Company records allowances for doubtful accounts based primarily on the length of time the receivables are past due based on the terms of the originating transaction, the current business environment and its historical experience. Uncollectible accounts are charged against the allowance for doubtful accounts when all cost effective commercial means of collection have been exhausted.

Concentration of Credit Risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to significant concentrations of credit risk consist principally of cash and cash equivalents, investments in marketable securities, and accounts receivable.

The Company invests its cash equivalents primarily in money market funds. Cash equivalents are maintained with high quality institutions, the composition and maturities of which are regularly monitored by management. The Company had $0.4 million of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insured cash and cash equivalents at October 2, 2010. Investments in marketable securities are generally in high-credit quality debt instruments with an active resale market. Such investments are made only in instruments issued or enhanced by high-quality institutions. The Company has not incurred any credit risk losses related to these investments.

The Company’s trade accounts receivable are primarily derived from sales to OEMs in the computer industry. The Company performs credit evaluations of its customers’ financial condition and limits the amount of credit extended when deemed necessary, but generally requires no collateral. The Company believes that the concentration of credit risk in its trade receivables is moderated by its credit evaluation process, relatively short collection terms, the high level of credit worthiness of its customers (see Note 3), and foreign credit insurance. Reserves are maintained for potential credit losses, and such losses historically have not been significant and have been within management’s expectations.

Inventories

Inventories are valued at the lower of actual cost to purchase or manufacture the inventory or net realizable value of the inventory. Cost is determined on an average cost basis which approximates actual cost on a first-in, first-out basis and includes raw materials, labor and manufacturing overhead. At each balance sheet date, the Company evaluates its ending inventory quantities on hand and on order and records a provision for excess quantities and obsolescence. Among other factors, the Company considers historical demand and forecasted demand in relation to the inventory on hand, competitiveness of product offerings, market conditions and product life cycles when determining obsolescence and net realizable value of raw material inventory. Provisions are made to reduce excess or obsolete inventories to their estimated net realizable values. Once established, write-downs are considered permanent adjustments to the cost basis of the excess or obsolete inventories.

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment are recorded at cost and depreciated on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives, which generally range from three to seven years. Leasehold improvements are recorded at cost and amortized on a straight-line basis over the shorter of their estimated useful lives or the remaining lease term.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

The Company evaluates the recoverability of the carrying value of long-lived assets held and used in its operations for impairment on at least an annual basis or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their net book value may not be recoverable. When such factors and circumstances exist, the Company compares the projected undiscounted future net cash flows associated with the related asset or group of assets over their estimated useful lives against their respective carrying amount. These projected future cash flows may vary significantly over time as a result of increased competition, changes in technology, fluctuations in demand, consolidation of our customers and reductions in average selling prices. If the carrying value is determined not to be recoverable from future operating cash flows, the asset is deemed impaired and an impairment loss is recognized to the extent the carrying value exceeds the estimated fair value of the asset. The fair value of the asset or asset group is based on market value when available, or when unavailable, on discounted expected cash flows.

Table of Contents

Warranties

The Company offers warranties generally ranging from one to three years, depending on the product and negotiated terms of the purchase agreements with customers. Such warranties require the Company to repair or replace defective product returned to the Company during the warranty period at no cost to the customer. Warranties are not offered on sales of excess component inventory. The Company records an estimate for warranty-related costs at the time of sale based on its historical and estimated product return rates and expected repair or replacement costs (see Note 3). Such costs have historically been consistent between periods and within management’s expectations and the provisions established.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company accounts for equity issuances to non-employees in accordance with ASC Topic 505. All transactions in which goods or services are the consideration received for the issuance of equity instruments are accounted for based on the fair value of the consideration received or the fair value of the equity instrument issued, whichever is more reliably measurable. The measurement date used to determine the fair value of the equity instrument issued is the earlier of the date on which the third-party performance is complete or the date on which it is probable that performance will occur.

In accordance with ASC Topic 718, employee and director stock-based compensation expense recognized during the period is based on the value of the portion of stock-based payment awards that is ultimately expected to vest during the period. Given that stock-based compensation expense recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of operations is based on awards ultimately expected to vest, it has been reduced for estimated forfeitures. ASC Topic 718 requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. The Company’s estimated average forfeiture rates are based on historical forfeiture experience and estimated future forfeitures.

The fair value of common stock option awards to employees and directors is calculated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The Black-Scholes model requires subjective assumptions regarding future stock price volatility and expected time to exercise, along with assumptions about the risk-free interest rate and expected dividends, which affect the estimated fair values of the Company’s common stock option awards. The expected term of options granted is calculated as the average of the weighted vesting period and the contractual expiration date of the option. This calculation is based on the safe harbor method permitted by the SEC in instances where the vesting and exercise terms of options granted meet certain conditions and where limited historical exercise data is available. The expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock. The risk-free rate selected to value any particular grant is based on the U.S. Treasury rate that corresponds to the expected term of the grant effective as of the date of the grant. The expected dividend assumption is based on the Company’s history and management’s expectation regarding dividend payouts. Compensation expense for common stock option awards with graded vesting schedules is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for the last separately vesting portion of the award.

The Company recognizes the fair value of restricted stock awards issued to employees and outside directors as stock-based compensation expense on a straight-line basis over the vesting period for the last separately vesting portion of the awards. Fair value is determined as the difference between the closing price of our common stock on the grant date and the purchase price of the restricted stock award, if any, reduced by expected forfeitures.

Income Taxes

Under ASC Topic 270, the Company is required to adjust its effective tax rate each quarter to be consistent with the estimated annual effective tax rate. The Company is also required to record the tax impact of certain discrete items, unusual or infrequently occurring, including changes in judgment about valuation allowances and effects of changes in tax laws or rates, in the interim period in which they occur. In addition, jurisdictions with a projected loss for the year or a year-to-date loss where no tax benefit can be recognized are excluded from the estimated annual effective tax rate. The impact of such an exclusion could result in a higher or lower effective tax rate during a particular quarter, based upon the mix and timing of actual earnings versus annual projections.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized to reflect the estimated future tax effects, calculated at currently effective tax rates, of future deductible or taxable amounts attributable to events that have been recognized on a cumulative basis in the condensed consolidated financial statements. A valuation allowance related to a net deferred tax asset is recorded when it is more likely than not that some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized.

Table of Contents

ASC Topic 740 prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement requirement for the financial statement recognition of a tax position that has been taken or is expected to be taken on a tax return and also provides guidance on de-recognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure, and transition. Under ASC Topic 740 the Company may only recognize or continue to recognize tax positions that meet a “more likely than not” threshold.

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenditures are expensed in the period incurred.

Collaborative Arrangement

The Company has entered into a collaborative arrangement with a partner in order to develop products using certain of the Company’s proprietary technology. Under the arrangement, the development partner was granted a non-exclusive license to specified intellectual property for exclusive use in the development and production of ASIC chipsets for the Company. Both the Company and the development partner provided and continue to provide engineering project management resources at their own expense. The development partner is entitled to non-recurring engineering fees based upon the achievement of development milestones, and to a minimum portion of the Company’s purchasing allocations for the component. Expenses incurred and paid to the development partner are included in research and development expense in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations.

Comprehensive Loss

ASC Topic 220 establishes standards for reporting and displaying comprehensive income and its components in the condensed consolidated financial statements. Accumulated other comprehensive loss includes unrealized gains or losses on marketable securities.

Risks and Uncertainties

The Company’s operations in the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”) are subject to various political, geographical and economic risks and uncertainties inherent to conducting business in China. These include, but are not limited to, (i) potential changes in economic conditions in the region, (ii) managing a local workforce that may subject the Company to uncertainties or certain regulatory policies, (iii) changes in other policies of the Chinese governmental and regulatory agencies, and (iv) changes in the laws and policies of the U.S. government regarding the conduct of business in foreign countries, generally, or in China, in particular. Additionally, the Chinese government controls the procedures by which its local currency, the Chinese Renminbi (“RMB”), is converted into other currencies and by which dividends may be declared or capital distributed for the purpose of repatriation of earnings and investments. If restrictions in the conversion of RMB or in the repatriation of earnings and investments through dividend and capital distribution restrictions are instituted, the Company’s operations and operating results may be negatively impacted. Restricted net assets of the Company’s subsidiary in the PRC totaled $2.5 million and $2.7 million at October 2, 2010 and January 2, 2010, respectively.

Foreign Currency Re-measurement

The functional currency of the Company’s foreign subsidiary is the U.S. dollar. Local currency financial statements are re-measured into U.S. dollars at the exchange rate in effect as of the balance sheet date for monetary assets and liabilities and the historical exchange rate for nonmonetary assets and liabilities. Expenses are re-measured using the average exchange rate for the period, except items related to nonmonetary assets and liabilities, which are re-measured using historical exchange rates. All re-measurement gains and losses are included in determining net loss.

Net Loss Per Share

Basic net loss per share is calculated by dividing net loss by the weighted-average common shares outstanding during the period, excluding unvested shares issued pursuant to restricted share awards under our share-based compensation plans. Diluted net loss per share is calculated by dividing the net loss by the weighted-average shares and dilutive potential common shares outstanding during the period. Dilutive potential shares consist of dilutive shares issuable upon the exercise or vesting of outstanding stock options and restricted stock awards, respectively, and the exercise of warrants, computed using the treasury stock method. In periods of losses, basic and diluted loss per share are the same, as the effect of stock options, unvested restricted share awards and warrants on loss per share is anti-dilutive.

Table of Contents

New Accounting Pronouncements

In September 2009, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2009-13, Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements (“ASU 2009-13”), which amends the revenue guidance under ASC Topic 605, which describes the accounting for multiple element arrangements. ASU 2009-13 addresses how to determine whether an arrangement involving multiple deliverables contains more than one unit of accounting and how arrangement consideration shall be measured and allocated to the separate units of accounting in the arrangement. ASU 2009-13 is effective on a prospective basis for the Company’s fiscal year 2011, with earlier adoption permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the adoption of ASU 2009-13 and the impact that ASU 2009-13 will have on its condensed consolidated financial statements.

In September 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-14, Certain Revenue Arrangements That Include Software Elements (“ASU 2009-14”), which excludes tangible products containing software components and non-software components that function together to deliver the product’s essential functionality from the scope of ASC Topic 985, which describes the accounting for software revenue recognition. ASU 2009-14 is effective on a prospective basis for the Company’s fiscal year 2011, with earlier adoption permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that ASU 2009-14 will have on its condensed consolidated financial statements.

Note 3—Supplemental Financial Information

Inventories

Inventories consist of the following (in thousands):

	October 2,		January 2,
	2010		2010

Raw materials	$	2,103	$	997
Work in process	345		342
Finished goods	1,413		893
	$	3,861	$	2,232

Warranty Liability

The following table summarizes the activity related to the warranty liability (in thousands):

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009

Beginning balance	$	240		$	277
Charged to costs and expenses	176			122
Usage	(214		)	(155		)
Ending balance	$	202		$	244

The warranty liability is included as a component of accrued expenses and other current liabilities in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets.

Table of Contents

Facility Relocation Costs

The following table summarizes the activity related to the Company’s accrual for facility relocation costs during the nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 (in thousands):

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009

Beginning balance	$	84		$	80
(Reduction) increase in expected costs	(28		)	61
Net payments	(10		)	(16		)
Ending balance	$	46		$	125

In May 2009, the Company entered into an agreement to sublease a portion of its new domestic headquarters facility to another tenant at a discount from the rent required under its lease commitment. As a result, the Company recorded an additional charge of approximately $61,000. In February 2010, the sublessor vacated the space that it had subleased. The Company determined that the space could be used in its operations. As a result, the Company reversed $28,000 of its accrual for facility relocation costs. The resulting expense increase and reduction are included as a component of selling, general and administrative expenses in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of operations for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009.

The liability for facility relocation costs is included as a component of accrued expenses and other current liabilities in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets.

Comprehensive Loss

The components of comprehensive loss, net of taxes, consist of the following (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,			October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009			2010			2009

Net loss	$	(4,939	)	$	(2,086	)	$	(11,878	)	$	(9,897	)
Other comprehensive loss:
Change in net unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax	(1		)	(6		)	(48		)	32
Total comprehensive loss	$	(4,940	)	$	(2,092	)	$	(11,926	)	$	(9,865	)

Accumulated other comprehensive loss reflected on the condensed consolidated balance sheets at October 2, 2010 and January 2, 2010, represents accumulated net unrealized losses on investments in marketable securities.

Computation of Net Loss Per Share

Basic and diluted net loss per share is calculated by dividing net loss by the weighted-average common shares outstanding during the period. The following table sets forth the computation of net loss per share (in thousands, except per share data):

	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,			October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009			2010			2009

Numerator: Net loss	$	(4,939	)	$	(2,086	)	$	(11,878	)	$	(9,897	)
Denominator: Weighted-average common shares outstanding, basic and diluted	24,799			19,855			23,422			19,855
Net loss per share, basic and diluted	$	(0.20	)	$	(0.11	)	$	(0.51	)	$	(0.50	)

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth potentially dilutive common share equivalents, consisting of shares issuable upon the exercise or vesting of outstanding stock options and restricted stock awards, respectively, and the exercise of warrants, computed using the treasury stock method. These potential common shares have been excluded from the diluted net loss per share calculations above as their effect would be anti-dilutive for the periods then ended (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended		Nine Months Ended
	October 2,	October 3,	October 2,	October 3,
	2010	2009	2010	2009
Common share equivalents	1,779	600	1,978	420

The above common share equivalents would have been included in the calculation of diluted earnings per share had the Company reported net income for the periods then ended.

Major Customers

Net sales to some of the Company’s OEM customers include memory modules that are qualified by the Company directly with the OEM customer and sold to electronic manufacturing services providers (“EMSs”), for incorporation into products manufactured exclusively for the OEM customer or in some instances, to facilitate credit and logistics. These net sales to EMSs have historically fluctuated period to period as a portion of the total net sales to the OEM customers. Net sales to Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. Ltd., an EMS operating under the trade name Foxconn that purchases memory modules from the Company for incorporation into products manufactured exclusively for Dell, Inc. (“Dell”), represented approximately 94% and 61% of net sales to Dell for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009, respectively. Arrow Electronics Inc. (“Arrow”) is an EMS for DRS Electronics, Inc. (“DRS Electronics”). Substantially all of the Company’s products sold to Arrow are incorporated into components manufactured for DRS Electronics. Similarly, Flextronics International Ltd. (“Flextronics”) distributes substantially all of the products purchased from the Company to F5 Networks, Inc. (“F5 Networks”). The following table sets forth sales to customers comprising 10% or more of the Company’s net sales for the periods presented:

	Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
	October 2,		October 3,		October 2,		October 3,
	2010		2009		2010		2009
Customer:
Dell (including Foxconn)	69	%	47	%	53	%	48	%
Flextronics (F5 Networks)	13	%	*	%	25	%	*	%
Arrow Electronics (DRS Electronics)	*	%	10	%	*	%	13	%
Hewlett Packard	*	%	18	%	*	%	10	%

* less than 10% of net sales

The Company’s accounts receivable are concentrated with two customers at October 2, 2010 representing approximately 70% and 18%, and two customers at January 2, 2010, representing approximately 68% and 10%, of aggregate gross receivables. A significant reduction in sales to, or the inability to collect receivables from, a significant customer could have a material adverse impact on the Company. The Company mitigates risk associated with foreign receivables by purchasing comprehensive foreign credit insurance.

