View Filing Data

Statement Of Financial Position Classified - USD ($) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Jan. 30, 2010	Jan. 31, 2009
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$ 1,105,428	$ 927,409
Restricted cash	0	24,500
Short-term investments	691,289	0
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $5,912 and $3,206	356,796	222,101
Inventories	241,541	310,654
Prepaid expenses and other current assets	62,527	61,268
Deferred income taxes	7,964	14,383
Total current assets	2,465,545	1,560,315
Property and equipment, net	342,497	390,853
Long-term investments	34,281	40,541
Goodwill	1,997,662	1,997,630
Acquired intangible assets	179,101	286,534
Other noncurrent assets	151,854	138,327
Total assets	5,170,940	4,414,200
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	277,405	139,028
Accrued liabilities	82,067	83,113
Accrued employee compensation	125,810	92,022
Income taxes payable	19,992	35,803
Deferred income	59,396	57,895
Current portion of capital lease obligations	1,940	1,787
Total current liabilities	566,610	409,648
Capital lease obligations, net of current portion	511	2,451
Non-current income taxes payable	117,240	123,379
Other long-term liabilities	68,600	49,655
Total liabilities	$ 752,961	$ 585,133
Commitments and contingencies (Note 13)
Shareholders' equity:
Preferred shares, $0.002 par value; 8,000 shares authorized; no shares issued and outstanding	$ 0	$ 0
Common shares, $0.002 par value; 992,000 shares authorized; 638,341 and 616,388 shares issued and outstanding, respectively	1,277	1,233
Additional paid-in capital	4,607,844	4,372,265
Accumulated other comprehensive loss	(885)	(718)
Accumulated deficit	(190,257)	(543,713)
Total shareholders' equity	4,417,979	3,829,067
Total liabilities and shareholders' equity	$ 5,170,940	$ 4,414,200

Statement Of Income Alternative - USD ($) shares in Thousands, $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Jan. 30, 2010	Jan. 31, 2009	Feb. 02, 2008
Statement [Line Items]
Net revenue	$ 2,807,687	$ 2,950,563	$ 2,894,693
Operating costs and expenses:
Cost of goods sold	1,227,096	1,426,624	1,497,796
Research and development	828,176	935,272	994,202
Selling and marketing	139,404	161,703	212,773
General and administrative	171,362	108,465	139,778
Amortization and write-off of acquired intangible assets	107,534	153,323	155,734
Total operating costs and expenses	2,473,572	2,785,387	3,000,283
Operating income (loss)	334,115	165,176	(105,590)
Interest and other income	10,727	23,651	28,100
Interest expense	(1,732)	(17,994)	(40,498)
Income (loss) before income taxes	343,110	170,833	(117,988)
Provision (benefit) for income taxes	(10,346)	23,591	(3,561)
Net income (loss)	$ 353,456	$ 147,242	$ (114,427)
Net income (loss) per share:
Basic	$ 0.57	$ 0.24	$ (0.19)
Diluted	$ 0.54	$ 0.23	$ (0.19)
Weighted average shares:
Basic	623,934	608,747	590,308
Diluted	653,471	630,328	590,308

Statement Of Shareholders Equity And Other Comprehensive Income - USD ($) shares in Thousands, $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Jan. 30, 2010	Jan. 31, 2009	Feb. 02, 2008
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	$ 3,829,067	$ 3,411,519	$ 3,227,184
Shares issued pursuant to stock options and awards, net	45,893	56,920	49,797
Issuance of common shares under the employee stock purchase plan	65,752	33,358	17,335
Issuance of common shares on exercise of warrants		2,412
Stock-based compensation	124,140	178,999	230,980
Tax benefit from employee stock transactions	(162)	(50)	63
Comprehensive income (loss):
Unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale investments, net of tax	77	(1,333)	587
Unrealized gain on cash flow hedges	341
Other	(585)
Net income (loss)	353,456	147,242	(114,427)
Total Comprehensive income (loss)	353,289	145,909	(113,840)
Ending Balance	$ 4,417,979	$ 3,829,067	$ 3,411,519
Common Shares
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance (in shares)	616,388	599,971	587,425
Beginning Balance	$ 1,233	$ 1,200	$ 1,175
Shares issued pursuant to stock options and awards, net (in shares)	14,674	10,790	11,243
Shares issued pursuant to stock options and awards, net	$ 29	$ 21	$ 22
Issuance of common shares under the employee stock purchase plan (in shares)	7,279	3,947	1,303
Issuance of common shares under the employee stock purchase plan	$ 15	$ 8	$ 3
Issuance of common shares on exercise of warrants (in shares)		1,680
Issuance of common shares on exercise of warrants		$ 4
Comprehensive income (loss):
Ending Balance (in shares)	638,341	616,388	599,971
Ending Balance	$ 1,277	$ 1,233	$ 1,200
Additional Paid-in Capital
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	4,372,265	4,100,659	3,802,509
Shares issued pursuant to stock options and awards, net	45,864	56,899	49,775
Issuance of common shares under the employee stock purchase plan	65,737	33,350	17,332
Issuance of common shares on exercise of warrants		2,408
Stock-based compensation	124,140	178,999	230,980
Tax benefit from employee stock transactions	(162)	(50)	63
Comprehensive income (loss):
Ending Balance	4,607,844	4,372,265	4,100,659
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	(718)	615	28
Comprehensive income (loss):
Unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale investments, net of tax	77	(1,333)	587
Unrealized gain on cash flow hedges	341
Other	(585)
Ending Balance	(885)	(718)	615
Accumulated Deficit
Statement [Line Items]
Beginning Balance	(543,713)	(690,955)	(576,528)
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income (loss)	353,456	147,242	(114,427)
Ending Balance	$ (190,257)	$ (543,713)	$ (690,955)

