3Ware 2005 Annual Report Download - page 91

APPLIED MICRO CIRCUITS CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Looking through product shipments to distributors and subcontractors to the end customers, net revenues to
end customers that exceeded 10% of total net revenues in any of the three years ended March 31, 2005 were as
follows:
2005 2004 2003
Harris Corporation .................................................... * * 18%
Nortel Networks Corporation ............................................ 11% 17% 14%
* Less than 10% of total net revenues for period indicated.
Net revenues by geographic region were as follows (in thousands):
Fiscal Years Ended March 31,
2005 2004 2003
United States of America .................................. $121,527 $ 70,617 $ 59,868
Other North America ..................................... 21,003 8,042 6,165
Europe and Israel ........................................ 50,124 18,695 11,318
Asia................................................... 59,748 33,823 24,240
Other .................................................. 1,354 — —
$253,756 $131,177 $101,591
12. Contingencies
Since 1993, the Company has been named as a potentially responsible party, or PRP, along with a large
number of other companies that used Omega Chemical Corporation in Whittier, California to handle and dispose
of certain hazardous waste material. The Company is a member of a large group of PRPs that has agreed to fund
certain remediation efforts at the Omega Chemical site, for which the Company has accrued approximately
$100,000. In September 2000, the Company entered into a consent decree with the Environmental Protection
Agency, pursuant to which the Company agreed to fund its proportionate share of the initial remediation efforts
at the Omega Chemical site.
In April 2001, a series of similar federal complaints were filed against the Company and certain of its
executive officers and directors. The complaints were consolidated into a single proceeding in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of California. In re Applied Micro Circuits Corp. Securities Litigation, lead case
number 01–CV–0649–K(AB). The consolidated federal complaint alleged violations of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and was brought as a shareholder class action under Exchange Act Sections 10(b), 20(a), 20A and
Rule 10b-5. In January 2005, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Understanding pursuant to which the
Company agreed to pay $60 million to settle the litigation. In April 2005, the Company and its insurers funded
the settlement fund following the court’s preliminary approval of the settlement. Of the total amount, the
Company’s insurers paid approximately $31 million. The settlement is subject to final court approval, which the
Company does not expect to occur before June 2005.
In May 2001, a series of similar state derivative actions were filed against the Company’s directors and
certain executive officers. The state complaints were coordinated and assigned to the Superior Court of the State
of California in the County of San Diego. Applied Micro Circuits Shareholders Cases, case no. JCCP No. 4193.
The consolidated state complaint alleged overstatement of the Company’s financial prospects, mismanagement,
inflation of stock value and sale of stock at inflated prices for personal gain during the period from November
2000 through February 2001. In July 2004, the court approved a settlement of the derivative actions, which
F-29