Cash Flow Information

The following table sets forth cash (received) paid for income taxes and interest for the periods presented (in thousands):

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009

Income taxes	$	(725	)	$	(1,175	)
Interest	$	52		$	78

Table of Contents

Note 4—Fair Value Measurements

The following tables detail the fair value measurements within the fair value hierarchy of the Company’s investments in marketable securities (in thousands):

			Fair Value Measurements at October 2, 2010 Using
			Quoted Prices		Significant
			in Active		Other		Significant
	Fair Value at		Markets for		Observable		Unobservable
	October 2,		Identical Assets		Inputs		Inputs
	2010		(Level 1)		(Level 2)		(Level 3)

Available-for-sale debt securities:
Obligations of the U.S. government	$	1,000	$	1,000	$	—	$	—
Federal agency notes and bonds	501		501		—		—
Corporate notes and bonds	1,925		—		1,925		—
Auction and variable floating rate notes	894		—		—		894
Total	$	4,320	$	1,501	$	1,925	$	894

			Fair Value Measurements at January 2, 2010 Using
			Quoted Prices		Significant
			in Active		Other		Significant
	Fair Value at		Markets for		Observable		Unobservable
	January 2,		Identical Assets		Inputs		Inputs
	2010		(Level 1)		(Level 2)		(Level 3)

Available-for-sale debt securities:
Obligations of the U.S. government	$	997	$	997	$	—	$	—
Federal agency notes and bonds	61		61		—		—
Commercial paper	1,048		1,048		—		—
Corporate notes and bonds	1,843		1,843		—		—
Auction and variable floating rate notes	941		—		—		941
Total	$	4,890	$	3,949	$	—	$	941

As of January 3, 2010, the Company reclassified its investments in commercial paper and corporate notes and bonds, with a fair value of $2.9 million, from assets measured at fair value using Level 1 inputs to assets measured at fair value using Level 2 inputs. The transfer resulted solely from management’s reassessment of the level of activity in the secondary market for these investments, which historically has been low due to the short-term nature of the instruments. Management does not believe that the reassessment in any way reflects a change in the actual liquidity or credit quality of these investments. The reassessment was precipitated by a change in custodial institutions in connection with the Company’s new revolving credit agreement (see Note 6).

Fair value measurements using Level 3 inputs in the table above relate to the Company’s investments in auction rate securities. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs used to estimate the fair value of assets or liabilities and are utilized to the extent that observable inputs are not available.

The following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances for the Company’s assets measured at fair value using Level 3 inputs (in thousands):

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009

Beginning balance	$	941		$	960
Unrealized (loss) gain included in other comprehensive loss	(47		)	15
Ending balance	$	894		$	975

Table of Contents

Note 5—Investments in Marketable Securities

Investments in marketable securities consist of the following (in thousands):

	October 2, 2010
			Net
	Amortized		Unrealized			Fair
	Cost		Gain (Loss)			Value

Obligations of the U.S. government	$	1,000	$	—		$	1,000
Federal agency notes and bonds	501		—			501
Corporate notes and bonds	1,923		2			1,925
Auction and variable floating rate notes	1,001		(107		)	894
	$	4,425	$	(105	)	$	4,320

	January 2, 2010
			Net
	Amortized		Unrealized			Fair
	Cost		Gain (Loss)			Value

Obligations of the U.S. government	$	997	$	—		$	997
Federal agency notes and bonds	61		—			61
Commercial paper	1,048		—			1,048
Corporate notes and bonds	1,839		4			1,843
Auction and variable floating rate notes	1,002		(61		)	941
	$	4,947	$	(57	)	$	4,890

Realized gains and losses on the sale of investments in marketable securities are determined using the specific identification method. Net realized gains and losses recorded were not significant in any of the periods reported upon.

The following table provides the breakdown of investments in marketable securities with unrealized losses (in thousands):

	October 2, 2010
	Continuous Unrealized Loss
	Less than 12 months					12 months or greater
	Fair		Unrealized			Fair		Unrealized
	Value		Loss			Value		Loss

Auction and variable floating rate notes	$	—	$	—		$	894	$	(107	)

	January 2, 2010
	Continuous Unrealized Loss
	Less than 12 months					12 months or greater
	Fair		Unrealized			Fair		Unrealized
	Value		Loss			Value		Loss

Corporate notes and bonds	$	366	$	(1	)	—		—
Auction and variable floating rate notes	—		—			941		(61		)
	$	366	$	(1	)	$	941	$	(61	)

As of October 2, 2010 and January 2, 2010, the Company held two and four investments, respectively, that were in an unrealized loss position.

Table of Contents

Auction Rate Securities

Disruptions in the credit market continue to adversely affect the liquidity and overall market for auction rate securities. As of October 2, 2010 and January 2, 2010, the Company held two investments in auction rate securities with a total purchase cost of $1.0 million. These two investments represent (i) a Baa1 rated, fully insured debt obligation of a municipality and (ii) an A3 rated debt obligation backed by pools of student loans guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Education. Given the insufficient observable market inputs and related information available, the Company has classified its investments in auction rate securities within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy (see Note 4).

The Company does not believe that the current illiquidity of its investments in auction rate securities will materially impact its ability to fund its working capital needs, capital expenditures or other business requirements. The Company, however, remains uncertain as to when liquidity will return to the auction rate markets, whether other secondary markets will become available or when the underlying securities may be called by the issuer. Given these and other uncertainties, the Company’s investments in auction rate securities have been classified as long-term investments in marketable securities in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets. The Company has concluded that the estimated gross unrealized losses on these investments, which totaled approximately $107,000 and $42,000 at October 2, 2010 and January 2, 2010, are temporary because (i) the Company believes that the absence of liquidity that has occurred is due to general market conditions, (ii) the auction rate securities continue to be of a relatively high credit quality and interest is paid as due and (iii) the Company has the intent and ability to hold these investments until a recovery in the market occurs.

Other Investments in Marketable Securities

Excluding its auction rate securities, the gross unrealized losses on the Company’s other investments in marketable securities totaled approximately $1,000 as of January 2, 2010. There were no securities other than auction rate securities in an unrealized loss position at October 2, 2010. The fair value of the Company’s investments was determined based on Level 1 and Level 2 inputs, consisting of quoted prices from actual market transactions for identical investments.

The Company maintains an investment portfolio of various holdings, types and maturities. The Company invests in instruments that meet high quality credit standards, as specified in its investment policy guidelines. These guidelines generally limit the amount of credit exposure to any one issue, issuer or type of instrument. The fair value of the Company’s investments in marketable securities could change significantly in the future and the Company may be required to record other-than-temporary impairment charges or unrealized losses in future periods.

The following table presents the amortized cost and fair value of the Company’s investments in marketable securities classified as available-for-sale at October 2, 2010 by contractual maturity (in thousands):

	October 2, 2010
	Amortized		Fair
	Cost		Value

Maturity
Less than one year	$	3,424	$	3,426
Greater than two years*	1,001		894
	$	4,425	$	4,320

* Comprised of auction rate securities which generally have reset dates of 90 days or less but final contractual maturity dates in excess of 15 years.

Note 6—Credit Agreement

On October 31, 2009, the Company entered into a credit agreement with Silicon Valley Bank, which was amended on March 24, 2010, June 30, 2010 and September 30, 2010. Currently, the credit agreement provides that the Company can borrow up to the lesser of (i) 80% of eligible accounts receivable, or (ii) $10.0 million. The Company has the option to increase credit availability to $15.0 million at any time through the maturity date of September 30, 2012, subject to the conditions of the credit agreement.

The credit agreement contains an overall sublimit of $10.0 million to collateralize the Company’s contingent obligations under letters of credit, foreign exchange contracts and cash management services. Amounts outstanding under the overall sublimit reduce the amount available pursuant to the credit agreement. At October 2, 2010, letters of credit in the amount of $2.9 million were outstanding. The letters of credit expire on various dates through October 31, 2011.

Table of Contents

Interest is payable monthly at either (i) prime plus 1.25%, as long as the Company maintains $8.5 million in revolving credit availability plus unrestricted cash on deposit with the bank, or (ii) prime plus 2.25%. Additionally, the credit agreement requires payments for an unused line, as well as anniversary and early termination fees, as applicable.

In connection with the September 30, 2010 amendment, Silicon Valley Bank extended a $1.5 million term loan, which bears interest at a rate of prime plus 1.75%. The Company is required to make equal monthly principal payments which total $0.5 million annually, and a balloon payment of $0.5 at maturity. Any remaining unpaid principal is due upon maturity of the credit agreement. The term loan is classified as long-term debt in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.

The Company’s previous credit facility, which consisted of a revolving line of credit and a non-revolving equipment line, expired on August 31, 2009 and all borrowings were repaid to the bank. Interest on the credit facility was payable monthly at the greatest of (i) the sum of the prime rate plus 3%, (ii) the sum of LIBOR plus 6% or (iii) 8%.

The following table presents details of interest expense related to borrowings on revolving credit lines, along with certain other applicable information (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
	October 2,		October 3,		October 2,		October 3,
	2010		2009		2010		2009

Interest expense	$	12	$	34	$	36	$	46

					October 2,		January 2,
					2010		2010
Outstanding borrowings on the revolving line of credit					$	—	$	—
Borrowing availability under the revolving line of credit					$	2,382	$	—

Obligations under the credit agreement are secured by a first priority lien on the Company’s tangible and intangible assets. Silicon Valley Bank released Netlist Technology Texas, LP as an obligor under the credit agreement due to the dissolution of this subsidiary in October 2010.

The credit agreement subjects the Company to certain affirmative and negative covenants, including financial covenants with respect to the Company’s tangible net worth and restrictions on the payment of dividends. As of October 2, 2010, the Company was in compliance with its financial covenants.

Note 7—Long-Term Debt

Long-term debt consists of the following (in thousands):

	October 2,			January 2,
	2010			2010

Obligations under capital leases	$	260		$	159
Term note payable to bank	1,458			—
	1,718			159
Less current portion	(640		)	(108		)
	$	1,078		$	51

Table of Contents

Interest expense related to long-term debt is presented in the following table (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
	October 2,		October 3,		October 2,		October 3,
	2010		2009		2010		2009

Interest expense	$	5	$	6	$	11	$	25

Note 8—Income Taxes

The following table sets forth the Company’s provision (benefit) for income taxes, along with the corresponding effective tax rates (in thousands, except percentages):

	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,			October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009			2010			2009

Provision (benefit) for income taxes	$	12		$	(458	)	$	(713	)	$	(409	)
Effective tax rate	(0.2		)%	18		%	5.7		%	4		%

During the nine months ended October 2, 2010, the Company carried back approximately $1.7 million of gross net operating losses under the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Act and received a federal income tax refund of approximately $0.7 million. During the three and nine months ended October 3, 2009, the Company reduced its unrecognized tax benefits by approximately $0.5 million as a result of a lapse in a federal statute of limitations.

The Company evaluates whether a valuation allowance should be established against its deferred tax assets based on the consideration of all available evidence using a “more likely than not” standard. Due to uncertainty of future utilization, the Company has provided a full valuation allowance as of October 2, 2010 and January 2, 2010. Accordingly, no benefit has been recognized for net deferred tax assets, including net operating losses that cannot be realized currently via carryback to periods of taxable income.

The Company had unrecognized tax benefits at October 2, 2010 and January 2, 2010 of approximately $0.1 million that, if recognized, would affect the Company’s annual effective tax rate.

Note 9—Commitments and Contingencies

Litigation

Federal Securities Class Action

Beginning in May 2007, the Company, certain of its officers and directors, and the Company’s underwriters were named as defendants in four purported class action shareholder complaints, two of which were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, and two of which were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. These purported class action lawsuits were filed on behalf of persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s common stock pursuant or traceable to the Company’s November 30, 2006 initial public offering (the “IPO”). The lawsuits were consolidated into a single action—Belodoff v. Netlist, Inc., Lead Case No. SACV07-677 DOC (MLGx)—which is currently pending in the Central District of California. Lead Plaintiff filed the Consolidated Complaint in November 2007. Defendants filed their motions to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint in January 2008. The motions to dismiss were taken under submission in April 2008 and on May 30, 2008, the court granted the defendants’ motions. However, plaintiffs were granted the right to amend their complaint and subsequently filed their First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint (“Amended Complaint”) in July 2008. The defendants filed motions to dismiss the Amended Complaint in January 2009, and on April 17, 2009, the court granted defendants’ motions to dismiss. However, plaintiffs were again granted the right to amend their complaint. Plaintiffs’ filed their Second Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint (“Second Amended Complaint”) in May 2009. Generally, the Second Amended Complaint, like the preceding complaints, alleged that the Registration Statement filed by the Company in connection with the IPO contained untrue statements of material fact or omissions of material fact in violation of Sections 11 and 15 of Securities Act of 1933. Defendants filed motions to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint in June 2009. The motions to dismiss were taken under submission in August 2009 and on September 1, 2009, the Court granted the defendants’ motions. However, plaintiffs again were granted the right to amend their complaint.

Table of Contents

In December 2008, the parties reached a tentative agreement in principle to settle the class action. In February 2010, the parties executed a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement documenting the essential terms of the proposed settlement, informed the court of their proposed settlement, and drafted a joint motion to submit to the court for preliminary approval of the proposed settlement. Under the settlement agreement presented to the court for approval, plaintiffs and the class will dismiss all claims, with prejudice, in exchange for a cash payment of $2.6 million. The Company’s directors’ and officers’ liability insurers will pay the settlement amount in accordance with the Company’s insurance policies.

On April 19, 2010, the court issued an order preliminarily approving the settlement. A final settlement approval was issued on September 30, 2010.

Patent Claims

In May 2008, the Company initiated discussions with Google, Inc. (“Google”) regarding the Company’s claim that Google has infringed on a U.S. patent owned by the Company, U.S. Patent No. 7,289,386 (“the ’386 patent”), which relates generally to rank multiplication in memory modules. On August 29, 2008, Google filed a declaratory judgment lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, seeking a declaration that Google did not infringe the ’386 patent and that the ’386 patent is invalid. Google is not seeking any monetary damages. On November 18, 2008, the Company filed a counterclaim for infringement of the ’386 patent by Google. Claim construction proceedings were held on November 14, 2009, and the Company prevailed on every disputed claim construction issue. On June 1, 2010, the Company filed a motion for summary judgment of patent infringement and a motion for summary judgment to dismiss Google’s affirmative defenses based on Netlist’s activities in the JEDEC standard-setting organization. The hearings for these motions have been postponed indefinitely by the Court. On September 1, 2010, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) granted Google’s request for reexamination of the ’386 patent. On September 14, 2010, the Court granted Google’s request to stay the litigation pending the conclusion of the reexamination by the USPTO. On October 20, 2010, Smart Modular, Inc. (“SMOD”) filed a request for reexamination of the ’386 patent with the USPTO. The USPTO is expected to make a determination whether to grant or deny this request in January 2011.

On December 4, 2009, the Company filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Google in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, seeking damages and injunctive relief based on Google’s infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,619,912 (“the ’912 patent”), which issued in November 2009 and is related to the ’386 patent. On February 11, 2010, Google answered the Company’s complaint and asserted counterclaims against the Company seeking a declaration that the patent is invalid and not infringed, and claiming that the Company committed fraud, negligent misrepresentation and breach of contract based on Netlist’s activities in the JEDEC standard-setting organization. The counterclaim seeks unspecified compensatory damages. Claim construction proceedings will be held on March 17, 2011. On October 20 and October 21, respectively, SMOD and Google each filed requests for reexamination of the ’912 patent. The USPTO is expected to make a determination whether to grant or deny these requests in January 2011. The Company intends to vigorously pursue its infringement claims against Google and to vigorously defend against Google’s claims.

On September 22, 2009, the Company filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Inphi Corporation (“Inphi”) in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The suit alleges that Inphi is contributorily infringing and actively inducing the infringement of a U.S. patent owned by the Company, U.S. Patent No. 7,532,537 (“the ’537 patent”), which relates generally to memory modules with load isolation and memory domain translation capabilities. The Company is seeking damages and injunctive relief based on Inphi’s use of its patented technology. On December 22, 2009, the Company filed an Amended Complaint asserting claims of patent infringement based on two additional patents, the ’912 patent and U.S. Patent No. 7,636,274 (“the ’274 patent”), which relate generally to load isolation and memory domain translation technologies, as well as rank multiplication. Inphi has denied infringement and has asserted that the patents-in-suit are invalid. On April 19, 2010, Inphi filed requests for reexamination of the three patents-in-suit, and on April 21, 2010, Inphi filed an interference proceeding on the three patents-in-suit with the USPTO. Inphi then filed a motion to stay the lawsuit, which was granted on May 18, 2010. On September 1, 2010, the USPTO confirmed the patentability of all fifty-one claims of the ’912 patent. The Company intends to vigorously pursue its infringement claims against Inphi and to continue to vigorously defend its patent rights in the USPTO.

On November 30, 2009, Inphi filed a patent infringement lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court for the Central District of California alleging infringement of two Inphi patents generally related to memory module output buffers. Discovery is currently underway, and the Company intends to vigorously defend against Inphi’s claims of infringement.

Table of Contents

On March 24, 2010, Ring Technologies Enterprises filed a patent infringement lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Dell Computer and its suppliers. The suit alleges that the Company and forty-two (42) other defendants infringed on its U.S. Patent No. 6,879,526. The Company filed its answer to Ring Technologies’ complaint and intends to vigorously defend against Ring Technologies’ claims of infringement.