Statement Of Cash Flows Indirect - USD ($) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
Statement Of Cash Flows Indirect - USD ($) $ in Thousands	Jan. 30, 2010	Jan. 31, 2009	Feb. 02, 2008
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income (loss)	$ 353,456	$ 147,242	$ (114,427)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization	99,214	112,824	105,812
Stock-based compensation	126,599	177,132	230,980
Amortization and write-off of acquired intangible assets	107,534	153,323	155,734
Gain on sale of equity investment	(4,938)	0	0
Loss (gain) from write-off and disposition of assets	3,986	0	(1,822)
Amortization of marketable securities premium	1,667	0	0
Fair market value adjustment to Intel inventory sold	(15,509)	(15,359)	(109,262)
Termination of supply contract	0	0	(22,069)
Interest expense related to supply contract	0	0	5,833
Deferred tax provision	13,356	(17,468)	(13,783)
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation	(677)	(365)	(278)
Changes in assets and liabilities, net of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in acquisitions:
Restricted cash	24,500	(24,500)	0
Accounts receivable	(134,695)	109,919	(1,763)
Inventories	82,659	126,938	(202,275)
Prepaid expenses and other assets	(4,326)	63,476	108,321
Accounts payable	136,045	(88,795)	(8,187)
Accrued liabilities and other	(4,199)	(36,708)	10,880
Accrued employee compensation	33,292	(26,956)	8,852
Income taxes payable	(22,112)	11,507	1,845
Deferred income	15,661	(11,525)	22,961
Net cash provided by operating activities	811,513	680,685	177,352
Cash flows from investing activities:
Cash paid for acquisitions, net of cash acquired	0	(5,287)	(19,987)
Purchases of investments	(804,979)	(10,172)	(262,886)
Sales and maturities of short-term and long-term investments	118,362	29,181	230,906
Purchases of equity investments and loans advanced	(2,000)	0	(323)
Acquisition related transaction costs	0	0	(1,340)
Purchases of property and equipment	(39,814)	(73,243)	(113,462)
Proceeds from sale of asset under construction	0	0	5,122
Purchases of technology licenses	(15,598)	(5,200)	(23,175)
Net cash used in investing activities	(744,029)	(64,721)	(185,145)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Proceeds from the issuance of common shares	111,645	92,645	65,903
Principal payments on capital lease and term loan obligations	(1,787)	(397,213)	(10,748)
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation	677	365	278
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities	110,535	(304,203)	55,433
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents	178,019	311,761	47,640
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period	927,409	615,648	568,008
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	1,105,428	927,409	615,648
Supplemental cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest	297	20,787	41,840
Cash paid for income taxes, net	4,836	17,232	16,878
Non-Cash Investing Activities:
Receivable from sale of equity investment	$ 7,681	$ 0	$ 0

The Company and its Significant Accounting Policies:

12 Months Ended

Jan. 30, 2010

Statement [Line Items]

The Company and its Significant Accounting Policies:

Note 1 — The Company and its Significant Accounting Policies:

The Company

Marvell Technology Group Ltd., a Bermuda company (the “Company”), is a leading global semiconductor provider of high-performance application specific standard products. The Company’s core strength of expertise is the development of complex System-on-a-Chip devices leveraging its extensive technology portfolio of intellectual property in the areas of analog, mixed-signal, digital signal processing and embedded ARM-based microprocessor integrated circuits. The Company’s broad product portfolio includes devices for data storage, enterprise-class Ethernet data switching, Ethernet physical-layer transceiver handheld cellular, Ethernet-based wireless networking, personal area networking, Ethernet-based PC connectivity, control plane communications controllers, video-image processing and power management solutions.

Basis of Presentation

The Company’s fiscal year is the 52- or 53-week period ending on the Saturday closest to January 31. In a 52-week year, each fiscal quarter consists of 13 weeks. The additional week in a 53-week year is added to the fourth quarter, making such quarter consist of 14 weeks. Fiscal years 2010 and 2009 were comprised of 52-week periods and fiscal year 2008 was comprised of a 53–week period. Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior period balances in the Statements of Operations in order to conform to the current period’s presentation.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP in the United States requires management to make estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, the Company evaluates its estimates, including those related to performance based compensation, uncollectible receivables, inventory excess and obsolescence, the useful lives of long-lived assets including property and equipment, investment fair values, goodwill and other intangible assets, and income taxes, litigation and other contingencies. In addition, the Company uses assumptions when employing the Black-Scholes option valuation model to calculate the fair value of stock-based awards granted. The Company bases its estimates of the carrying value of certain assets and liabilities on historical experience and on various other assumptions, that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, when these carrying values are not readily available from other sources. Actual results could differ from these estimates, and such differences could affect the results of operations reported in future periods.

Principles of Consolidation

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated. The functional currency of the Company and its subsidiaries is the United States dollar.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less from the date of purchase to be cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents consist of cash on deposit with banks, time deposits, federal agency notes, commercial paper, and money market funds.

Restricted Cash

Restricted cash consisted of proceeds of insurance recoveries that the Company offset against payments that it was required to make in settlements related to the stock option backdating litigation. The final payments were made during fiscal 2010.

Investments

The Company’s marketable investments are classified as available-for-sale and trading securities and are reported at fair value. Unrealized gains and losses of the Company’s available-for-sale securities are excluded from earnings and reported as a component of other comprehensive income (loss). The Company assesses whether an other-than-temporary impairment loss on its available-for-sale and trading securities has occurred due to declines in fair value or other market conditions. Declines in fair value that are considered other-than-temporary are recorded as an impairment of investments in interest and other income, net within the Consolidated Statements of Operations.

In general, investments with original maturities of greater than 90 days and remaining maturities of less than one year are classified as short-term investments. Investments with maturities beyond one year may also be classified as short-term based on their highly liquid nature and because such investments represent the investment of cash that is available for current operations.

The Company has previously invested in auction rate securities that are typically fully collateralized by pools of loans originated under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (the “FFELP”) and are guaranteed by the United States Federal Department of Education (the “DOE”), and insured. In addition, all auction rate securities held are rated by one or more of the major independent rating agencies as either AAA or Aaa at the time of purchase. See Note 3 for further details on the Company’s investments.

The Company also has equity investments in privately-held companies. These investments are recorded at cost and are included in other non current assets. The Company accounts for these investments under the cost method because its ownership is less than 20% and it does not have the ability to exercise significant influence over the operations of these companies. The Company monitors these investments for impairment and makes appropriate reductions in carrying value when impairment is deemed to be other than temporary.

Impairment of Investments

In April 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) amended an existing guidance on determining whether impairment for investments in debt securities is other-than-temporary. If the debt security’s market value is below amortized cost and the Company either intends to sell the security or it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the security before it anticipated recovery, the Company records an other-than-temporary impairment charge to interest and other income, net within the Consolidated Statements of Operations. However, if an impairment is due to credit losses, the Company considers other credit factors to account for the impairment loss.

Derivative Financial Instruments

The Company accounts for its derivative instruments as either assets or liabilities and carries them at fair value. Derivatives that are not defined as hedges must be adjusted to fair value through earnings. For derivative instruments that hedge the exposure to variability in expected future cash flows and are designated as cash flow hedges, the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument is reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in shareholders’ equity and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged transaction affects earnings. The ineffective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument is recognized in current earnings. To receive hedge accounting treatment, cash flow hedges must be highly effective in offsetting changes to expected future cash flows on hedged transactions.

Concentration of Credit Risk and Significant Customers

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to a significant concentration of credit risk consist principally of cash equivalents, short-term investments and accounts receivable. The Company places its cash primarily in checking and money market accounts. Cash equivalents and short-term investment balances are maintained with high quality financial institutions, the composition and maturities of which are regularly monitored by management. The Company believes that the concentration of credit risk in its trade receivables with respect to its served markets, as well as the limited customer base located primarily in the Asia Pacific Region, are substantially mitigated by the Company’s credit evaluation process, relatively short collection terms and the high level of credit worthiness of its customers. The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers’ financial conditions and limits the amount of credit extended when deemed necessary based upon payment history and the customer’s current credit worthiness, but generally requires no collateral. The Company regularly reviews the allowance for bad debt and doubtful accounts by considering factors such as historical experience, credit quality, age of the accounts receivable balances and current economic conditions that may affect a customer’s ability to pay.

The allowance for doubtful accounts at January 30, 2010, January 31, 2009, and February 2, 2008 was $1.0 million, 0.9 million, and $0.4 million, respectively. Refer to the Revenue Recognition policies for additional information on sales returns and allowances.

During fiscal 2010, Toshiba acquired the disk drive operations of Fujitsu. Although Toshiba and Fujitsu revenue have not historically accounted for more than 10% of our revenue, the Company has combined fiscal 2010 revenue for both Toshiba and Fujitsu together for reporting purposes based on Toshiba’s acquisition of Fujitsu’s disk drive operations in fiscal 2010.

The following table sets forth sales to end customers comprising 10% or more of the Company’s net revenue for the periods indicated:


	Years Ended
Customer	January 30, 2010		January 31, 2009		February 2, 2008
Western Digital	24	%	21	%	17	%
Toshiba	15	%	*		*

*	Less than 10% of net revenue

The Company’s accounts receivable were concentrated with three customers at January 30, 2010 representing 25%, 22% and 20% of gross accounts receivable, respectively and were concentrated with one customer at January 31, 2009 representing 11% of gross accounts receivable.

In each of fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, no distributor accounted for more than 10% of the Company’s net revenue. One distributor accounted for 11% of total accounts receivable in the year ended February 2, 2008. The Company continuously monitors the creditworthiness of its distributors and believes these distributors’ sales to diverse end customers and to diverse geographies further serve to mitigate the Company’s exposure to credit risk.

Concentration of Other Risk

The semiconductor industry is characterized by rapid technological change, competitive pricing pressures, and cyclical market patterns. The Company’s results of operations are affected by a wide variety of factors, including general economic conditions, both domestically and abroad; economic conditions specific to the semiconductor industry; demand for the Company’s products; the timely introduction of new products; implementation of new manufacturing technologies; manufacturing capacity; the ability to manufacture efficiently; the availability and cost of materials and supplies; competition; the ability to safeguard patents and intellectual property in a rapidly evolving market; and reliance on assembly and wafer fabrication subcontractors and on independent distributors and sales representatives. As a result, the Company may experience substantial period-to-period fluctuations in future operating results due to the factors mentioned above or other factors.

Inventories

Inventory is stated at the lower of cost or market, cost being determined under the first-in, first-out method. The Company records inventory excess and obsolescence provisions for estimated obsolete or unmarketable inventory equal to the difference between the cost of inventory and estimated net realizable value based upon assumptions about future demand and market conditions. If actual future demand for the Company’s products is less than currently forecasted, additional inventory provisions may be required. Once a provision is recorded, it is maintained until the product to which it relates to is sold or otherwise disposed of. The Company recorded charges for inventory excess and obsolescence of $24.6 million, $56.6 million, and $62.1 million, for fiscal 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively. The Company also recorded $15.5 million, $15.4 million and $109.3 million of fair market value adjustments to Intel inventory sold in fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Shipping and handling costs are classified as a component of cost of goods sold in the consolidated statements of operations.

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment, including capital leases and leasehold improvements, are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which ranges from three to five years. Buildings are depreciated over an estimated useful life of thirty years and building improvements are depreciated over estimated useful lives of fifteen years. Land is not depreciated. Assets held under capital leases and leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of term of the lease or their estimated useful lives.

Goodwill

Goodwill is recorded when the consideration paid for a business acquisition exceeds the fair value of net tangible and intangible assets acquired. Goodwill is measured and tested for impairment on an annual basis during the fourth fiscal quarter or more frequently if the Company believes indicators of impairment exist. The performance of the test involves a two-step process. The first step requires comparing the fair value of the reporting unit to its net book value, including goodwill. As the Company has only one reporting unit, the fair value of the reporting unit is determined by taking the market capitalization of the reporting unit as determined through quoted market prices and adjusted for control premiums and other relevant factors. A potential impairment exists if the fair value of the reporting unit is lower than its net book value. The second step of the process is only performed if a potential impairment exists, and it involves determining the difference between the fair value of the reporting unit’s net assets other than goodwill and the fair value of the reporting unit. If the difference is less than the net book value of goodwill, impairment exists and is recorded. In the event that the Company determines that the value of goodwill has become impaired, the Company will record an accounting charge for the amount of impairment during the fiscal quarter in which the determination is made. The Company has not been required to perform this second step of the process because the fair value of the reporting unit has significantly exceeded its net book value at every measurement date.