Other Contingent Obligations

During its normal course of business, the Company has made certain indemnities, commitments and guarantees under which it may be required to make payments in relation to certain transactions. These include (i) intellectual property indemnities to the Company’s customers and licensees in connection with the use, sales and/or license of Company products; (ii) indemnities to vendors and service providers pertaining to claims based on the Company’s negligence or willful misconduct; (iii) indemnities involving the accuracy of representations and warranties in certain contracts; (iv) indemnities to directors and officers of the Company to the maximum extent permitted under the laws of the State of Delaware; and (v) certain real estate leases, under which the Company may be required to indemnify property owners for environmental and other liabilities, and other claims arising from the Company’s use of the applicable premises. The duration of these indemnities, commitments and guarantees varies and, in certain cases, may be indefinite. The majority of these indemnities, commitments and guarantees do not provide for any limitation of the maximum potential for future payments the Company could be obligated to make. Historically, the Company has not been obligated to make significant payments for these obligations, and no liabilities have been recorded for these indemnities, commitments and guarantees in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets.

Commitment to Purchase Component Inventory

In September, 2010, the Company entered into a $2.5 million commitment to purchase ASIC devices for use in certain of its high-performance memory modules that are in the evaluation process with OEM and end-user customers. The Company issued a $1.1 million letter of credit to secure payment for future shipments. See note 6.

Note 10—Stockholders’ Equity

Common Stock

On March 24, 2010, the Company sold 4,594,250 shares of common stock in a registered public offering. The shares were sold to the public at a price of $3.85 per share. The Company received net proceeds of $16.2 million, after underwriting discounts and commissions, and estimated expenses payable by the Company.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company has stock-based compensation awards outstanding pursuant to the 2000 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2000 Plan”) and the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2006 Plan”). Effective as of the IPO, no further grants may be made under the 2000 Plan. In addition to awards made pursuant to the 2006 Plan, the Company periodically issues inducement grants outside the 2006 Plan to certain new hires. In the nine months ended October 2, 2010, the Company issued 305,000 stock options pursuant to inducement grants.

On June 2, 2010, the Company’s shareholders approved an amendment to the 2006 Plan to provide that the number of shares of common stock that may be issued shall be increased annually by a number of shares equal to the lesser of 5.0% of the issued and outstanding shares as of January 1 of each year or 1,200,000 shares. Prior to June 2, 2010, the annual increase in shares available under the 2006 Plan was capped at 500,000. The amendment is effective for fiscal 2010. An additional 505,566 shares are available for issuance as a result of the amendment to the 2006 Plan. At October 2, 2010, the Company had 367,281 shares available for grant pursuant to option, stock appreciation right, performance unit, restricted stock, restricted stock unit or stock grant awards under the 2006 Plan.

Table of Contents

A summary of the Company’s common stock option activity as of and for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 is presented below (shares in thousands):

	Options Outstanding
			Weighted-
			Average
	Number of		Exercise
	Shares		Price
Options outstanding at January 2, 2010	4,298		$	2.41
Options granted	588		3.35
Options exercised	(80	)	0.99
Options cancelled	(162	)	0.87
Options outstanding at October 2, 2010	4,644		$	2.61

A summary of the Company’s restricted stock awards as of and for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 is presented below (shares in thousands):

	Restricted Stock Outstanding
			Weighted-
			Average
			Grant-Date
	Number of		Fair Value
	Shares		per Share
Balance outstanding at January 2, 2010	—		$	—
Restricted stock granted	528		3.46
Restricted stock forfeited	(10	)	3.49
Restricted stock vested	(60	)	3.49
Balance outstanding at October 2, 2010	458		$	3.46

Restricted stock awards vest in eight equal increments at intervals of approximately six months from the date of grant.

The following table presents details of the assumptions used to calculate the weighted-average grant date fair value of common stock options granted by the Company:

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009
Expected term (in years)	5.5			5.4
Expected volatility	146		%	111		%
Risk-free interest rate	2.14		%	2.94		%
Expected dividends	—			—
Weighted-average grant date fair value per share	$	3.07		$	0.28

The weighted-average fair value per share of the restricted stock granted in the nine months ended October 2, 2010 was $3.46, calculated based on the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the respective grant dates.

At October 2, 2010, the amount of unearned stock-based compensation currently estimated to be expensed from fiscal 2010 through fiscal 2014 related to unvested common stock options and restricted stock awards is approximately $3.6 million, net of estimated forfeitures. The weighted-average period over which the unearned stock-based compensation is expected to be recognized is approximately 3.1 years. If there are any modifications or cancellations of the underlying unvested awards, the Company may be required to accelerate, increase or cancel any remaining unearned stock-based compensation expense.

Table of Contents

Warrants

A summary of activity with respect to outstanding warrants to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 is presented below (shares in thousands):

			Weighted-
			Average
	Number of		Exercise
	Shares		Price
Warrants outstanding at January 2, 2010	18		$	1.25
Warrants exercised	(18	)	1.25
Warrants outstanding and exercisable at October 2, 2010	—		$	—

Note 11—Segment and Geographic Information

The Company operates in one reportable segment: the design and manufacture of high-performance memory subsystems for the server, high-performance computing and communications markets. The Company evaluates financial performance on a Company-wide basis.

At October 2, 2010 and January 2, 2010, approximately $2.6 million and $3.0 million, respectively, of the Company’s net long-lived assets were located in the PRC.

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Cautionary Statement

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and the related notes thereto contained in Part I, Item 1 of this Report. The information contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q is not a complete description of our business or the risks associated with an investment in our common stock. We urge you to carefully review and consider the various disclosures made by us in this Report and in our other reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 2, 2010 and subsequent reports on Form 8-K, which discuss our business in greater detail.

This Report contains forward-looking statements regarding future events and our future performance. These forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expected or projected. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, continuing development, qualification and volume production of NetVault™NV and HyperCloud™; the rapidly-changing nature of technology; risks associated with intellectual property, including the costs and unpredictability of litigation over infringement of our property and the possibility of our patents being reexamined by the United States Patent and Trademark Office; volatility in the pricing of DRAM ICs and NAND; changes in and uncertainty of customer acceptance of, and demand for, our existing products and products under development, including uncertainty of and/or delays in product orders and product qualifications; delays in our and our customers’ product releases and development; introductions of new products by competitors; changes in end-user demand for technology solutions; our ability to attract and retain skilled personnel; our reliance on suppliers of critical components and vendors in the supply chain; fluctuations in the market price of critical components; evolving industry standards; and the political and regulatory environment in the People’s Republic of China. Other risks and uncertainties are described under the heading “Risk Factors” in Part II, Item IA of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, and similar discussions in our other SEC filings. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to revise or update publicly any forward-looking statements for any reason.

Overview

We design, manufacture and sell high-performance, logic-based memory subsystems for the server, storage and communications equipment markets. Our memory subsystems consist of combinations of dynamic random access memory integrated circuits (“DRAM ICs” or “DRAM”), NAND flash memory (“NAND”), application-specific integrated circuits (“ASICs”) and other components assembled on printed circuit boards (“PCBs”). We primarily market and sell our products to leading original equipment manufacturer (“OEM”) customers. Our solutions are targeted at applications where memory plays a key role in meeting system performance requirements.

In November 2009, we introduced HyperCloud™ DDR3 memory technology. HyperCloud™ utilizes an ASIC chipset that incorporates Netlist patented rank multiplication technology that increases memory capacity and load reduction functionality that increases memory bandwidth. We expect that this achievement will make possible improved levels of performance for memory intensive datacenter applications and workloads, including financial services applications, search engines, social networks/communications, media internet portals, virtualization, and high performance scientific and defense-related computing. HyperCloud™ memory is being evaluated by several of our OEM customers for use in their server products. HyperCloud™ is interoperable with Joint Electronics Devices Engineering Council (“JEDEC”) standard DDR3 memory modules. Our HyperCloud™ products are designed to allow for installation in servers without the need for a bios change. As such, their anticipated sales launch is not dependent on the design plans or product cycle of our OEM customers. As of October 2, 2010, we have not shipped any production quantities of HyperCloud™.

Table of Contents

In February 2010, we announced general availability of NetVaultTM NV, a non-volatile cache memory subsystem targeting Redundant Array of Independent Disks, (“RAID”) storage applications. NetVaultTM NV provides server and storage OEMs a solution for enhanced datacenter fault recovery. Unlike our traditional battery-powered fault tolerant cache product which relied solely on batteries to power the cache, NetVaultTM NV utilizes a combination of DRAM for high throughput performance and flash for extended data retention. The introduction of NetVaultTM NV, as well as the launch of the Dell, Inc. (“Dell”) PERC 7 line of servers in December 2009, has resulted in RAID controller subsystem revenues of $13.7 million, or 49% of total revenues for the nine months ended October 2, 2010, including $4.4 million of NetVault NV. This compares favorably with $3.3 million of RAID controller subsystems, or 28% of total revenues for the nine months ended October 3, 2009. Although revenues through October 2, 2010 have been primarily for shipments to Dell, we intend to qualify NetVault TMNV with several OEMs and to pursue end-user opportunities. Based on sell through activity through October 2010, we do not anticipate significant sales of NetVaultTMNV products for Dell in the fourth quarter of 2010. Dell has initiated marketing activities that we expect will increase the sell through of NetVault™NV such that we can resume volume production and delivery of the product in the first quarter of fiscal 2011.

The remainder of our revenues arises primarily from OEM sales of custom memory modules, the majority of which are utilized in data center and industrial applications. When developing custom modules for an equipment product launch, we engage with our OEM customers from the earliest stages of new product definition, providing us unique insight into their full range of system architecture and performance requirements. This close collaboration has also allowed us to develop a significant level of systems expertise. We leverage a portfolio of proprietary technologies and design techniques, including efficient planar design, alternative packaging techniques and custom semiconductor logic, to deliver memory subsystems with high speed, capacity and signal integrity, small form factor, attractive thermal characteristics and low cost per bit. Revenues from custom modules have improved as a result of OEM product placements on new platforms and improved economic conditions compared with 2009. The continuation of this trend, which cannot be assured, is dependent on our ability to qualify our memory modules on new platforms as current platforms reach the end of their life cycles, and on the state of the global economy.

Consistent with the concentrated nature of the OEM customer base in our target markets, a small number of large customers have historically accounted for a significant portion of our net sales. Dell and Flextronics International Ltd. (“Flextronics”) represented approximately 53% and 25%, respectively, of our net sales for the nine months ended October 2, 2010. Dell, Arrow Electronics, Inc. (“Arrow”) and Hewlett Packard, Inc. represented approximately 48%, 13% and 10%, respectively, of our net sales for the nine months ended October 3, 2009. Net sales to some of our OEM customers include memory modules that are qualified by us directly with the OEM customer and sold to electronic manufacturing services providers (“EMSs”), for incorporation into products manufactured exclusively for the OEM customer or in some instances, to facilitate credit and logistics. These net sales to EMSs have historically fluctuated period to period as a portion of the total net sales to the OEM customers. Net sales to Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. Ltd., an EMS operating under the trade name Foxconn that purchases memory modules from us for incorporation into products manufactured exclusively for Dell, represented approximately 94% and 61% of net sales to Dell for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009, respectively. Arrow is an EMS for DRS Electronics, Inc. (“DRS Electronics”). Substantially all of our products sold to Arrow are incorporated into components manufactured for DRS Electronics. Similarly, Flextronics distributes substantially all of the products purchased from us to F5 Networks, Inc.

Key Business Metrics

The following describes certain line items in our condensed consolidated statements of operations that are important to management’s assessment of our financial performance:

Net Sales. Net sales consist primarily of sales of our high performance memory subsystems, net of a provision for estimated returns under our right of return policies, which generally range up to 30 days. We generally do not have long-term sales agreements with our customers. Although OEM customers typically provide us with non-binding forecasts of future product demand over specific periods of time, they generally place orders with us approximately two weeks in advance of scheduled delivery. Selling prices are typically negotiated monthly, based on competitive market conditions and the current price of DRAM ICs and NAND. Purchase orders generally have no cancellation or rescheduling penalty provisions. We often ship our products to our customers’ international manufacturing sites. All of our sales to date, however, are denominated in United States (“U.S.”) dollars. We also sell excess component inventory of DRAM ICs and NAND to distributors and other users of memory ICs. As compared to previous years, component inventory sales remain a relatively small percentage of net sales as a result of our efforts to diversify both our customer and product line bases. This diversification effort has also allowed us to use components in a wider range of memory subsystems. We expect that component inventory sales will continue to represent a minimal portion of our net sales in future periods.

Table of Contents

Cost of Sales. Our cost of sales includes the cost of materials, manufacturing costs, depreciation and amortization of equipment, inventory valuation provisions, stock-based compensation and occupancy costs and other allocated fixed costs. The DRAM ICs and NAND incorporated into our products constitute a significant portion of our cost of sales, and thus our cost of sales will fluctuate based on the current price of DRAM ICs and NAND. We attempt to pass through such DRAM IC and NAND flash memory cost fluctuations to our customers by renegotiating pricing prior to the placement of their purchase orders. However, the sales prices of our memory subsystems can also fluctuate due to competitive situations unrelated to the pricing of DRAM ICs and NAND, which affects gross margins. The gross margin on our sales of excess component DRAM IC and NAND inventory is much lower than the gross margin on our sales of our memory subsystems. We assess the valuation of our inventories on a monthly basis and record a provision to cost of sales as necessary to reduce inventories to the lower of cost or net realizable value.

Research and Development. Research and development expense consists primarily of employee and independent contractor compensation and related costs, non-recurring engineering fees, patent filing and protection legal fees, computer-aided design software licenses, reference design development costs, depreciation or rental of evaluation equipment, stock-based compensation, and occupancy and other allocated overhead costs. Also included in research and development expense are the costs of material and overhead related to the production of engineering samples of new products under development or products used solely in the research and development process, reduced by estimated salvage value. Our customers typically do not separately compensate us for design and engineering work involved in developing application-specific products for incorporation into their products. All research and development costs are expensed as incurred. We anticipate that research and development expenditures will increase in future periods as we seek to expand new product opportunities, increase our activities related to new and emerging markets and continue to develop additional proprietary technologies.

Selling, General and Administrative. Selling, general and administrative expenses consist primarily of employee salaries and related costs, stock-based compensation, independent sales representative commissions, professional services, promotional and other selling and marketing expenses, sample expense and occupancy and other allocated overhead costs. A significant portion of our selling effort is directed at building relationships with OEMs and other customers and working through the product approval and qualification process with them. Therefore, the cost of material and overhead related to products manufactured for qualification is included in selling expenses. As we continue to service existing and establish new customers, we anticipate that our sales and marketing expenses will increase.

Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes. We are required to adjust our effective tax rate each quarter to be consistent with the estimated annual effective tax rate. We are also required to record the tax impact of certain discrete items, unusual or infrequently occurring, including changes in judgment about valuation allowances and effects of changes in tax laws or rates, in the interim period in which they occur. In addition, jurisdictions with a projected loss for the year or a year-to-date loss where no tax benefit can be recognized are excluded from the estimated annual effective tax rate. The impact of such an exclusion could result in a higher or lower effective tax rate during a particular quarter, based upon the mix and timing of actual earnings versus annual projections.

We evaluate whether a valuation allowance should be established against our deferred tax assets based on the consideration of all available evidence using a “more likely than not” standard. As of October 2, 2010 and January 2, 2010, we have provided a full valuation allowance and no benefit has been recognized for net operating losses and other deferred tax assets due to uncertainty of future utilization.

Critical Accounting Policies

The preparation of our condensed consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the condensed consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of net sales and expenses during the reporting period. By their nature, these estimates and assumptions are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty. We base our estimates on our historical experience, knowledge of current conditions and our beliefs of what could occur in the future considering available information. We review our estimates on an on-going basis. Actual results may differ from these estimates, which may result in material adverse effects on our operating results and financial position. We believe the following critical accounting policies involve our more significant assumptions and estimates used in the preparation of our condensed consolidated financial statements:

Table of Contents

Revenue Recognition. We recognize revenues in accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 605. Accordingly, we recognize revenues when there is persuasive evidence that an arrangement, product delivery and acceptance have occurred, the sales price is fixed or determinable, and collectibility of the resulting receivable is reasonably assured.