Long-Lived Assets and Intangible Assets

Long-lived assets include equipment, furniture and fixtures and intangible assets. Whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of long-lived assets may not be recoverable, the Company estimates the future cash flows, undiscounted and without interest charges, expected to result from the use of those assets and their eventual cash position. If the sum of the expected future cash flows is less than the carrying amount of those assets, the Company recognizes an impairment loss based on the excess of the carrying amount over the fair value of the assets. See Note 7 – Goodwill and Acquired Intangible Assets for further details regarding impairment of acquisition-related identified intangible assets.

Acquisition-related identified intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated economic lives of one to seven years for purchased technology, one to eight years for core technology, one to five years for trade name, four to seven years for customer contracts and three years for non-compete agreements.

Foreign Currency Transactions

The functional currency of substantially all of the Company’s non-United States operations is the United States dollar. Monetary accounts maintained in currencies other than the United States dollar are re-measured using the foreign exchange rate at the balance sheet date. Operational accounts and nonmonetary balance sheet accounts are measured and recorded at the rate in effect at the date of the transaction. The effects of foreign currency re-measurement are reported in current operations.

Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenues when there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, delivery has occurred, the fee is fixed or determinable, and collection is reasonably assured.

Product revenue is generally recognized upon shipment of product to customers, net of accruals for estimated sales returns and rebates. However, some of the Company’s sales are made through distributors under agreements allowing for price protection, shipped from stock pricing adjustment rights and limited rights of return on products unsold by the distributors. Although title passes to the distributor upon shipment terms and payment by the Company’s distributors is not contingent on resale of the product, product revenue on sales made through distributors with price protection, shipped from stock pricing adjustment rights and stock rotation rights are deferred until the distributors sell the product to end customers because the Company’s selling price is not fixed and determinable and the Company is not able to reliably estimate the volume of future returns. Deferred revenue less the related cost of the inventories is reported as deferred income. The Company does not believe that there is any significant exposure related to impairment of deferred cost of sales, as its historical returns have been minimal and inventory turnover for its distributors generally ranges from 60 to 90 days. The Company’s sales to direct customers are made primarily pursuant to standard purchase orders for delivery of products. Revenue related to the sale of consignment inventory is not recognized until the product is pulled from inventory stock by the customer.

The provision for estimated sales returns on product sales is recorded in the same period the related revenues are recorded. These estimates are based on historical sales returns and other known factors. Actual returns could differ from these estimates. The Company accounts for rebates by recording reductions to revenue for rebates in the same period that the related revenue is recorded. The amount of these reductions is based upon the terms included in the Company’s various rebate agreements.

Advertising Expenses

Advertising costs are expensed as incurred.

Stock-Based Compensation

Stock-based compensation is measured at the grant date, based on the fair value of the award, and is recognized as expense over the requisite service period. For grants from January 29, 2006, the Company amortizes stock-based compensation expense under the straight-line attribution method over the vest term. For grants prior to January 29, 2006, the Company amortizes stock-based compensation expense under the accelerated method.

The Company estimates the fair value of share-based payment awards on the date of grant using the Black Scholes option-pricing model. The value of the portion of the award that is ultimately expected to vest is recognized as expense over the requisite service periods. The Black-Scholes option pricing model was developed for use in estimating the value of traded options that have no vesting restrictions and that are freely transferable. In addition, the Black-Scholes model incorporates various highly subjective assumptions including expected term of awards, expected future stock price volatility, and expected forfeiture rates. The fair value generated by the model may not be indicative of the actual fair values of awards as it does not consider other factors important to those share-based payment awards, such as continued employment, periodic vesting requirements, and limited transferability.

In developing estimates used to calculate assumptions, the Company establishes the expected term for employee options and awards, as well as expected forfeiture rates, based on the historical settlement experience and after giving consideration to vesting schedules. Assumptions for option exercises and pre-vesting terminations of options were stratified by employee groups with sufficiently distinct behavior patterns. Expected volatility was developed based on the average of the Company’s historical daily stock price volatility.

Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from initial estimates. Stock-based compensation expense is recorded net of estimated forfeitures such that expense is recorded only for those stock-based awards that are expected to vest. Previously recognized expense is reversed for the portion of awards forfeited prior to vesting as and when forfeitures occurred.

Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Comprehensive income (loss) is comprised of net income (loss) and unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities and foreign exchange contracts. For the years ended January 30, 2010, January 31, 2009, February 2, 2008, $(0.2) million, $(1.3) million, and $0.6 million, respectively, of net unrealized gains (losses) were reclassified as realized gains (losses) and recognized in the accompanying statement of operations upon the sale of the related securities and maturity of the related contracts.

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), as presented on the accompanying balance sheets, consists of net unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities and foreign exchange contracts, net of tax.

Net Income (Loss) Per Share

The Company reports both basic net income (loss) per share, which is based upon the weighted average number of common shares outstanding and diluted net income (loss) per share, which is based on the weighted average number of common shares outstanding and potentially dilutive common shares.

Accounting for Income Taxes

In accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 740, Income Taxes (“ASC 740”), the Company recognizes income taxes using an asset and liability approach. This approach requires the recognition of taxes payable or refundable for the current year and deferred tax liabilities and assets for the future tax consequences of events that have been recognized in the Company’s consolidated financial statements or tax returns. The measurement of current and deferred taxes is based on provisions of the enacted tax law and the effects of future changes in tax laws or rates are not anticipated.

ASC 740 provides for recognition of deferred tax assets if the realization of such deferred tax assets is more likely than not to occur. With the exception of certain international jurisdictions, the Company has determined that at this time it is more likely than not that deferred tax assets attributable to the remaining jurisdictions will not be realized, primarily due to uncertainties related to its ability to utilize the net operating loss carryforwards and research and development tax credits before they expire based on the Company’s past experiences. Accordingly, the Company has established a valuation allowance for such deferred tax assets. If there is a change in the Company’s ability to realize its deferred tax assets, then its tax provision may decrease in the period in which it determines that realization is more likely than not.

As a multinational corporation, the Company conducts its business in many countries and is subject to taxation in many jurisdictions. The taxation of the Company’s business is subject to the application of multiple and sometimes conflicting tax laws and regulations as well as multinational tax conventions. The Company’s effective tax rate is highly dependent upon the geographic distribution of its worldwide earnings or losses, the tax regulations and tax holidays in each geographic region, the availability of tax credits and carryforwards, and the effectiveness of its tax planning strategies. The application of tax laws and regulations is subject to legal and factual interpretation, judgment and uncertainty. Tax laws themselves are subject to change as a result of changes in fiscal policy, changes in legislation, and the evolution of regulations and court rulings. Consequently, taxing authorities may impose tax assessments or judgments against the Company that could materially impact its tax liability and/or its effective income tax rate.

Warranty

The Company’s products are generally subject to warranty, which provides for the estimated future costs of repair, replacement or customer accommodation upon shipment of the product. The Company’s products typically carry a standard 90-day warranty, with certain exceptions in which the warranty period can range from one to five years based on contractual agreements. The warranty accrual is primarily estimated based on historical claims compared to historical revenues and assumes that the Company will have to replace products subject to a claim. For new products, the Company uses a historical percentage for the appropriate class of product. From time to time, the Company becomes aware of specific warranty situations, which are relatively large and it records specific amounts to cover these exposures in addition to the standard run rate provisions.

Accounting Standards Codification

During the third quarter of fiscal year 2010, the Company adopted the new ASC issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”). The ASC has become the source of authoritative U.S. GAAP, recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities. The ASC is not intended to change or alter existing U.S. GAAP. The adoption of the ASC did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or financial condition.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In June 2009, the FASB issued guidance that amends the consolidation rules related to variable interest entities. The determination of whether a company is required to consolidate an entity is based on, among other things, an entity’s purpose and design and a company’s ability to direct the activities of the entity that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance. This guidance requires ongoing reassessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of the variable interest entity. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2009. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this accounting guidance on its financial position and results of operations.

In September 2009, the FASB issued new accounting guidance related to the revenue recognition of multiple element arrangements. The new guidance states that if vendor specific objective evidence or third party evidence for deliverables in an arrangement cannot be determined, companies will be required to develop a best estimate of the selling price to separate deliverables and allocate arrangement consideration using the relative selling price method. The accounting guidance will be applied prospectively and will become effective during the first quarter of fiscal year 2011. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this accounting guidance on its financial position and results of operations.

In January 2010, the FASB issued guidance that expands the interim and annual disclosure requirements of fair value measurements, including the information about movement of assets between level 1 and 2 of the three- tier fair value hierarchy established under its fair value measurement guidance. This guidance also requires separate disclosure for each of purchases, sales, issuance, and settlements in the reconciliation for fair value measurements using significant unobservable inputs, level 3. Except for the detailed disclosure in the level 3 reconciliation, which is effective for the fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, all the other disclosures under this guidance are effective for the fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2009. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of this guidance on its financial position and results of operations.

Investments:

12 Months Ended

Jan. 30, 2010

Statement [Line Items]

Investments:

Note 3 — Investments:

The following tables summarize the Company’s investments (in thousands):


	As of January 30, 2010
	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Gains		Gross Unrealized Loss			Estimated Fair Value
Short-term investments:
Available-for-sale:
Corporate	$	227,610	$	934	$	(75	)	$	228,469
U.S. government agency		457,592		258		(30	)		457,820
Trading securities:
Auction rate security and settlement option		5,000		—		—			5,000

Total Short-term investments	$	690,202	$	1,192	$	(105	)	$	691,289
Long-term investments:
Available-for-sale:
Auction rate securities	$	36,600	$	—	$	(2,319	)	$	34,281

Total long-term investments	$	36,600	$	—	$	(2,319	)	$	34,281

Total Investments	$	726,802	$	1,192	$	(2,424	)	$	725,570


	As of January 31, 2009
	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Gains		Gross Unrealized Loss			Estimated Fair Value
Long-term investments:
Available-for-sale:
Auction rate securities	$	36,850	$	—	$	(1,309	)	$	35,541

Trading securities:
Auction rate security and settlement option		5,000		—		—			5,000

Total long-term investments	$	41,850	$	—	$	(1,309	)	$	40,541

Total Investments	$	41,850	$	—	$	(1,309	)	$	40,541

As of January 30, 2010, the Company’s investment portfolio included $41.6 million in par value of auction rate securities. Auction rate securities are usually found in the form of municipal bonds, preferred stock, pools of student loans or collateralized debt obligations with contractual maturities generally between 20 and 30 years and whose interest rates are reset every seven to 35 days through an auction process. At the end of each reset period, investors can sell or continue to hold the securities at par. The Company’s auction rate securities are all backed by student loans originated under the Federal Family Education Loan Program and are fully collateralized, insured and guaranteed by the DOE.

Beginning in February 2008, liquidity issues in the global credit markets resulted in the failure of auctions of auction rate securities, as the amount of securities submitted for sale in those auctions exceed the amount of bids. Due to the auction failures, the auction rate securities do not have a readily determinable market or value. In addition, five of the securities have been downgraded. To estimate the fair value of the auction rate securities since that time, the Company used a discounted cash flow model based on estimated timing and amount of future interest and principal payments, credit quality of the underlying securities and liquidity considerations, the collateralization of underlying security investments, the credit worthiness of the issuer of the securities, the probability of full repayment and other considerations described above. Although all of the Company’s auction rate securities were historically classified as short-term investments due to its ability to liquidate them, beginning in February 2008, the Company re-classified them to long-term, consistent with the stated 20 to 30 year contractual maturities of the securities.

In the quarter ended January 31, 2009, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with UBS, the broker for one of our auction rate securities purchases, where UBS has the right to call and sell an auction rate security that the Company purchased from them for $5 million at a future date. As a result of the Company’s participation in this settlement, it received a put option, which it elected to measure at fair value and include in long term investments. The value of the settlement was equal to the amount of impairment at the settlement date. The Company also elected to transfer this auction rate security and the settlement option to trading securities from available-for-sale as its intent is to exercise the put option at a future date. During fiscal 2010, the Company reclassified this security and settlement option to short-term, as it has the right and plans to exercise the put option within one year.