We generally use customer purchase orders and/or contracts as evidence of an arrangement. Delivery occurs when goods are shipped for customers with FOB Shipping Point terms and upon receipt for customers with FOB Destination terms, at which time title and risk of loss transfer to the customer. Shipping documents are used to verify delivery and customer acceptance. We assess whether the sales price is fixed or determinable based on the payment terms associated with the transaction and whether the sales price is subject to refund. Customers are generally allowed limited rights of return for up to 30 days, except for sales of excess component inventories, which contain no right-of-return privileges. Estimated returns are provided for at the time of sale based on historical experience or specific identification of an event necessitating a reserve. We offer a standard product warranty to our customers and have no other post-shipment obligations. While these sales returns have historically been within our expectations and the provisions established, we cannot guarantee that we will continue to experience similar sales return rates in the future. Any significant increase in product return rates could have a material adverse effect on our operating results for the period or periods in which such returns materialize. We assess collectibility based on the creditworthiness of the customer as determined by credit checks and evaluations, as well as the customer’s payment history.

All amounts billed to customers related to shipping and handling are classified as net sales, while all costs incurred by us for shipping and handling are classified as cost of sales.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments. Our financial instruments consist principally of cash and cash equivalents, investments in marketable securities, accounts receivable, accounts payable, accrued expenses and debt instruments. Other than for certain investments in auction rate securities, commercial paper and short-term corporate bonds, the fair value of our cash equivalents and investments in marketable securities is determined based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or Level 1 inputs. Because of their short-term nature, commercial paper and short-term corporate bonds are not frequently traded. Although there are observable quotes for these securities, the markets are not considered active. Accordingly, the fair values of these investments are based on Level 2 inputs. The fair value of our auction rate securities is determined based on Level 3 inputs. We recognize transfers between Levels 1 through 3 of the fair value hierarchy at the beginning of the reporting period. We believe that the carrying values of all other financial instruments approximate their current fair values due to their nature and respective durations.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts. We perform credit evaluations of our customers’ financial condition and limit the amount of credit extended to our customers as deemed necessary, but generally require no collateral. We evaluate the collectibility of accounts receivable based on a combination of factors. In cases where we are aware of circumstances that may impair a specific customer’s ability to meet its financial obligations subsequent to the original sale, we will record an allowance against amounts due, and thereby reduce the net recognized receivable to the amount that we reasonably believe will be collected. For all other customers, we record allowances for doubtful accounts based primarily on the length of time the receivables are past due based on the terms of the originating transaction, the current business environment and our historical experience. Uncollectible accounts are charged against the allowance for doubtful accounts when all cost effective commercial means of collection have been exhausted. Generally, our credit losses have been within our expectations and the provisions established. However, we cannot guarantee that we will continue to experience credit loss rates similar to those we have experienced in the past.

Our accounts receivable are highly concentrated among a small number of customers, and a significant change in the liquidity or financial position of one of these customers could have a material adverse effect on the collectability of our accounts receivable, our liquidity and our future operating results.

Inventories. We value our inventories at the lower of the actual cost to purchase or manufacture the inventory or the net realizable value of the inventory. Cost is determined on an average cost basis which approximates actual cost on a first-in, first-out basis and includes raw materials, labor and manufacturing overhead. At each balance sheet date, we evaluate ending inventory quantities on hand and record a provision for excess quantities and obsolescence. Among other factors, we consider historical demand and forecasted demand in relation to the inventory on hand, competitiveness of product offerings, market conditions and product life cycles when determining obsolescence and net realizable value. In addition, we consider changes in the market value of DRAM ICs and NAND in determining the net realizable value of our raw material inventory. Once established, any write downs are considered permanent adjustments to the cost basis of our excess or obsolete inventories.

Table of Contents

A significant decrease in demand for our products could result in an increase in the amount of excess inventory quantities on hand. In addition, our estimates of future product demand may prove to be inaccurate, in which case we may have understated or overstated the provision required for excess and obsolete inventory. In the future, if our inventories are determined to be overvalued, we would be required to recognize additional expense in our cost of sales at the time of such determination. Likewise, if our inventories are determined to be undervalued, we may have over-reported our costs of sales in previous periods and would be required to recognize additional gross profit at the time such inventories are sold. In addition, should the market value of DRAM ICs or NAND decrease significantly, we may be required to lower our selling prices to reflect the lower current cost of our raw materials. If such price decreases reduce the net realizable value of our inventories to less than our cost, we would be required to recognize additional expense in our cost of sales in the same period. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure the accuracy of our forecasts of future product demand, any significant unanticipated changes in demand, technological developments or the market value of DRAM ICs or NAND could have a material effect on the value of our inventories and our reported operating results.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets. We evaluate the recoverability of the carrying value of long-lived assets held and used in our operations for impairment on at least an annual basis or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their net book value may not be recoverable. When such factors and circumstances exist, we compare the projected undiscounted future net cash flows associated with the related asset or group of assets over their estimated useful lives against their respective carrying amount. These projected future cash flows may vary significantly over time as a result of increased competition, changes in technology, fluctuations in demand, consolidation of our customers and reductions in average selling prices. If the carrying value is determined not to be recoverable from future operating cash flows, the asset is deemed impaired and an impairment loss is recognized to the extent the carrying value exceeds the estimated fair value of the asset. The fair value of the asset or asset group is based on market value when available, or when unavailable, on discounted expected cash flows.

Warranty Reserve. We offer product warranties generally ranging from one to three years, depending on the product and negotiated terms of purchase agreements with our customers. Such warranties require us to repair or replace defective product returned to us during the warranty period at no cost to the customer. Warranties are not offered on sales of excess component inventory. Our estimates for warranty-related costs are recorded at the time of sale based on historical and estimated future product return rates and expected repair or replacement costs. While such costs have historically been consistent between periods and within our expectations and the provisions established, unexpected changes in failure rates could have a material adverse impact on us, requiring additional warranty reserves, and adversely affecting our gross profit and gross margins.

Stock-Based Compensation. We account for equity issuances to non-employees in accordance with ASC Topic 505. All transactions in which goods or services are the consideration received for the issuance of equity instruments are accounted for based on the fair value of the consideration received or the fair value of the equity instrument issued, whichever is more reliably measurable. The measurement date used to determine the fair value of the equity instrument issued is the earlier of the date on which the third-party performance is complete or the date on which it is probable that performance will occur.

In accordance with ASC Topic 718, employee and director stock-based compensation expense recognized during the period is based on the value of the portion of stock-based payment awards that is ultimately expected to vest during the period. Given that stock-based compensation expense recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of operations is based on awards ultimately expected to vest, it has been reduced for estimated forfeitures. ASC Topic 718 requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. Our estimated average forfeiture rates are based on historical forfeiture experience and estimated future forfeitures.

The fair value of common stock option awards to employees and directors is calculated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The Black-Scholes model requires subjective assumptions regarding future stock price volatility and expected time to exercise, along with assumptions about the risk-free interest rate and expected dividends, all of which affect the estimated fair values of our common stock option awards. The expected term of options granted is calculated as the average of the weighted vesting period and the contractual expiration date of the option. This calculation is based on the safe harbor method permitted by the SEC in instances where the vesting and exercise terms of options granted meet certain conditions and where limited historical exercise data is available. The expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of our common stock. The risk-free rate selected to value any particular grant is based on the U.S. Treasury rate that corresponds to the expected term of the grant effective as of the date of the grant. The expected dividends assumption is based on our history and our expectations regarding dividend payouts. We evaluate the assumptions used to value our common stock option awards on a quarterly basis. If factors change and we employ different assumptions, stock- based compensation expense may differ significantly from what we have recorded in prior periods. Compensation expense for common stock option awards with graded vesting schedules is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for the last separately vesting portion of the award.

Table of Contents

We recognize the fair value of restricted stock awards issued to employees and outside directors as stock-based compensation expense on a straight-line basis over the vesting period for the last separately vesting portion of the awards. Fair value is determined as the difference between the closing price of our common stock on the grant date and the purchase price of the restricted stock award, if any, reduced by expected forfeitures.

If there are any modifications or cancellations of the underlying vested or unvested stock-based awards, we may be required to accelerate, increase or cancel any remaining unearned stock-based compensation expense, or record additional expense for vested stock-based awards. Future stock-based compensation expense and unearned stock- based compensation may increase to the extent that we grant additional common stock options or other stock-based awards.

Income Taxes. Under ASC Topic 270, we are required to adjust our effective tax rate each quarter to be consistent with the estimated annual effective tax rate. We are also required to record the tax impact of certain discrete items, unusual or infrequently occurring, including changes in judgment about valuation allowances and effects of changes in tax laws or rates, in the interim period in which they occur. In addition, jurisdictions with a projected loss for the year or a year-to-date loss where no tax benefit can be recognized are excluded from the estimated annual effective tax rate. The impact of such an exclusion could result in a higher or lower effective tax rate during a particular quarter, based upon the mix and timing of actual earnings versus annual projections.

ASC Topic 740 prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement requirement for the financial statement recognition of a tax position that has been taken or is expected to be taken on a tax return and also provides guidance on de-recognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure, and transition. Under ASC Topic 740 we may only recognize or continue to recognize tax positions that meet a “more likely than not” threshold.

The application of tax laws and regulations is subject to legal and factual interpretation, judgment and uncertainty. Tax laws and regulations themselves are subject to change as a result of changes in fiscal policy, changes in legislation, the evolution of regulations and court rulings. Therefore, the actual liability for U.S. or foreign taxes may be materially different from our estimates, which could result in the need to record additional tax liabilities or potentially reverse previously recorded tax liabilities.

Table of Contents

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth certain condensed consolidated statements of operations data as a percentage of net sales for the periods indicated:

	Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
	October 2,		October 3,		October 2,		October 3,
	2010		2009		2010		2009

Net sales	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%
Cost of sales	71		76		76		89
Gross profit	29		24		24		11
Operating expenses:
Research and development	47		31		40		48
Selling, general and administrative	28		33		29		52
Total operating expenses	75		63		70		100
Operating loss	(46	)	(39	)	(46	)	(89	)
Other income (expense):
Interest income (expense), net	—		—		—		1
Other income, net	—		—		—		1
Total other income (expense), net	—		—		—		2
Loss before provision (benefit) for income taxes	(46	)	(39	)	(46	)	(87	)
Provision (benefit) for income taxes	—		(7	)	(3	)	(3	)
Net loss	(46	)%	(32	)%	(43	)%	(84	)%

Three and Nine Months Ended October 2, 2010 Compared to Three and Nine Months Ended October 3, 2009

Net Sales, Cost of Sales and Gross Profit

The following table presents net sales, cost of sales and gross profit for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 (in thousands, except percentages):

	Three Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,						%
	2010			2009			Change			Change

Net sales	$	10,565		$	6,446		$	4,119		64	%
Cost of sales	7,545			4,879			2,666			55	%
Gross profit	$	3,020		$	1,567		$	1,453		93	%
Gross margin	29		%	24		%	4		%

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,						%
	2010			2009			Change			Change

Net sales	$	27,759		$	11,781		$	15,978		136	%
Cost of sales	21,103			10,507			10,596			101	%
Gross profit	$	6,656		$	1,274		$	5,382		422	%
Gross margin	24		%	11		%	13		%

Table of Contents

Net Sales. Overall, net sales of our RAID, data center optimization and industrial applications increased as a result of the selection of our memory modules for inclusion in new product platforms. Net sales in all product categories have benefited from resurgence in technology investment, as general economic conditions have improved since early 2009. Should economic conditions erode positive sales trends may not continue.

The increase in net sales for the three months ended October 2, 2010 as compared with the three months ended October 3, 2009 resulted primarily from increases of approximately (i) $4.9 million in sales of NetVault™ non-volatile cache systems used in RAID controller subsystems, including $1.7 million from the launch of NetVault™ NV, the flash-based cache system that became generally available in 2010, and (ii) $0.8 million in sales of memory modules utilized in data center targeted server applications, offset by decreases of (i) $0.7 million in sales of memory modules used in laptop applications, and (ii) $0.6 million from the re-sale of DRAM components.

The increase in net sales for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 as compared with the nine months ended October 3, 2009 resulted from increases of approximately (i) $10.3 million in sales of NetVault™ products, including $4.4 million from NetVault™ NV, (ii) $5.0 million in sales of memory modules utilized in data center targeted server applications, and (iii) $1.0 million in sales of memory modules designed for industrial applications.

Gross Profit and Gross Margin. The overall improvements in gross profit are due to increased sales and manufacturing volume, as well as a shift in sales toward higher margin products. Gross profit for the three months ended October 2, 2010 as compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009 increased due to the 64% increase in net sales between the two periods, resulting in profits earned on each unit sold, as well as an improved ability to absorb fixed manufacturing costs. These volume based improvements were partially offset by increased DRAM prices, which affected margins in some product categories. Gross profits for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009 were impacted by the same trends, including a 136% increase in net sales between the two periods.

Research and Development.

The following table presents research and development expenses for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 (in thousands, except percentages):

	Three Months Ended
	October 2,		October 3,				%
	2010		2009		Change		Change

Research and development	$	4,958	$	1,975	$	2,983	151	%

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,		October 3,				%
	2010		2009		Change		Change

Research and development	$	11,156	$	5,619	$	5,537	99	%

The increase in research and development expense in the three months ended October 2, 2010 as compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009 resulted primarily from increases of (i) $2.1 million in engineering expenses as a result of an increase in non-recurring engineering charges and both internal engineering headcount and outside contractors engaged in new product development activities, (ii) $0.8 million in material expenses related to product builds and testing, primarily related to our HyperCloud™ products and (iii) $0.1 million in legal and professional fees as we continue to increase patent filing and protection activities related to new and emerging markets.

The increase in research and development expense in the nine months ended October 2, 2010 as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009 resulted primarily from increases of (i) $3.1 million in non-recurring engineering charges, headcount, and outside consultants, (ii) $1.1 million in patent filing and protection legal fees, and (iii) $1.3 million in product qualification builds and testing.

Table of Contents

Selling, General and Administrative.

The following table presents selling, general and administrative expenses for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 (in thousands, except percentages):

	Three Months Ended
	October 2,		October 3,				%
	2010		2009		Change		Change

Selling, general and administrative	$	2,986	$	2,115	$	871	41	%

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,		October 3,				%
	2010		2009		Change		Change

Selling, general and administrative	$	8,163	$	6,170	$	1,993	32	%

The increase in selling, general and administrative expense in the three months ended October 2, 2010 as compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009 resulted primarily from increases of approximately (i) $0.4 million in personnel-related expenses primarily attributable to hiring personnel to support the development of markets for HyperCloud™ and NetVault™ NV, (ii) $0.3 million in product samples and travel costs as a result of activities related to the OEM qualification process for HyperCloud™ and NetVault™ NV, and (iii) $0.2 million in commission expenses due to an increase in sales revenue.

The increase in selling, general and administrative expense in the nine months ended October 2, 2010 as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009 resulted primarily from increases of approximately (i) $0.9 million in personnel-related expenses, (ii) $0.6 million in product samples and travel costs as a result of activities related to the OEM qualification process for HyperCloud™ and NetVault™ NV, and (iii) $0.5 million in commission expenses.

Other Income (Expense).

The following table presents other income for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 (in thousands, except percentages):

	Three Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,						%
	2010			2009			Change			Change

Interest income (expense), net	$	(3	)	$	(25	)	$	22		(88	)%
Other income, net	—			4			(4		)	100	%
Total other income (expense), net	$	(3	)	$	(21	)	$	18		86	%

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,		October 3,					%
	2010		2009		Change			Change

Interest income (expense), net	$	1	$	75	$	(74	)	(99	)%
Other income, net	71		134		(63		)	(47	)%
Total other income (expense), net	$	72	$	209	$	(137	)	(66	)%

Net interest income (expense) for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 was comprised of nominal interest income, offset by nominal interest expense. Net interest income for the three and nine months ended October 3, 2009 was comprised of interest income of approximately $0.02 million and $0.1 million, respectively, partially offset by interest expense of approximately $0.05 million and $0.03 million, respectively. The decrease in interest income in the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 as compared to the three and nine months ended October 3, 2009 was due to a combination of our lower average cash and investment balances and the decrease in the yield earned on those balances due to lower interest rates. The decrease in interest expense in the three months and nine months ended October 2, 2010 as compared to the three and nine months ended October 3, 2009 resulted primarily from our lower average outstanding balances on our line of credit and debt balances during the current year.

Table of Contents

Other income, net, for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 was primarily comprised of cash proceeds from the early termination of a sublease of our headquarters facility. Other income, net, for the nine months ended October 3, 2009 was primarily comprised of gains from the sale of equipment held for sale during the first quarter.

Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes.

The following table presents the provision (benefit) for income taxes for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 (in thousands, except percentages):

	Three Months Ended
	October 2,		October 3,					%
	2010		2009			Change		Change

Provision (benefit) for income taxes	$	12	$	(458	)	$	470	(103	)%

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,					%
	2010			2009			Change		Change

Provision (benefit) for income taxes	$	(713	)	$	(409	)	$	304	(74	)%

During the nine months ended October 2, 2010, we carried back approximately $1.7 million of gross net operating losses under the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Act and recorded a tax benefit and income tax receivable of approximately $0.7 million, which was received in April 2010. Our income tax benefit of $0.5 million and $0.4 million for the three and nine months ended October 3, 2009, respectively, was the result of a change in our liability for unrecognized tax benefits due to a lapse in a federal statute of limitations. We recorded a provision for income taxes for the quarter ended October 2, 2010 as a result of state taxes.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Since our inception, we have financed our operations primarily through issuances of equity and debt securities and cash generated from operations. We have also funded our operations with a revolving line of credit under our bank credit facility, from capitalized lease obligations and from the sale and leaseback of our domestic manufacturing facility.

Working Capital and Cash and Marketable Securities

The following table presents working capital, cash and cash equivalents and investments in marketable securities (in thousands):

	October 2,		January 2,
	2010		2010
Working Capital	$	20,565	$	13,379

Cash and cash equivalents(1)	$	14,722	$	9,942
Short-term marketable securities(1)	3,426		3,949
Long-term marketable securities	894		941
	$	19,042	$	14,832

(1) Included in working capital

Our working capital increased in the nine months ended October 2, 2010 primarily as a result of our increase in cash, cash equivalents and short-term marketable securities resulting from our public offering of our shares of common stock. Additionally, we experienced increases in certain operating assets, offset by increases in certain operating liabilities resulting from our increase in sales of our legacy products and production ramp up for HyperCloud™ and NetVault™ NV.

Table of Contents

Cash Provided and Used in the Nine Months Ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009

The following table summarizes our cash flows for the periods indicated (in thousands):

	Nine Months Ended
	October 2,			October 3,
	2010			2009

Net cash provided by (used in):
Operating activities	$	(12,648	)	$	(4,779	)
Investing activities	(196		)	1,586
Financing activities	17,624			(520		)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents	$	4,780		$	(3,713	)

Operating Activities. Net cash used in operating activities for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 was primarily a result of (i) net loss of approximately $11.9 million and (ii) cash used by changes in operating assets and liabilities of approximately $3.6 million, partially offset by approximately $2.8 million in net non-cash operating expenses, primarily consisting of depreciation and amortization and stock-based compensation expense. Net cash used in operating activities for the nine months ended October 3, 2009 was primarily a result of a net loss of approximately $9.9 million, partially offset by (i) approximately $2.7 million in net non-cash operating expenses, primarily comprising depreciation and amortization and stock-based compensation, and (ii) approximately $2.4 million in net cash provided by changes in operating assets and liabilities.

Accounts receivable increased approximately $2.7 million during the nine months ended October 2, 2010 primarily as a result of the increase in our net sales during the period. During the same period, we were successful in collecting cash from sales to our customers substantially in accordance with our standard payment terms with those customers. Inventories increased approximately $1.6 million during the nine months ended October 2, 2010 as we prepared for qualification and production of our HyperCloud™ products and initiated production of our NetVault™ NV products. During the nine months ended October 2, 2010, we were able to partially fund the growth in our accounts receivable and inventory through an increase in accounts payable of $1.9 million, primarily from component vendors.

Investing Activities. Net cash used in investing activities for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 was primarily the result of the acquisition of $0.7 million in property and equipment, offset by net sales of marketable securities of $0.5 million. Net cash provided by investing activities for the nine months ended October 3, 2009 was primarily a result of net sales of marketable securities of $1.3 million and proceeds from the sale of equipment of $0.3 million.

Financing Activities. Net cash provided by financing activities for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 was a result of the net proceeds of $16.2 million from the sale of 4,594,250 shares of our common stock in a registered public offering, which closed on March 24, 2010, and the proceeds of a $1.5 million term loan obtained from Silicon Valley Bank. Net cash used in financing activities for the nine months ended October 3, 2009 was the result of repayment of approximately $0.5 million on our long-term debt.

Capital Resources

On October 31, 2009, we entered into a credit agreement with Silicon Valley Bank, which was amended on March 24, 2010, June 30, 2010 and September 30, 2010. Currently, the credit agreement provides that we can borrow up to the lesser of (i) 80% of eligible accounts receivable, or (ii) $10.0 million. We have the option to increase credit availability to $15.0 million at any time through the maturity date of September 30, 2012, subject to the conditions of the credit agreement.

The credit agreement contains an overall sublimit of $10.0 million to collateralize our contingent obligations under letters of credit, foreign exchange contracts and cash management services. Amounts outstanding under the overall sublimit reduce the amount available pursuant to the credit agreement. At October 2, 2010, letters of credit in the amount of $2.9 million were outstanding. The letters of credit expire on various dates through October 31, 2011.

In September, 2010, we entered into a $2.5 million commitment to purchase ASIC devices for use in certain of our high-performance memory modules that are in the evaluation process with OEM and end-user customers. We issued a $1.1 million letter of credit to secure payment for future shipments.

Interest is payable monthly at either (i) prime plus 1.25%, as long as we maintain $8.5 million in revolving credit availability plus unrestricted cash on deposit with the bank, or (ii) prime plus 2.25%. Additionally, the credit agreement requires payments for an unused line, as well as anniversary and early termination fees, as applicable.

Table of Contents

The following table presents details of outstanding borrowings and availability under our line of credit (in thousands):

	October 2,		January 2,
	2010		2010
Outstanding borrowings on the revolving line of credit	$	—	$	—
Borrowing availability under the revolving line of credit	$	2,382	$	—

In addition, in connection with the September 30, 2010 amendment, Silicon Valley Bank extended a $1.5 million term loan under the credit agreement, which bears interest at a rate of 1.75%. We are required to make equal monthly principal payments which total $0.5 million annually, and a balloon payment of $0.5 million at maturity. As of October 2, 2010, $1.5 million was outstanding under the term loan.

All obligations under the credit agreement are secured by a first priority lien on the Company’s tangible and intangible assets. Silicon Valley Bank released Netlist Technology Texas, LP as an obligor under the credit agreement due to the dissolution of this subsidiary in October 2010.

The only restriction on the use of funds under the revolving line of credit is that we must be in compliance with the covenants of the credit agreement. The credit agreement includes affirmative and negative covenants, including financial covenants with respect to our liquidity and profitability. As of October 2, 2010, we were in compliance with all financial covenants and expect to maintain compliance for the foreseeable future. However, we have in the past been in violation of one or more covenants of other credit agreements, and we could violate one or more covenants in the future. If we were to be in violation of covenants under our credit agreement, our lender could choose to accelerate payment on all outstanding loan balances. If that were to occur, we may be unable to quickly obtain equivalent or suitable replacement financing. If we were not able to secure alternative sources of funding, such acceleration would have a material adverse impact on our financial condition.

We have in the past utilized equipment leasing arrangements to finance certain capital expenditures. Equipment leases continue to be a financing alternative that we expect to pursue in the future.

We believe our existing cash balances, borrowing availability under our bank credit facility, and the cash expected to be generated from operations, will be sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for at least the next 12 months. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including our levels of net sales, the timing and extent of expenditures to support research and development activities, the expansion of manufacturing capacity both domestically and internationally and the continued market acceptance of our products. We could be required, or may choose, to seek additional funding through public or private equity or debt financings. In addition, in connection with any future acquisitions, we may require additional funding which may be provided in the form of additional debt or equity financing or a combination thereof. These additional funds may not be available on terms acceptable to us, or at all.

New Accounting Pronouncements

In September 2009, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2009-13, Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements (“ASU 2009-13”), which amends the revenue guidance under ASC Topic 605, which describes the accounting for multiple element arrangements. ASU 2009-13 addresses how to determine whether an arrangement involving multiple deliverables contains more than one unit of accounting and how arrangement consideration shall be measured and allocated to the separate units of accounting in the arrangement. ASU 2009-13 is effective on a prospective basis for the Company’s fiscal year 2011, with earlier adoption permitted. We are currently evaluating the adoption of ASU 2009-13 and the impact that ASU 2009-13 will have on our condensed consolidated financial statements.

In September 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-14, Certain Revenue Arrangements That Include Software Elements (“ASU 2009-14”), which excludes tangible products containing software components and non-software components that function together to deliver the product’s essential functionality from the scope of ASC Topic 985, which describes the accounting for software revenue recognition. ASU 2009-14 is effective on a prospective basis for our fiscal year 2011, with earlier adoption permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact that ASU 2009-14 will have on its condensed consolidated financial statements.

Table of Contents

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We do not have any relationships with unconsolidated entities or financial partnerships, such as entities often referred to as structured finance or special purpose entities, which would have been established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet arrangements or other contractually narrow or limited purposes. In addition, we do not have any undisclosed borrowings or debt, and we have not entered into any synthetic leases. We are, therefore, not materially exposed to any financing, liquidity, market or credit risk that could arise if we had engaged in such relationships.

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

(a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures. We carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, (“Exchange Act”)) as of the end of our fiscal quarter ended October 2, 2010. Based upon that evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act (i) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and (ii) is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

(b) Change in internal controls over financial reporting. During the fiscal quarter that ended October 2, 2010, there were no changes in our internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.

Inherent Limitations on Internal Control

A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Further, the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple errors. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the control. The design of any system of controls is also based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

The information set forth in the sections entitled Federal Securities Class Action, Patent Claims and Trade Secret Claim under Note 9 of Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part I, Item I of this Report, is incorporated herein by reference.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

You should consider each of the following factors as well as the other information in this Report in evaluating our business and our prospects. The risks described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks we are not presently aware of or that we currently believe are immaterial may also impair our business operations. The trading price of our common stock could decline due to any of these risks, and you could lose all or part of your investment. In assessing these risks, you should also refer to the other information contained or incorporated by reference in this Report, including our consolidated financial statements and related notes.

Risks related to our business

We expect a number of factors to cause our operating results to fluctuate on a quarterly and annual basis, which may make it difficult to predict our future performance.

Our operating results have varied significantly in the past and will continue to fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter or year-to-year in the future due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Factors relating to our business that may contribute to these quarterly and annual fluctuations include the following factors, as well as other factors described elsewhere in this Report:

Table of Contents

· our inability to develop new or enhanced products that achieve customer or market acceptance in a timely manner, including our HyperCloud™ memory module and our flash-based memory products;

· our failure to maintain the qualification of our products with our current customers or to qualify future products with our current or prospective customers in a timely manner or at all;

· the timing of actual or anticipated introductions of competing products or technologies by us or our competitors, customers or suppliers;

· the loss of, or a significant reduction in sales to, a key customer;

· the cyclical nature of the industry in which we operate;

· a reduction in the demand for our high performance memory subsystems or the systems into which they are incorporated;

· our customers’ failure to pay us on a timely basis;

· costs, inefficiencies and supply risks associated with outsourcing portions of the design and the manufacture of integrated circuits;

· our ability to absorb manufacturing overhead if our revenues decline or vary from our projections;

· delays in fulfilling orders for our products or a failure to fulfill orders;

· our ability to procure an adequate supply of key components, particularly DRAM ICs and NAND;

· dependence on large suppliers who are also competitors and whose manufacturing priorities may not support our production schedules;

· changes in the prices of our products or in the cost of the materials that we use to build our products, including fluctuations in the market price of DRAM ICs and NAND;

· our ability to effectively operate our manufacturing facility in the PRC;

· manufacturing inefficiencies associated with the start-up of new manufacturing operations, new products and initiation of volume production;

· our failure to produce products that meet the quality requirements of our customers;

· disputes regarding intellectual property rights and the possibility of our patents being reexamined by the United States Patent and Trademark Office;

· the costs and management attention diversion associated with litigation;

· the loss of any of our key personnel;

· changes in regulatory policies or accounting principles;

· our ability to adequately manage or finance internal growth or growth through acquisitions; and

· the effect of our investments and financing arrangements on our liquidity.

Due to the various factors mentioned above, and others, the results of any prior quarterly or annual periods should not be relied upon as an indication of our future operating performance. In one or more future periods, our results of operations may fall below the expectations of securities analysts and investors. In that event, the market price of our common stock would likely decline. In addition, the market price of our common stock may fluctuate or decline regardless of our operating performance.

Table of Contents

We have historically incurred losses and may continue to incur losses.

Since the inception of our business in 2000, we have only experienced one fiscal year (2006) with profitable results. In order to regain profitability, or to achieve and sustain positive cash flows from operations in the future, we must further reduce operating expenses and/or increase our revenues. Although we have in the past engaged, and are continuing to engage, in a series of cost reduction actions, these expense reductions alone may not make us profitable or allow us to sustain profitability if it is achieved. Our ability to achieve profitability will depend on increased revenue growth from, among other things, increased demand for our memory subsystems and related product offerings, as well as our ability to expand into new and emerging markets. We may not be successful in achieving the necessary revenue growth or the expected expense reductions. Moreover, we may be unable to sustain past or expected future expense reductions in subsequent periods. We may not achieve profitability or sustain such profitability, if achieved, on a quarterly or annual basis in the future.

Any failure to achieve profitability could result in increased capital requirements and pressure on our liquidity position. Many companies are experiencing difficulty in achieving access to capital in these challenging times. We believe our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including our levels of net sales, the timing and extent of expenditures to support research and development activities, the expansion of manufacturing capacity both domestically and internationally and the continued market acceptance of our products. Our capital requirements could result in our having to, or otherwise choosing to, seek additional funding through public or private equity offerings or debt financings, which funding may not be available on terms acceptable to us, or at all, either of which could result in our inability to meet certain of our financial obligations and other related commitments.

We are subject to risks relating to product concentration and lack of market diversification.

We have historically derived a substantial portion of our net sales from sales of our high performance memory subsystems for use in the server market. We expect these memory subsystems to continue to account for a significant portion of our net sales in the near term. Continued market acceptance of these products for use in servers is critical to our success.

In an attempt to set our products apart from those of our competitors, we have invested a significant portion of our research and development budget into the design of ASIC devices, such as the HyperCloud™ memory subsystem, introduced in November 2009. This new design and the products they are incorporated into are subject to increased risks as compared to our existing products. For example:

· we may be unable to achieve customer or market acceptance of the HyperCloud™ memory subsystem or other new products, or achieve such acceptance in a timely manner;

· the HyperCloud™ memory subsystem or other new products may contain currently undiscovered flaws, the correction of which would result in increased costs and time to market;

· we are dependent on a limited number of suppliers for both the DRAM ICs and the ASIC devices that are essential to the functionality of the HyperCloud™ memory subsystem, and could experience supply chain disruption as a result of business issues that are specific to our suppliers or the industry as a whole; and

· we will be required to demonstrate the quality and reliability of the HyperCloud™ memory subsystem or other new products to our customers, and will be required to qualify these new products with our customers, both of which will require a significant investment of time and resources prior to the receipt of any revenue from such customers.

Any failure or delay in placing or qualifying new products with our customers would likely result in reductions in our net sales and would adversely impact our results of operations.

Additionally, if the demand for servers deteriorates or if the demand for our products to be incorporated in servers declines, our operating results would be adversely affected, and we would be forced to diversify our product portfolio and our target markets. We may not be able to achieve this diversification, and our inability to do so may adversely affect our business.

Table of Contents

We may lose our competitive position if we are unable to timely and cost-effectively develop new or enhanced products that meet our customers’ requirements and achieve market acceptance.

Our industry is characterized by intense competition, rapid technological change, evolving industry standards and rapid product obsolescence. Evolving industry standards and technological change or new, competitive technologies could render our existing products obsolete. Accordingly, our ability to compete in the future will depend in large part on our ability to identify and develop new or enhanced products on a timely and cost-effective basis, and to respond to changing customer requirements. In order to develop and introduce new or enhanced products, we need to:

· identify and adjust to the changing requirements of our current and potential customers;

· identify and adapt to emerging technological trends and evolving industry standards in our markets;

· design and introduce cost-effective, innovative and performance-enhancing features that differentiate our products from those of our competitors;

· develop relationships with potential suppliers of components required for these new or enhanced products;

· qualify these products for use in our customers’ products; and

· develop and maintain effective marketing strategies.