As of January 30, 2010, the estimated fair values of the auction rate securities were $2.3 million less than their par value. Based on the Company’s assessment of its cash flow projections, a balance of approximately $1.8 billion in cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments other than auction rate securities and the fact that Company continues to generate positive cash flow on a quarterly basis, the Company does not anticipate having to sell these securities below par value in order to operate its business. The Company does not have the intent to sell these auction rate securities until recovery and it is more likely than not that it will not be required to sell the auction rate securities prior to recovery. Thus the Company considers the impairment to be temporary and recorded the unrealized loss to accumulated other comprehensive loss, a component of shareholders’ equity as of January 30, 2010. To the extent the Company determines that any impairment is other-than-temporary, the impairment would be recorded to earnings.

The contractual maturities of available-for-sale and trading debt securities at January 30, 2010, and January 31, 2009 are presented in the following table (in thousands):


	January 30, 2010				January 31, 2009
	Amortized Cost		Estimated Fair Value		Amortized Cost		Estimated Fair Value
Due in one year or less	$	357,179	$	357,348	$	—	$	—
Due between one and five years		333,023		333,941		5,000		5,000
Due over five years		36,600		34,281		36,850		35,541

	$	726,802	$	725,570	$	41,850	$	40,541

The following tables summarize the investments’ gross unrealized losses and fair value, aggregated by investment category and length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position (in thousands):


	January 30, 2010
	Less than 12 months					12 months or more					Total
	Fair Value		Unrealized (Loss)			Fair Value		Unrealized (Loss)			Fair Value		Unrealized (Loss)
U.S. Federal and State debt securities		94,220		(30	)		—		—			94,220		(30	)
Corporate debt securities		28,428		(75	)		—		—			28,428		(75	)
Auction rate securities and settlement option	$	5,000	$	—		$	34,281	$	(2,319	)	$	39,281	$	(2,319	)

Total securities	$	127,648	$	(105	)	$	34,281	$	(2,319	)	$	161,929	$	(2,424	)


	January 31, 2009
	Less than 12 months					12 months or more					Total
	Fair Value		Unrealized (Loss)			Fair Value		Unrealized (Loss)			Fair Value		Unrealized (Loss)
Auction rate securities and settlement option	$	—	$	—		$	40,541	$	(1,309	)	$	40,541	$	(1,309	)

Total securities	$	—	$	—		$	40,541	$	(1,309	)	$	40,541	$	(1,309	)

Supplemental Financial Information (in thousands):

12 Months Ended

Jan. 30, 2010

Statement [Line Items]

Supplemental Financial Information (in thousands):

Note 4 — Supplemental Financial Information (in thousands):

Cash and cash equivalents


	January 30, 2010		January 31, 2009
Cash	$	333,875	$	72,348
Cash equivalents:
Commercial paper		4,000		381,674
Time deposits		142,794		105,491
Money market mutual fund		542,574		367,896
Federal agency notes		82,185		—

Total cash and cash equivalents	$	1,105,428	$	927,409

Inventories


	January 30, 2010		January 31, 2009
Work-in-process	$	128,371	$	188,830
Finished goods		113,170		121,824

Inventories	$	241,541	$	310,654

Property and equipment, net


	January 30, 2010			January 31, 2009
	January 30, 2010			January 31, 2009
Machinery and equipment	$	371,281			343,772
Computer software		66,643			75,986
Furniture and fixtures		23,335			23,490
Leasehold improvements		33,224			38,872
Buildings		146,294			146,294
Building improvements		45,631			45,329
Land		71,198			71,198
Construction in progress		5,174			2,483

		762,780			747,424
Less: Accumulated depreciation and amortization		(420,283	)		(356,571	)

Property and equipment, net	$	342,497		$	390,853

The Company recorded depreciation expense of $87.3 million, $95.5 million, and $93.7 million for fiscal 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively. Property and equipment included $7.0 million, $7.0 million and $9.1 million of assets acquired under capital lease at January 30, 2010, January 31, 2009 and February 2, 2008, respectively. Accumulated depreciation related to these assets was $5.0 million, $3.6 million and $3.2 million at January 30, 2010, January 31, 2009 and February 2, 2008, respectively.

Other noncurrent assets


	January 30, 2010		January 31, 2009
Long-term prepayments for foundry capacity	$	8,504	$	8,800
Equity investments in privately held companies		6,314		7,058
Severance fund		57,261		43,121
Technology licenses		33,486		24,108
Deferred tax assets, non-current		34,638		41,575
Other		11,651		13,665

Other noncurrent assets	$	151,854	$	138,327

Accrued liabilities


	January 30, 2010		January 31, 2009
Accrued royalties	$	12,651	$	5,660
Accrued rebates		13,404		28,925
Accrued legal and professional services		13,585		25,719
Accrued customer advances(1)		8,167		—
Accrued sales/GST tax		6,082		3,494
Accrued tapeouts		5,957		5,097
Other		22,221		14,218

Accrued liabilities	$	82,067	$	83,113

(1)	Accrued customer advances were included in the deferred income line of the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of January 31, 2009.

Other long-term liabilities


	January 30, 2010		January 31, 2009
Accrued severance	$	53,549	$	46,716
Long-term facilities consolidation charge		3,305		2,246
Accrued technology license		4,500		—
Other		7,246		693

	$	68,600	$	49,655

Net income (loss) per share

The computations of basic and diluted net income per share are presented in the following table (in thousands, except per share amounts):


	Year Ended
	January 30,		January 31,		February 2,
	2010		2009		2008
Numerator:
Net income (loss)	$	353,456	$	147,242	$	(114,427	)
Denominator:
Weighted average shares of common shares outstanding:
Weighted average shares — basic		623,934		608,747		590,308
Effect of dilutive securities:
Warrants		—		315		—
Common share options and other		29,807		21,266		—
Weighted average shares — diluted		653,471		630,328		590,308
Net income (loss) per share
Basic	$	0.57	$	0.24	$	(0.19	)
Diluted	$	0.54	$	0.23	$	(0.19	)

Options to purchase 14.3 million common shares at a weighted average exercise price of $13.28 have been excluded from the computation of diluted net income per share for fiscal 2010 because their exercise price was greater than the share price of the Company on January 29, 2010, the last trading day of fiscal 2010.

Options to purchase 64.5 million common shares at a weighted average exercise price of $19.49 have been excluded from the computation of diluted net income per share for fiscal 2009 because their exercise price was greater than the share price of the Company on January 30, 2009, the last trading day of fiscal 2009.

The effects of warrants, common share options, restricted stock and other securities totaling 38.7 million shares were excluded from diluted net loss per share for fiscal 2008 as they would be anti-dilutive in net loss periods.

Comprehensive income (loss) (in thousands)

The changes in the components of other comprehensive income were as follows (in thousands):


	Year Ended
	January 30, 2010			January 31, 2009
Net income	$	353,456		$	147,242
Other comprehensive income:
Change in unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities		77			(1,333	)
Change in unrealized gain on cash flow hedges		341			—
Change in other		(585	)		—

Total comprehensive income	$	353,289		$	145,909

The components of accumulated other comprehensive loss were as follows (in thousands):


	Year Ended
	January 30, 2010			January 31, 2009
Unrealized loss on marketable securities	$	(1,232	)	$	(1,309	)
Unrealized gain on cash flow hedges		341			—
Other		6			591

Accumulated other comprehensive loss	$	(885	)	$	(718	)

Fair Value Measurements:

12 Months Ended

Jan. 30, 2010

Statement [Line Items]

Fair Value Measurements:

Note 6 — Fair Value Measurements:

Effective February 3, 2008, the Company adopted the authoritative guidance for fair value measurements and disclosures for all assets and liabilities within the scope of this guidance, except as it applies to the non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities subject to additional authoritative guidance, which the Company adopted during the quarter ended May 2, 2009. The guidance clarifies that fair value is an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants. As such, fair value is a market-based measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or a liability. As a basis for considering such assumptions, the guidance establishes a three-tier value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in the valuation methodologies in measuring fair value:

Level 1 — Observable inputs that reflect quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets.

Level 2 — Include other inputs that are directly or indirectly observable in the marketplace.

Level 3 — Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity.

The fair value hierarchy also requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value.

The Company measures its cash equivalents and marketable securities at fair value. The Company’s cash equivalents and government securities are primarily classified within Level 1, its corporate securities in Level 2 and its auction rate securities in Level 3. Cash equivalents and government securities are valued primarily using quoted market prices utilizing market observable inputs. Corporate securities are considered Level 2 because markets are sometimes not as active or prices as current as with Level 1 securities. The Company’s investments in auction rate securities are classified within Level 3 because there are no active markets for the auction rate securities and therefore the Company is unable to obtain independent valuations from market sources. Therefore, the auction rate securities were valued using a discounted cash flow model. Some of the inputs to the cash flow model are unobservable in the market, including estimated timing and amount of future interest and principal payments, credit quality of the underlying securities and liquidity considerations, the collateralization of underlying security investments, the credit worthiness of the issuer of the securities, the probability of full repayment and other considerations. The total amount of assets measured using Level 3 valuation methodologies represented 0.8% of total assets as of January 30, 2010.

The table below sets forth, by level, the Company’s financial assets that were accounted for at fair value as of January 30, 2010. The table does not include assets and liabilities that are measured at historical cost or any basis other than fair value (in thousands):


	Portion of Carrying Value Measured at Fair Value at January 30, 2010		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3
Items measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
Cash equivalents:
Money market funds, Federal agency notes and commercial paper	$	542,574	$	542,574	$	—	$	—
Short-term investments:		691,289		457,820		228,469		5,000
Prepaids and other current assets:
Derivative assets		830		—		830		—
Long-term investments:
Auction rate securities		34,281		—		—		34,281
Severance pay fund		57,261		9,156		48,105		—

Total	$	1,326,235	$	1,009,550	$	277,404	$	39,281


	Portion of Carrying Value Measured at Fair Value at January 31, 2009		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3
Items measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
Cash equivalents:
Commercial paper	$	381,674	$	381,674	$	—	$	—
Long-term investments:
Auction rate securities		40,541		—		—		40,541
Severance pay fund		43,121		8,512		34,609		—

Total	$	465,336	$	390,186	$	34,609	$	40,541

The following table summarizes the change in fair values for Level 3 items for the year ended January 30, 2010:


	Level 3
Changes in fair value during the period ended January 30, 2010 (pre-tax):
Beginning Balance at February 1, 2009	$	40,541
Purchases		—
Sales		(250	)
Unrealized loss included in other comprehensive income (loss)		(1,010	)

Ending Balance at January 30, 2010	$	39,281


	Level 3
Changes in fair value during the period ended January 31, 2009 (pre-tax):
Beginning Balance at February 3, 2008	$	45,628
Purchases		10,000
Sales		(13,778	)
Unrealized loss included in other comprehensive income (loss)		(1,309	)

Ending Balance at January 31, 2009	$	40,541

Shareholders' Equity:

12 Months Ended

Jan. 30, 2010

Statement [Line Items]

Shareholders' Equity:

Note 10 — Shareholders’ Equity:

Common and Preferred Stock

As of January 30, 2010, the Company is authorized to issue 992,000,000 shares of $0.002 par value common shares and 8,000,000 shares of $0.002 par value preferred shares. The Company has the authority to issue undesignated preferred stock in one or more series and to fix the rights, preferences, privileges and restrictions thereof, including dividend rights, dividend rates, conversion rights, voting rights, terms of redemption and liquidation preferences. As of January 30, 2010, and January 31, 2009, no shares of preferred stock were outstanding.

1995 Stock Option Plan

In April 1995, the Company adopted the 1995 Stock Option Plan (the “Option Plan”). The Option Plan, as amended, had 383.4 million common shares reserved for issuance thereunder as of January 30, 2010. Options granted under the Option Plan generally have a term of ten years and generally must be issued at prices not less than 100% and 85% for incentive and nonqualified stock options, respectively, of the fair market value of the stock on the date of grant. Incentive stock options granted to shareholders who own greater than 10% of the outstanding stock are for periods not to exceed five years and must be issued at prices not less than 110% of the fair market value of the stock on the date of grant. The options generally vest 20% one year after the vesting commencement date, and the remaining shares vest one-sixtieth per month over the remaining 48 months. Options granted under the Option Plan subsequent to March 1, 2000 may only be exercised upon or after vesting.