Our product development efforts are costly and inherently risky. It is difficult to foresee changes or developments in technology or anticipate the adoption of new standards. Moreover, once these things are identified, if at all, we will need to hire the appropriate technical personnel or retain third party designers, develop the product, identify and eliminate design flaws, and manufacture the product in production quantities either in-house or through third-party manufacturers. As a result, we may not be able to successfully develop new or enhanced products or we may experience delays in the development and introduction of new or enhanced products. Delays in product development and introduction could result in the loss of, or delays in generating, net sales and the loss of market share, as well as damage to our reputation. Even if we develop new or enhanced products, they may not meet our customers’ requirements or gain market acceptance. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that our future product development efforts will result in the development of new or enhanced products or that such products will achieve market acceptance.

Our customers require that our products undergo a lengthy and expensive qualification process without any assurance of net sales.

Our prospective customers generally make a significant commitment of resources to test and evaluate our memory subsystems prior to purchasing our products and integrating them into their systems. This extensive qualification process involves rigorous reliability testing and evaluation of our products, which may continue for six months or longer and is often subject to delays. In addition to qualification of specific products, some of our customers may also require us to undergo a technology qualification if our product designs incorporate innovative technologies that the customer has not previously encountered. Such technology qualifications often take substantially longer than product qualifications and can take over a year to complete. Qualification by a prospective customer does not ensure any sales to that prospective customer. Even after successful qualification and sales of our products to a customer, changes in our products, our manufacturing facilities, our production processes or our component suppliers may require a new qualification process, which may result in additional delays.

In addition, because the qualification process is both product-specific and platform-specific, our existing customers sometimes require us to requalify our products, or to qualify our new products, for use in new platforms or applications. For example, as our OEM customers transition from prior generation DDR2 DRAM architectures to current generation DDR3 DRAM architectures, we must design and qualify new products for use by those customers. In the past, this process of design and qualification has taken up to six months to complete, during which time our net sales to those customers declined significantly. After our products are qualified, it can take several months before the customer begins production and we begin to generate net sales.

We must devote substantial resources, including design, engineering, sales, marketing and management efforts, to qualify our products with prospective customers in anticipation of sales. Significant delays in the qualification process could result in an inability to keep up with rapid technology change or new, competitive technologies. If we delay or do not succeed in qualifying a product with an existing or prospective customer, we will not be able to sell that product to that customer, which would harm our operating results and business.

Table of Contents

Sales to a limited number of customers represent a significant portion of our net sales and the loss of, or a significant reduction in sales to, any one of these customers could materially harm our business.

Sales to certain of our OEM customers such as Dell, Flextronics, Hewlett Packard and Arrow have historically represented a substantial majority of our net sales. Dell and Flextronics represented approximately 53% and 25%, respectively, of our net sales for the nine months ended October 2, 2010. Dell, Arrow, and Hewlett Packard represented approximately 48%, 13% and 10%, respectively, of our net sales for the nine months ended October 3, 2009. We currently expect that sales to major OEM customers will continue to represent a significant percentage of our net sales for the foreseeable future. We do not have long-term agreements with our OEM customers, or with any other customer. Any one of these customers could decide at any time to discontinue, decrease or delay their purchase of our products. In addition, the prices that these customers pay for our products could change at any time. The loss of any of our OEM customers, or a significant reduction in sales to any of them, could significantly reduce our net sales and adversely affect our operating results.

Our ability to maintain or increase our net sales to our key customers depends on a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include our customers’ continued sales of servers and other computing systems that incorporate our memory subsystems and our customers’ continued incorporation of our products into their systems. Because of these and other factors, net sales to these customers may not continue and the amount of such net sales may not reach or exceed historical levels in any future period. Because these customers account for a substantial portion of our net sales, the failure of any one of these customers to pay on a timely basis would negatively impact our cash flow. In addition, while we may not be contractually obligated to accept returned products, we may determine that it is in our best interest to accept returns in order to maintain good relations with our customers.

A limited number of relatively large potential customers dominate the markets for our products.

Our target markets are characterized by a limited number of large companies. Consolidation in one or more of our target markets may further increase this industry concentration. As a result, we anticipate that sales of our products will continue to be concentrated among a limited number of large customers in the foreseeable future. We believe that our financial results will depend in significant part on our success in establishing and maintaining relationships with, and effecting substantial sales to, these potential customers. Even if we establish these relationships, our financial results will be largely dependent on these customers’ sales and business results.

If a standardized memory solution which addresses the demands of our customers is developed, our net sales and market share may decline.

Many of our memory subsystems are specifically designed for our OEM customers’ high performance systems. In a drive to reduce costs and assure supply of their memory module demand, our OEM customers may endeavor to design JEDEC standard DRAM modules into their new products. Although we also manufacture JEDEC modules, this trend could reduce the demand for our higher priced customized memory solutions which in turn would have a negative impact on our financial results. In addition, customers deploying custom memory solutions today may in the future choose to adopt a JEDEC standard, and the adoption of a JEDEC standard module instead of a previously custom module might allow new competitors to participate in a share of our customers’ memory module business that previously belonged to us.

If our OEM customers were to adopt JEDEC standard modules, our future business may be limited to identifying the next generation of high performance memory demands of OEM customers and developing solutions that addresses such demands. Until fully implemented, this next generation of products may constitute a much smaller market, which may reduce our net sales and market share.

We may not be able to maintain our competitive position because of the intense competition in our targeted markets.

We participate in a highly competitive market, and we expect competition to intensify. Many of our competitors have longer operating histories, significantly greater resources and name recognition, a larger base of customers and longer-standing relationships with customers and suppliers than we have. As a result, some of these competitors are able to devote greater resources to the development, promotion and sale of products and are better positioned than we are to influence customer acceptance of their products over our products. These competitors also may be able to respond better to new or emerging technologies or standards and may be able to deliver products with comparable or superior performance at a lower price. For these reasons, we may not be able to compete successfully against these competitors.

Table of Contents

In addition to the competitors described above, some of our OEM customers have their own internal design groups that may develop solutions that compete with ours. These design groups have some advantages over us, including direct access to their respective companies’ technical information and technology roadmaps. Our OEM customers also have substantially greater resources, financial and otherwise, than we do, and may have lower cost structures than ours. As a result, they may be able to design and manufacture competitive products more efficiently or inexpensively. If any of these OEM customers are successful in competing against us, our sales could decline, our margins could be negatively impacted and we could lose market share, any or all of which could harm our business and results of operations. Further, some of our significant suppliers are also competitors, many of whom have the ability to manufacture competitive products at lower costs as a result of their higher levels of integration.

We expect our competitors to continue to improve the performance of their current products, reduce their prices and introduce new or enhanced technologies that may offer greater performance and improved pricing. If we are unable to match or exceed the improvements made by our competitors, our market position would deteriorate and our net sales would decline. In addition, our competitors may develop future generations and enhancements of competitive products that may render our technologies obsolete or uncompetitive.

We also expect to face competition from new and emerging companies that may enter our existing or future markets. These potential competitors may have similar or alternative products which may be less costly or provide additional features.

Our operating results may be adversely impacted by worldwide economic and political uncertainties and specific conditions in the markets we address, including the cyclical nature of and volatility in the memory market and semiconductor industry.

Adverse changes in domestic and global economic and political conditions have made it extremely difficult for our customers, our vendors and us to accurately forecast and plan future business activities, and they could cause U.S. and foreign businesses to slow spending on our products and services, which would further delay and lengthen sales cycles. In addition, sales of our products are dependent upon demand in the computing, networking, communications, printer, storage and industrial markets. These markets have been cyclical and are characterized by wide fluctuations in product supply and demand. These markets have experienced significant downturns, often connected with, or in anticipation of, maturing product cycles, reductions in technology spending and declines in general economic conditions. These downturns have been characterized by diminished product demand, production overcapacity, high inventory levels and the erosion of average selling prices.

We may experience substantial period-to-period fluctuations in future operating results due to factors affecting the computing, networking, communications, printers, storage and industrial markets. A decline or significant shortfall in demand in any one of these markets could have a material adverse effect on the demand for our products. As a result, our sales will likely decline during these periods. In addition, because many of our costs and operating expenses are relatively fixed, if we are unable to control our expenses adequately in response to reduced sales, our gross margins, operating income and cash flow would be negatively impacted.

During challenging economic times our customers may face issues gaining timely access to sufficient credit, which could result in an impairment of their ability to make timely payments to us. If that were to occur, we may be required to increase our allowance for doubtful accounts and our days sales outstanding would be negatively impacted. Furthermore, our vendors may face similar issues gaining access to credit, which may limit their ability to supply components or provide trade credit to us. We cannot predict the timing, strength or duration of any economic slowdown or subsequent economic recovery, worldwide, or in the memory market and related semiconductor industry. If the economy or markets in which we operate fail to improve or continue to worsen, our business, financial condition and results of operations will likely be materially and adversely affected. Additionally, the combination of our lengthy sales cycle coupled with challenging macroeconomic conditions could compound the negative impact on the results of our operations.

Table of Contents

Our lack of a significant backlog of unfilled orders, and the difficulty inherent in forecasting customer demand, makes it difficult to forecast our short-term production requirements to meet that demand, and any failure to optimally calibrate our production capacity and inventory levels to meet customer demand could adversely affect our revenues, gross margins and earnings.

We make significant decisions regarding the levels of business that we will seek and accept, production schedules, component procurement commitments, personnel needs and other resource requirements, based on our estimates of customer requirements. We do not have long-term purchase agreements with our customers. Instead, our customers often place purchase orders no more than two weeks in advance of their desired delivery date, and these purchase orders generally have no cancellation or rescheduling penalty provisions. The short-term nature of commitments by many of our customers, the fact that our customers may cancel or defer purchase orders for any reason, and the possibility of unexpected changes in demand for our customers’ products each reduce our ability to accurately estimate future customer requirements for our products. This fact, combined with the quick turn-around times that apply to each order, makes it difficult to forecast our production needs and allocate production capacity efficiently. We attempt to forecast the demand for the DRAM ICs, NAND, and other components needed to manufacture our products. Lead times for components vary significantly and depend on various factors, such as the specific supplier and the demand and supply for a component at a given time.

Our production expense and component purchase levels are based in part on our forecasts of our customers’ future product requirements and to a large extent are fixed in the short term. As a result, we likely will be unable to adjust spending on a timely basis to compensate for any unexpected shortfall in those orders. If we overestimate customer demand, we may have excess raw material inventory of DRAM ICs and NAND. If there is a subsequent decline in the prices of DRAM ICs or NAND, the value of our inventory will fall. As a result, we may need to write-down the value of our DRAM IC or NAND inventory, which may result in a significant decrease in our gross margin and financial condition. Also, to the extent that we manufacture products in anticipation of future demand that does not materialize, or in the event a customer cancels or reduces outstanding orders, we could experience an unanticipated increase in our finished goods inventory. In the past, we have had to write-down inventory due to obsolescence, excess quantities and declines in market value below our costs. Any significant shortfall of customer orders in relation to our expectations could hurt our operating results, cash flows and financial condition.

Also, any rapid increases in production required by our customers could strain our resources and reduce our margins. If we underestimate customer demand, we may not have sufficient inventory of DRAM ICs and NAND on hand to manufacture enough product to meet that demand. We also may not have sufficient manufacturing capacity at any given time to meet our customers’ demands for rapid increases in production. These shortages of inventory and capacity will lead to delays in the delivery of our products, and we could forego sales opportunities, lose market share and damage our customer relationships.

Declines in our average sales prices, driven by volatile prices for DRAM ICs and NAND, among other factors, may result in declines in our revenues and gross profit.

Our industry is competitive and historically has been characterized by declines in average sales price, based in part on the market price of DRAM ICs and NAND, which have historically constituted a substantial portion of the total cost of our memory subsystems. Our average sales prices may decline due to several factors, including overcapacity in the worldwide supply of DRAM and NAND memory components as a result of worldwide economic conditions, increased manufacturing efficiencies, implementation of new manufacturing processes and expansion of manufacturing capacity by component suppliers.

Once our prices with a customer are negotiated, we are generally unable to revise pricing with that customer until our next regularly scheduled price adjustment. Consequently, we are exposed to the risks associated with the volatility of the price of DRAM ICs and NAND during that period. If the market prices for DRAM ICs and NAND increase, we generally cannot pass the price increases on to our customers for products purchased under an existing purchase order. As a result, our cost of sales could increase and our gross margins could decrease. Alternatively, if there are declines in the price of DRAM ICs and NAND, we may need to reduce our selling prices for subsequent purchase orders, which may result in a decline in our expected net sales.

In addition, since a large percentage of our sales are to a small number of customers that are primarily distributors and large OEMs, these customers have exerted, and we expect they will continue to exert, pressure on us to make price concessions. If not offset by increases in volume of sales or the sales of newly-developed products with higher margins, decreases in average sales prices would likely have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.

Table of Contents

We use a small number of custom ASIC, DRAM IC and NAND suppliers and are subject to risks of disruption in the supply of custom ASIC, DRAM ICs and NAND.

Our ability to fulfill customer orders or produce qualification samples is dependent on a sufficient supply of DRAM ICs and NAND, which are essential components of our memory subsystems. We are also dependent on a sufficient supply of custom ASIC devices to produce our HyperCloud™ memory modules. There are a relatively small number of suppliers of DRAM ICs and NAND, and we purchase from only a subset of these suppliers. We have no long-term DRAM or NAND supply contracts. Additionally, we could face obstacles in moving production of our ASIC components away from our current design and production partners. Our dependence on a small number of suppliers and the lack of any guaranteed sources of ASIC components, DRAM and NAND supply expose us to several risks, including the inability to obtain an adequate supply of these important components, price increases, delivery delays and poor quality.

The recent declines in customer demand and revenues have caused us to reduce our purchases of DRAM ICs and NAND. Should we not maintain sufficient purchase levels with some suppliers, our ability to obtain future supplies of raw materials may be impaired due to the practice of some suppliers to allocate their products to customers with the highest regular demand.

From time to time, shortages in DRAM ICs and NAND have required some suppliers to limit the supply of their DRAM ICs and NAND. As a result, we may be unable to obtain the DRAM ICs or NAND necessary to fill customers’ orders for our products in a timely manner. If we are unable to obtain a sufficient supply of DRAM ICs or NAND to meet our customers’ requirements, these customers may reduce future orders for our products or not purchase our products at all, which would cause our net sales to decline and harm our operating results. In addition, our reputation could be harmed, we may not be able to replace any lost business with new customers, and we may lose market share to our competitors.

Our customers qualify the ASIC components, DRAM ICs and NAND of our suppliers for use in their systems. If one of our suppliers should experience quality control problems, it may be disqualified by one or more of our customers. This would disrupt our supplies of ASIC components, DRAM ICs and NAND and reduce the number of suppliers available to us, and may require that we qualify a new supplier. If our suppliers are unable to produce qualification samples on a timely basis or at all, we could experience delays in the qualification process, which could have a significant impact on our ability to sell that product.

If the supply of other component materials used to manufacture our products is interrupted, or if our inventory becomes obsolete, our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

We use consumables and other components, including PCBs, to manufacture our memory subsystems. We sometimes procure PCBs and other components from single or limited sources to take advantage of volume pricing discounts. Material shortages or transportation problems could interrupt the manufacture of our products from time to time in the future. These delays in manufacturing could adversely affect our results of operations.

Frequent technology changes and the introduction of next-generation products also may result in the obsolescence of other items of inventory, such as our custom-built PCBs, which could reduce our gross margin and adversely affect our operating performance and financial condition. We may not be able to sell some products developed for one customer to another customer because our products are often designed to address specific customer requirements, and even if we are able to sell these products to another customer, our margin on such products may be reduced.

A prolonged disruption of our manufacturing facility could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We maintain a manufacturing facility in the PRC for producing most of our products, which allows us to utilize our materials and processes, protect our intellectual property and develop the technology for manufacturing. A prolonged disruption or material malfunction of, interruption in or the loss of operations at our manufacturing facility, or the failure to maintain sufficient labor force at such facility, would limit our capacity to meet customer demands and delay new product development until a replacement facility and equipment, if necessary, were found. The replacement of the manufacturing facility could take an extended amount of time before manufacturing operations could restart. The potential delays and costs resulting from these steps could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we are unable to manufacture our products efficiently, our operating results could suffer.

We must continuously review and improve our manufacturing processes in an effort to maintain satisfactory manufacturing yields and product performance, to lower our costs and to otherwise remain competitive. As we manufacture more complex products, the risk of encountering delays or difficulties increases. The start-up costs associated with implementing new manufacturing technologies, methods and processes, including the purchase of new equipment, and any resulting manufacturing delays and inefficiencies, could negatively impact our results of operations.

Table of Contents

If we need to add manufacturing capacity, an expansion of our existing manufacturing facility or establishment of a new facility could be subject to factory audits by our customers. Any delays or unexpected costs resulting from this audit process could adversely affect our net sales and results of operations. In addition, we cannot be certain that we will be able to increase our manufacturing capacity on a timely basis or meet the standards of any applicable factory audits.

We depend on third-parties to design and manufacture custom components for some of our products.

Significant customized components, such as ASICs, that are used in some of our products are designed and manufactured by third parties. The ability and willingness of such third parties to perform in accordance with their agreements with us is largely outside of our control. If one or more of our design or manufacturing partners fails to perform its obligations in a timely manner or at satisfactory quality levels, our ability to bring products to market or deliver products to our customers, as well as our reputation, could suffer. In the event of any such failures, we may have no readily available alternative source of supply for such products, since, in our experience, the lead time needed to establish a relationship with a new design and/or manufacturing partner is at least 12 months, and the estimated time for our OEM customers to re-qualify our product with components from a new vendor ranges from four to nine months. We cannot assure you that we can redesign, or cause to have redesigned, our customized components to be manufactured by a new manufacturer in a timely manner, nor can we assure you that we will not infringe on the intellectual property of our current design or manufacture partner when we redesign the custom components, or cause such components to be redesigned by a new manufacturer. A manufacturing disruption experienced by our manufacturing partners, the failure of our manufacturing partners to dedicate adequate resources to the production of our products, the financial instability of our manufacturing or design partners, or any other failure of our design or manufacturing partners to perform according to their agreements with us, would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We have many other risks due to our dependence on third-party manufacturers, including: reduced control over delivery schedules, quality, manufacturing yields and cost; the potential lack of adequate capacity during periods of excess demand; limited warranties on products supplied to us; and potential misappropriation of our intellectual property. We are dependent on our manufacturing partners to manufacture products with acceptable quality and manufacturing yields, to deliver those products to us on a timely basis and to allocate a portion of their manufacturing capacity sufficient to meet our needs. Although our products are designed using the process design rules of the particular manufacturers, we cannot assure you that our manufacturing partners will be able to achieve or maintain acceptable yields or deliver sufficient quantities of components on a timely basis or at an acceptable cost. Additionally, we cannot assure you that our manufacturing partners will continue to devote adequate resources to produce our products or continue to advance the process design technologies on which the qualification and manufacturing of our products are based.

If our products do not meet the quality standards of our customers, we may be forced to stop shipments of products until the quality issues are resolved.

Our customers require our products to meet strict quality standards. Should our products not meet such standards, our customers may discontinue purchases from us until we are able to resolve the quality issues that are causing us to not meet the standards. Such “quality holds” could have a significant adverse impact on our revenues and operating results.

If our products are defective or are used in defective systems, we may be subject to warranty, product recalls or product liability claims.

If our products are defectively manufactured, contain defective components or are used in defective or malfunctioning systems, we could be subject to warranty and product liability claims and product recalls, safety alerts or advisory notices. While we have product liability insurance coverage, it may not be adequate to satisfy claims made against us. We also may be unable to obtain insurance in the future at satisfactory rates or in adequate amounts. Warranty and product liability claims or product recalls, regardless of their ultimate outcome, could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and reputation, and on our ability to attract and retain customers. In addition, we may determine that it is in our best interest to accept product returns in circumstances where we are not contractually obligated to do so in order to maintain good relations with our customers. Accepting product returns may negatively impact our operating results.

Table of Contents

If we fail to protect our proprietary rights, our customers or our competitors might gain access to our proprietary designs, processes and technologies, which could adversely affect our operating results.

We rely on a combination of patent protection, trade secret laws and restrictions on disclosure to protect our intellectual property rights. We have submitted a number of patent applications regarding our proprietary processes and technology. It is not certain when or if any of the claims in the remaining applications will be allowed. To date we have had only fifteen patents issued. We intend to continue filing patent applications with respect to most of the new processes and technologies that we develop. However, patent protection may not be available for some of these processes or technologies.

It is possible that our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights may not:

· prevent challenges to, or the invalidation or circumvention of, our existing intellectual property rights;

· prevent our competitors from independently developing similar products, duplicating our products or designing around any patents that may be issued to us;

· prevent disputes with third parties regarding ownership of our intellectual property rights;

· prevent disclosure of our trade secrets and know-how to third parties or into the public domain;

· result in valid patents, including international patents, from any of our pending or future applications; or

· otherwise adequately protect our intellectual property rights.

Others may attempt to reverse engineer, copy or otherwise obtain and use our proprietary technologies without our consent. Monitoring the unauthorized use of our technologies is difficult. We cannot be certain that the steps we have taken will prevent the unauthorized use of our technologies. This is particularly true in foreign countries, such as the PRC, where we have established a manufacturing facility and where the laws may not protect our proprietary rights to the same extent as applicable U.S. laws.

If some or all of the claims in our patent applications are not allowed, or if any of our intellectual property protections are limited in scope by a court or circumvented by others, we could face increased competition with regard to our products. Increased competition could significantly harm our business and our operating results.

We are involved in and expect to continue to be involved in costly legal and administrative proceedings to defend against claims that we infringe the intellectual property rights of others or to enforce or protect our intellectual property rights.

As is common to the semiconductor industry, we have experienced substantial litigation regarding patent and other intellectual property rights. Lawsuits claiming that we are infringing others’ intellectual property rights have been and may in the future be brought against us, and we are currently defending against claims of invalidity in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). See Note 9 of Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part I, Item I of this Report, for a description of our legal contingencies.

The process of obtaining and protecting patents is inherently uncertain. In addition to the patent issuance process established by law and the procedures of the USPTO, we must comply with JEDEC administrative procedures in protecting our intellectual property within its industry standard setting process. These procedures evolve over time, are subject to variability in their application, and may be inconsistent with each other. Failure to comply with JEDEC’s administrative procedures could jeopardize our ability to claim that our patents have been infringed.

By making use of new technologies and entering new markets there is an increased likelihood that others might allege that our products infringe on their intellectual property rights. Litigation is inherently uncertain, and an adverse outcome in existing or any future litigation could subject us to significant liability for damages or invalidate our proprietary rights. An adverse outcome also could force us to take specific actions, including causing us to:

· cease manufacturing and/or selling products, or using certain processes, that are claimed to be infringing a third party’s intellectual property;

Table of Contents

· pay damages (which in some instances may be three times actual damages), including royalties on past or future sales;

· seek a license from the third party intellectual property owner to use their technology in our products, which license may not be available on reasonable terms, or at all; or

· redesign those products that are claimed to be infringing a third party’s intellectual property.

If any adverse ruling in any such matter occurs, any resulting limitations in our ability to market our products, or delays and costs associated with redesigning our products or payments of license fees to third parties, or any failure by us to develop or license a substitute technology on commercially reasonable terms could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

There is a limited pool of experienced technical personnel that we can draw upon to meet our hiring needs. As a result, a number of our existing employees have worked for our existing or potential competitors at some point during their careers, and we anticipate that a number of our future employees will have similar work histories. In the past, some of these competitors have claimed that our employees misappropriated their trade secrets or violated non-competition or non-solicitation agreements. Some of our competitors may threaten or bring legal action involving similar claims against us or our existing employees or make such claims in the future to prevent us from hiring qualified candidates. Lawsuits of this type may be brought, even if there is no merit to the claim, simply as a strategy to drain our financial resources and divert management’s attention away from our business.

We also may find it necessary to litigate against others, including our competitors, customers and former employees, to enforce our intellectual property and contractual and commercial rights including, in particular, our trade secrets, as well as to challenge the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others. We could become subject to counterclaims or countersuits against us as a result of this litigation. Moreover, any legal disputes with customers could cause them to cease buying or using our products or delay their purchase of our products and could substantially damage our relationship with them.

Any litigation, regardless of its outcome, would be time consuming and costly to resolve, divert our management’s time and attention and negatively impact our results of operations. We cannot assure you that current or future infringement claims by third parties or claims for indemnification by customers or end users of our products resulting from infringement claims will not be asserted in the future or that such assertions, if proven to be true, will not materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

If we are required to obtain licenses to use third party intellectual property and we fail to do so, our business could be harmed.

Although some of the components used in our final products contain the intellectual property of third parties, we believe that our suppliers bear the sole responsibility to obtain any rights and licenses to such third party intellectual property. While we have no knowledge that any third party licensor disputes our belief, we cannot assure you that disputes will not arise in the future. The operation of our business and our ability to compete successfully depends significantly on our continued operation without claims of infringement or demands resulting from such claims, including demands for payments of money in the form of, for example, ongoing licensing fees.

We are also developing products to enter new markets. Similar to our current products, we may use components in these new products that contain the intellectual property of third parties. While we plan to exercise precautions to avoid infringing on the intellectual property rights of third parties, we cannot assure you that disputes will not arise.

If it is determined that we are required to obtain inbound licenses and we fail to obtain licenses, or if such licenses are not available on economically feasible terms, our business, operating results and financial condition could be significantly harmed.

Table of Contents

The flash memory market is constantly evolving and competitive, and we may not have rights to manufacture and sell certain types of products utilizing emerging flash formats, or we may be required to pay a royalty to sell products utilizing these formats.

The flash-based storage market is constantly undergoing rapid technological change and evolving industry standards. Many consumer devices, such as digital cameras, PDAs and smartphones, are transitioning to emerging flash memory formats, such as the Memory Stick, and xD Picture Card formats, which we do not currently manufacture and do not have rights to manufacture. Although we do not currently serve the consumer flash market, it is possible that certain OEMs may choose to adopt these higher-volume, lower-cost formats. This could result in a decline in demand, on a relative basis, for other products that we manufacture such as CompactFlash, SD and embedded USB drives. If we decide to manufacture flash memory products utilizing emerging formats such as those mentioned, we will be required to secure licenses to give us the right to manufacture such products that may not be available at reasonable rates or at all. If we are not able to supply flash card formats at competitive prices or if we were to have product shortages, our net sales could be adversely impacted and our customers would likely cancel orders or seek other suppliers to replace us.

Our indemnification obligations for the infringement by our products of the intellectual property rights of others could require us to pay substantial damages.

As is common in the industry, we currently have in effect a number of agreements in which we have agreed to defend, indemnify and hold harmless our customers and suppliers from damages and costs which may arise from the infringement by our products of third-party patents, trademarks or other proprietary rights. The scope of such indemnity varies, but may, in some instances, include indemnification for damages and expenses, including attorneys’ fees. Our insurance does not cover intellectual property infringement. The term of these indemnification agreements is generally perpetual any time after execution of the agreement. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited. We may periodically have to respond to claims and litigate these types of indemnification obligations. Although our suppliers may bear responsibility for the intellectual property inherent in the components they sell to us, they may lack the financial ability to stand behind such indemnities. Additionally, it may be costly to enforce any indemnifications that they have granted to us. Accordingly, any indemnification claims by customers could require us to incur significant legal fees and could potentially result in the payment of substantial damages, both of which could result in a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We depend on a few key employees, and if we lose the services of any of those employees or are unable to hire additional personnel, our business could be harmed.

To date, we have been highly dependent on the experience, relationships and technical knowledge of certain key employees. We believe that our future success will be dependent on our ability to retain the services of these key employees, develop their successors, reduce our reliance on them, and properly manage the transition of their roles should departures occur.

The loss of these key employees could delay the development and introduction of, and negatively impact our ability to sell, our products and otherwise harm our business. We do not have employment agreements with any of these key employees other than Chun K. Hong, our President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board. In 2010, we obtained “Key Man” life insurance on Chun K. Hong; however, we do not carry “Key Man” life insurance on any of our other key employees.

Our future success also depends on our ability to attract, retain and motivate highly skilled engineering, manufacturing, and other technical and sales personnel. Competition for experienced personnel is intense. We may not be successful in attracting new engineers or other technical personnel, or in retaining or motivating our existing personnel. If we are unable to hire and retain engineers with the skills necessary to keep pace with the evolving technologies in our markets, our ability to continue to provide our current products and to develop new or enhanced products will be negatively impacted, which would harm our business. In addition, the shortage of experienced engineers, and other factors, may lead to increased recruiting, relocation and compensation costs for such engineers, which may exceed our expectations and resources. These increased costs may make hiring new engineers difficult, or may reduce our margins.

Historically, a significant portion of our workforce has consisted of contract personnel. We invest considerable time and expense in training these contract employees. We may experience high turnover rates in our contract employee workforce, which may require us to expend additional resources in the future. If we convert any of these contract employees into permanent employees, we may have to pay finder’s fees to the contract agency.

Table of Contents

We rely on third-party manufacturers’ representatives and the failure of these manufacturers’ representatives to perform as expected could reduce our future sales.

We sell some of our products to customers through manufacturers’ representatives. We are unable to predict the extent to which our manufacturers’ representatives will be successful in marketing and selling our products. Moreover, many of our manufacturers’ representatives also market and sell competing products. Our representatives may terminate their relationships with us at any time. Our future performance will also depend, in part, on our ability to attract additional manufacturers’ representatives that will be able to market and support our products effectively, especially in markets in which we have not previously distributed our products. If we cannot retain our current manufacturers’ representatives or recruit additional or replacement manufacturers’ representatives, our sales and operating results will be harmed.

The establishment and ongoing operation of our manufacturing facility in the PRC could expose us to new and significant risks.

During fiscal 2007, we invested significant time and effort in establishing a manufacturing facility in the PRC and preparing it for full-scale operations. This manufacturing facility became operational in July 2007 and was successfully qualified by certain key customers at that time. As of February 1, 2009, substantially all of our world-wide manufacturing production was being performed in the PRC. Language and cultural differences, as well as the geographic distance from our headquarters in Irvine, further compound the difficulties of running a manufacturing operation in the PRC. Our management has limited experience in creating or overseeing foreign operations, and this new facility may divert substantial amounts of their time. We cannot assure you that we will be able to maintain control over product quality, delivery schedules, manufacturing yields and costs as we increase our output. We also have to manage a local workforce that may subject us to uncertainties or regulatory policies and we remain subject to risks related to managing the increased production capacity provided by the facility. Should anticipated demand not materialize, the costs related to having excess capacity would have an adverse impact on our gross margins and operating results.

Changes in the labor laws of the PRC could increase the cost of employing the local workforce. The increased industrialization of the PRC could also increase the price of local labor. Either of these factors could negatively impact the cost savings we currently enjoy from having our manufacturing facility in the PRC.

In the future, some of our net sales may be denominated in Chinese Renminbi (“RMB”). The Chinese government controls the procedures by which RMB is converted into other currencies, and conversion of RMB generally requires government consent. As a result, RMB may not be freely convertible into other currencies at all times. If the Chinese government institutes changes in currency conversion procedures, or imposes restrictions on currency conversion, those actions may negatively impact our operations and could reduce our operating results. In addition, fluctuations in the exchange rate between RMB and U.S. dollars may adversely affect our expenses and results of operations as well as the value of our assets and liabilities. These fluctuations may also adversely affect the comparability of our period-to-period results. If we decide to declare dividends and repatriate funds from our Chinese operations, we will be required to comply with the procedures and regulations of applicable Chinese law. Any changes to these procedures and regulations, or our failure to comply with those procedures and regulations, could prevent us from making dividends and repatriating funds from our Chinese operations, which could adversely affect our financial condition. If we are able to make dividends and repatriate funds from our Chinese operations, these dividends would be subject to U.S. corporate income tax.

The PRC currently provides for favorable tax rates for certain foreign-owned enterprises operating in specified locations in the PRC. We have established our PRC facility in such a tax-favored location. Should the PRC government enact a revised tax structure, it is possible that we would not realize the tax benefits that we currently anticipate and this could adversely impact our operating results.

Economic, political and other risks associated with international sales and operations could adversely affect our net sales.

Part of our growth strategy involves making sales to foreign corporations and delivering our products to facilities located in foreign countries. To facilitate this process and to meet the long-term projected demand for our products, we have set up a manufacturing facility in the PRC. Selling and manufacturing in foreign countries subjects us to additional risks not present with our domestic operations. We have begun operating in business and regulatory environments in which we have little or no previous experience. We will need to overcome language and cultural barriers to effectively conduct our operations in these environments. In addition, the economies of the PRC and other countries have been highly volatile in the past, resulting in significant fluctuations in local currencies and other instabilities. These instabilities affect a number of our customers and suppliers in addition to our foreign operations and continue to exist or may occur again in the future.

Table of Contents

International turmoil and the threat of future terrorist attacks, both domestically and internationally, have contributed to an uncertain political and economic climate, both in the U.S. and globally, and have negatively impacted the worldwide economy. The occurrence of one or more of these instabilities could adversely affect our foreign operations and some of our customers or suppliers, each of which could adversely affect our net sales. In addition, our failure to meet applicable regulatory requirements or overcome cultural barriers could result in production delays and increased turn-around times, which would adversely affect our business.

Our international sales are subject to other risks, including regulatory risks, tariffs and other trade barriers, timing and availability of export licenses, political and economic instability, difficulties in accounts receivable collections, difficulties in managing distributors, lack of a significant local sales presence, difficulties in obtaining governmental approvals, compliance with a wide variety of complex foreign laws and treaties and potentially adverse tax consequences. In addition, the United States or foreign countries may implement quotas, duties, taxes or other charges or restrictions upon the importation or exportation of our products, leading to a reduction in sales and profitability in that country.

Our operations could be disrupted by power outages, natural disasters or other factors.

Our current manufacturing facilities are located in Suzhou, PRC. Due to this geographic concentration, a disruption of our manufacturing operations, resulting from equipment failure, power failures, quality control issues, human error, government intervention or natural disasters, including earthquakes, fires or floods, could interrupt or interfere with our manufacturing operations and consequently harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. Such disruptions would cause significant delays in shipments of our products and adversely affect our operating results.

Our failure to comply with environmental laws and regulations could subject us to significant fines and liabilities or cause us to incur significant costs.

We are subject to various and frequently changing U.S. federal, state and local and foreign governmental laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment, including those governing the discharge of pollutants into the air and water, the management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, the cleanup of contaminated sites and the maintenance of a safe workplace. In particular, some of our manufacturing processes may require us to handle and dispose of hazardous materials from time to time. For example, in the past our manufacturing operations have used lead-based solder in the assembly of our products. Today, we use lead-free soldering technologies in our manufacturing processes, as this is required for products entering the European Union. We could incur substantial costs, including clean-up costs, civil or criminal fines or sanctions and third-party claims for property damage or personal injury, as a result of violations of, or noncompliance with, environmental laws and regulations. These laws and regulations also could require us to incur significant costs to remain in compliance.

Our internal controls over financial reporting may not be effective, which could have a significant and adverse effect on our business.

Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the rules and regulations of the SEC, which we collectively refer to as Section 404, require us to evaluate our internal controls over financial reporting to allow management to report on those internal controls as of the end of each year. Effective internal controls are necessary for us to produce reliable financial reports and are important in our effort to prevent financial fraud. In the course of our Section 404 evaluations, we may identify conditions that may result in significant deficiencies or material weaknesses and we may conclude that enhancements, modifications or changes to our internal controls are necessary or desirable. Implementing any such matters would divert the attention of our management, could involve significant costs, and may negatively impact our results of operations.

We note that there are inherent limitations on the effectiveness of internal controls, as they cannot prevent collusion, management override or failure of human judgment. If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls or if management or our independent registered public accounting firm were to discover material weaknesses in our internal controls, we may be unable to produce reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, and it could harm our financial condition and results of operations, result in a loss of investor confidence and negatively impact our stock price.

If we do not effectively manage future growth, our resources, systems and controls may be strained and our results of operations may suffer.

We have in the past expanded our operations, both domestically and internationally. Any future growth may strain our resources, management information and telecommunication systems, and operational and financial controls. To manage future growth effectively, including the expansion of volume in our manufacturing facility in the PRC, we must be able to improve and expand our systems and controls. We may not be able to do this in a timely or cost-effective manner, and our current systems and controls may not be adequate to support our future operations. In addition, our officers have relatively limited experience in managing a rapidly growing business or a public company. As a result, they may not be able to provide the guidance necessary to manage future growth or maintain future market position. Any failure to manage our growth or improve or expand our existing systems and controls, or unexpected difficulties in doing so, could harm our business.

Table of Contents

If we acquire other businesses or technologies in the future, these acquisitions could disrupt our business and harm our operating results and financial condition.

We will evaluate opportunities to acquire businesses or technologies that might complement our current product offerings or enhance our technical capabilities. We have no experience in acquiring other businesses or technologies. Acquisitions entail a number of risks that could adversely affect our business and operating results, including, but not limited to:

· difficulties in integrating the operations, technologies or products of the acquired companies;

· the diversion of management’s time and attention from the normal daily operations of the business;

· insufficient increases in net sales to offset increased expenses associated with acquisitions or acquired companies;

· difficulties in retaining business relationships with suppliers and customers of the acquired companies;

· the overestimation of potential synergies or a delay in realizing those synergies;

· entering markets in which we have no or limited experience and in which competitors have stronger market positions; and

· the potential loss of key employees of the acquired companies.

Future acquisitions also could cause us to incur debt or be subject to contingent liabilities. In addition, acquisitions could cause us to issue equity securities that could dilute the ownership percentages of our existing stockholders. Furthermore, acquisitions may result in material charges or adverse tax consequences, substantial depreciation, deferred compensation charges, in-process research and development charges, the amortization of amounts related to deferred stock-based compensation expense and identifiable purchased intangible assets or impairment of goodwill, any or all of which could negatively affect our results of operations.

Incurring indebtedness could adversely affect our cash flow and prevent us from fulfilling our financial obligations.

On September 30, 2010, we renewed our revolving credit agreement and concurrently obtained term loan financing. Incurring debt could have material consequences, such as:

· requiring us to dedicate a portion of our cash flow from operations and other capital resources to debt service, thereby reducing our ability to fund working capital, capital expenditures, and other cash requirements;

· increasing our vulnerability to adverse economic and industry conditions;

· limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes and opportunities in, our business and industry, which may place us at a competitive disadvantage; and

· limiting our ability to incur additional debt on acceptable terms, if at all.

Additionally, if we are unable to maintain liquidity levels, as defined in the credit agreement, or if we were to default under our credit agreement and were unable to obtain a waiver for such a default, interest on the obligations would accrue at an increased rate. In the case of a default, the lenders could accelerate our obligations under the credit agreement; however, acceleration will be automatic in the case of bankruptcy and insolvency events of default.

Additionally, to the extent we have made intercompany loans to our subsidiaries and have pledged such loans to the lenders under the credit agreement, our subsidiaries would be required to pay the amount of the intercompany loans to the lenders in the event we are in default under the credit agreement. Any actions taken by the lenders against us in the event we are in default under the credit agreement could harm our financial condition. Finally, the credit facility contains certain restrictive covenants, including provisions restricting our ability to incur additional indebtedness, guarantee certain obligations, create or assume liens and pay dividends.

Table of Contents

Our investments in auction rate securities are subject to risks which may cause losses and affect the liquidity of these investments.

We hold certain investments in auction rate securities that have failed, or may in the future fail, their respective auctions. An auction failure means that the parties wishing to sell their securities could not do so. As a result of failed auctions, our ability to liquidate and fully recover the carrying value of our investments in the near term may be limited or not exist. If the issuers of these investments are unable to close future auctions and their credit ratings deteriorate, we may in the future be required to record an impairment charge on these investments. We also may be required to wait until market stability is restored for these investments or until the final maturity of the underlying notes (up to 30 years) to realize our investments’ cost value.

Risks related to our common stock

Our principal stockholders have significant voting power and may take actions that may not be in the best interest of our other stockholders.

As of October 18, 2010, our executive officers, directors and 5% stockholders beneficially own, in total, approximately 25% of our outstanding common stock. As a result, these stockholders, acting together, have the ability to exert substantial influence over all matters requiring approval by our stockholders, including the election and removal of directors and any proposed merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets and other corporate transactions. This concentration of control could be disadvantageous to other stockholders with interests different from those of our executive officers, directors and principal stockholders. For example, our executive officers, directors and principal stockholders could delay or prevent an acquisition or merger even if the transaction would benefit other stockholders. In addition, this significant concentration of share ownership may adversely affect the trading price for our common stock because investors may perceive disadvantages in owning stock in companies with stockholders that have the ability to exercise significant control.

Anti-takeover provisions under our charter documents and Delaware law could delay or prevent a change of control and could also limit the market price of our stock.

Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws contain provisions that could delay or prevent a change of control of our company or changes in our board of directors that our stockholders might consider favorable. In addition, these provisions could limit the price that investors would be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock. The following are examples of provisions which are included in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, each as amended:

· our board of directors is authorized, without prior stockholder approval, to designate and issue preferred stock, commonly referred to as “blank check” preferred stock, with rights senior to those of our common stock;

· stockholder action by written consent is prohibited;

· nominations for election to our board of directors and the submission of matters to be acted upon by stockholders at a meeting are subject to advance notice requirements; and

· our board of directors is expressly authorized to make, alter or repeal our bylaws.

In addition, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporate Law, which may prohibit certain business combinations with stockholders owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock. These and other provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, and of Delaware law, could make it more difficult for stockholders or potential acquirers to obtain control of our board of directors or initiate actions that are opposed by the then-current board of directors, including delaying or impeding a merger, tender offer, or proxy contest or other change of control transaction involving our company. Any delay or prevention of a change of control transaction or changes in our board of directors could prevent the consummation of a transaction in which our stockholders could receive a substantial premium over the then-current market price for their shares.

The price of and volume in trading of our common stock has and may continue to fluctuate significantly.

Our common stock has been publicly traded since November 2006. The price of our common stock and the trading volume of our shares are volatile and have in the past fluctuated significantly. There can be no assurance as to the prices at which our common stock will trade in the future or that an active trading market in our common stock will be sustained in the future. The market price at which our common stock trades may be influenced by many factors, including but not limited to, the following:

Table of Contents

· our operating and financial performance and prospects, including our ability to achieve and sustain profitability in the future;

· investor perception of us and the industry in which we operate;

· the availability and level of research coverage of and market making in our common stock;

· changes in earnings estimates or buy/sell recommendations by analysts;

· general financial and other market conditions; and

· changing and recently volatile domestic and international economic conditions.

In addition, shares of our common stock and the public stock markets in general, have experienced, and may continue to experience, extreme price and trading volume volatility. These fluctuations may adversely affect the market price of our common stock and a shareholders ability to sell their shares into the market at the desired time or at the desired price.

In 2007, following a drop in the price of our stock, securities litigation was initiated against the company. Given the historic volatility of our industry, we may become engaged in this type of litigation in the future. Securities litigation is expensive and time-consuming.

Item 5. Other Information

Bank Financing Agreement

On September 30, 2010, we entered into an amendment to our existing credit agreement with Silicon Valley Bank. The amendment extends the maturity date of our revolving credit facility to September 30, 2012 and increases our borrowing capacity to the lesser of (i) 80% of eligible accounts receivable, or (ii) $10.0 million. We have the option to increase credit availability under the revolving credit facility to $15.0 million at any time through the extended maturity date, subject to the conditions of the credit agreement. At October 2, 2010, there were no borrowings outstanding under the revolving credit facility.

Interest on the revolving credit facility is payable monthly at either (i) prime plus 1.25%, as long as we maintain $8.5 million in revolving credit availability plus unrestricted cash on deposit with Silicon Valley Bank, or (ii) prime plus 2.25%. Additionally, the credit agreement requires payments for an unused line, as well as anniversary and early termination fees, as applicable.

In connection with the amendment, Silicon Valley Bank also extended a $1.5 million term loan under the credit agreement, which bears interest at a rate of prime plus 1.75%. We are required to make equal monthly principal payments which total $0.5 million annually, and a balloon payment of $0.5 at maturity. Any remaining unpaid principal is due upon maturity of the credit agreement. As of October 2, 2010, $1.5 million was outstanding under the term loan.

All obligations under the credit agreement are secured by a first priority lien on our tangible and intangible assets. The credit agreement subjects us to certain affirmative and negative covenants, including financial covenants with respect to our tangible net worth and restrictions on the payment of dividends. As of October 2, 2010, we were in compliance with its financial covenants.

ASIC Design and Production Agreement

On August 11, 2010, we entered into an agreement with Open Silicon, Inc. for the design and production of an ASIC device to be incorporated into a product that is under development. The agreement requires that we pay non-recurring engineering fees over the course of the design phase and specifies terms regarding the purchase of production devices. We have requested confidential treatment regarding portions of this agreement pursuant to Rule 24b-2 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.

Table of Contents

Item 6. Exhibits

Exhibit
Number		Description of Document

3.1(1)		Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Netlist, Inc.

3.2(1)		Amended and Restated Bylaws of Netlist, Inc.

10.1(2)		Amendment to Loan Documents entered into as of September 30, 2010, by and between Silicon Valley Bank and Netlist, Inc.

10.2(2)*		ASIC Design and Production Agreement between Open Silicon, Inc. and Netlist, Inc.

10.3(2)*		Design and Production Agreement relating to Register ASIC (the “Production Register Agreement”), dated July 31, 2008, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc. (“Toshiba”).

10.4(2)*		Amendment #1 to the Production Register Agreement, dated May 22, 2009, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.5(2)*		Amendment #1 to the Production Register Agreement, dated January 28, 2010, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.6(2)*		Amendment #2 to the Production Register Agreement, dated March 10, 2010, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.7(2)*		Design and Production Agreement relating to ID ASIC (the “Production ID Agreement”), dated July 31, 2008, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.8(2)*		Amendment #1 to the Production ID Agreement, dated January 28, 2010, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.9(2)*		Amendment #2 to the Production ID Agreement, dated March 10, 2010, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.10(2)*		Development and Supply Agreement, dated as of September 10, 2008, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Diablo Technologies, Inc. (“Diablo”).

10.11(2)*		Settlement Agreement and Amendment to Development and Supply Agreement, dated January 12, 2010, between Netlist, Inc. and Diablo.

31.1(2)		Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act, as Amended.

31.2(2)		Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act, as Amended.

32(3)		Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and furnished herewith pursuant to SEC Release No. 33-8238.

(1) Incorporated by reference to the corresponding exhibit number of the registration statement on Form S-1 of the registrant (No. 333-136735) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 23, 2006.

(2) Filed herewith.

(3) The information in Exhibit 32 shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the “Exchange Act”), or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section, nor shall they be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act (including this Report), unless the registrant specifically incorporates the foregoing information into those documents by reference.

* Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to portions of this exhibit pursuant to Rule 24b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and these confidential portions have been redacted from the filing made herewith. A complete copy of this exhibit, including the redacted terms, has been separately filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Date: November 16, 2010		NETLIST, INC.
		a Delaware corporation
		(Registrant)

	By:	/s/ Chun K. Hong
		Chun K. Hong
		President, Chief Executive Officer and
		Chairman of the Board
		(Principal Executive Officer)


	By:	/s/ Gail M. Sasaki
		Gail M. Sasaki
		Vice President and Chief Financial
		Officer
		(Principal Financial Officer)

Table of Contents

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit
Number		Description of Document

3.1(1)		Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Netlist, Inc.

3.2(1)		Amended and Restated Bylaws of Netlist, Inc.

10.1(2)		Amendment to Loan Documents entered into as of September 30, 2010, by and between Silicon Valley Bank and Netlist, Inc.

10.2(2)*		ASIC Design and Production Agreement between Open Silicon, Inc. and Netlist, Inc.

10.3(2)*		Design and Production Agreement relating to Register ASIC (the “Production Register Agreement”), dated July 31, 2008, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc. (“Toshiba”).

10.4(2)*		Amendment #1 to the Production Register Agreement, dated May 22, 2009, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.5(2)*		Amendment #1 to the Production Register Agreement, dated January 28, 2010, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.6(2)*		Amendment #2 to the Production Register Agreement, dated March 10, 2010, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.7(2)*		Design and Production Agreement relating to ID ASIC (the “Production ID Agreement”), dated July 31, 2008, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.8(2)*		Amendment #1 to the Production ID Agreement, dated January 28, 2010, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.9(2)*		Amendment #2 to the Production ID Agreement, dated March 10, 2010, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Toshiba.

10.10(2)*		Development and Supply Agreement, dated as of September 10, 2008, by and between Netlist, Inc. and Diablo Technologies, Inc. (“Diablo”).

10.11(2)*		Settlement Agreement and Amendment to Development and Supply Agreement, dated January 12, 2010, between Netlist, Inc. and Diablo.

31.1(2)		Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act, as Amended.

31.2(2)		Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act, as Amended.

32(3)		Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and furnished herewith pursuant to SEC Release No. 33-8238.

(2) Filed herewith.

(3) The information in Exhibit 32 shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the “Exchange Act”), or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section, nor shall they be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act (including this Report), unless Netlist, Inc. specifically incorporates the foregoing information into those documents by reference.

Attached files

Stock widget

Investing forum

NETLIST INC Reports

Also read