In addition, the Company can also grant stock awards, which may be subject to vesting. Further, the Company can grant restricted stock unit awards. Restricted stock unit awards are denominated in shares of stock, but may be settled in cash or tradable shares of the Company’s common shares upon vesting, as determined by the Company at the time of grant.

1997 Directors’ Stock Option Plan

In August 1997, the Company adopted the 1997 Directors’ Stock Option Plan (the “1997 Directors’ Plan”). Under the 1997 Directors’ Plan, an outside director was granted an option to purchase 30,000 common shares upon appointment to the Company’s Board of Directors. These options vested 20% one year after the vesting commencement date and remaining shares vest one-sixtieth per month over the remaining 48 months. An outside director was also granted an option to purchase 6,000 common shares on the date of each annual meeting of the shareholders. These options vested one-twelfth per month over 12 months after the fourth anniversary of the vesting commencement date. Options granted under the 1997 Directors’ Plan could be exercised prior to vesting. The 1997 Directors’ Plan was terminated in October 2007.

2007 Directors’ Stock Incentive Plan

In October 2007, the Company adopted the 2007 Directors’ Stock Incentive Plan (the “2007 Directors’ Plan”). The 2007 Directors’ Plan had 750,000 common shares reserved for issuance thereunder as of January 30, 2010. Under the 2007 Directors’ Plan, an outside director is granted an option to purchase 50,000 common shares upon appointment to the Company’s Board of Directors. These options vest one-third on the one year anniversary of the date of grant and one-third of the shares on each anniversary thereafter. An outside director who has served on the Company’s Board of Directors for the prior six months is also granted an option to purchase 12,000 common shares on the date of each annual meeting of the Company’s shareholders. These options vest 100% on the earlier of the date of the next annual general meeting of shareholders or the one year anniversary of the date of grant.

Under the Option Plan and the 2007 Directors’ Plan, the Company may also grant restricted stock awards, which may be subject to vesting, and restricted stock unit awards, which are denominated in shares of stock, but may be settled in cash or tradable shares of the Company’s common shares upon vesting, as determined by the Company at the time of grant.

2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan

In June 2000, the Company adopted the 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the “Purchase Plan”), and on October 22, 2009, the Purchase Plan was amended and restated (the “Restated Purchase Plan”). The Restated Purchase Plan had 34.1 million common shares reserved for issuance thereunder as of January 30, 2010. Pursuant to the terms of the Restated Purchase Plan, the “look-back” period for the stock purchase price was changed from 24 months to six months. This change was effective for new participants who enroll in the Restated Purchase Plan in December 2009 and is applicable for each successive offering period thereafter. Offering and purchase periods will continue to begin on December 8 and June 8 of each year. New participants will be granted the right to purchase common shares at a price per share that is 85% of the lesser of the fair market value of the Company’s common shares at the beginning or the end of each six-month period. The existing two-year offering periods will be phased out and any currently enrolled participant in a current 24-month offering period will continue in the current offering period until the earlier of the end of the offering period or in the event the current offering period is reset. A reset occurs if the fair market value of Marvell common shares on any purchase date is less than it was on the first day of the offering period. Currently enrolled participants were granted the right to purchase common shares at a price per share that is 85% of the lesser of the fair market value of the shares at (i) the participant’s entry date into the two-year offering period or (ii) the end of each six-month purchase period within the offering period.

The Purchase Plan included a limitation on the number of shares that may be purchased in the event that the market price of the Company’s common shares decreases by more than 25% from one purchase date to the next. In the event the share limitation is triggered, the number of shares an employee may purchase on the subsequent purchase date may not exceed 75% of the number the employee could have purchased at 85% of the market price on the earlier purchase date. This share limitation was triggered in connection with the June 2008 purchase period, which ended in December 2008. Pursuant to the terms of the Restated Purchase Plan this share limitation is no longer effective.

Participants who will enroll under the Restated Purchase Plan will no longer be subject to a share limitation on the number of shares that may be purchased in the event that the market price of Company’s common shares decreases by more than 25% from one purchase date to the next. Participants may purchase no more than 7,500 shares per six-month offering period. Participants purchase stock using payroll deductions, which may not exceed 15% of their total cash compensation.

During fiscal 2010, a total of 7.3 million shares were issued under the Restated Purchase Plan at a weighted-average price of $4.95. During fiscal 2009, a total of 3.9 million shares were issued under the Purchase Plan at a weighted-average price of $8.45. During fiscal 2008, a total of 1.3 million shares were issued under the Purchase Plan at a weighted-average price of $13.30. At January 30, 2010, 34.1 million shares were available for future issuance under the Purchase Plan.

Combined Option Plan and Stock Award Activity

The following table summarizes the activity under the Option Plan, the 1997 Directors’ Plan, the 2007 Directors’ Plan and other stock based arrangements (in thousands, except for prices):


	Options Outstanding		Weighted Average Exercise Price of Options
Balance at January 27, 2007	118,627		$	13.72
Granted	12,577		$	16.21
Canceled/Forfeited	(13,841	)	$	17.39
Expired	(51	)	$	0.12
Exercised or issued	(8,154	)	$	6.83

Balance at February 2, 2008	109,158		$	14.64
Granted	25,067		$	9.35
Canceled/Forfeited	(39,598	)	$	21.58
Expired	—			—
Exercised or issued	(9,573	)	$	6.04

Balance at January 31, 2009	85,054		$	10.81
Granted	1,819		$	13.85
Canceled/Forfeited	(3,726	)	$	15.45
Expired	—			—
Exercised or issued	(12,181	)	$	7.12

Balance at January 30, 2010	70,966		$	11.28

Vested and expected to vest at January 30, 2010	68,472		$	11.32
Exercisable at January 30, 2010	45,381		$	10.61

Included in the preceding table are options for 2.1 million common shares granted to the Company’s officers at exercise prices ranging between $6.84 and $24.80 that will become exercisable only upon the achievement of specified annual earnings per share targets or achievement of certain operating performance criteria through fiscal 2014.

The Company has granted performance based options to executives contingent upon achieving pro forma earnings per share (“EPS”) targets. Pro forma EPS will be calculated by adjusting diluted net income per share under generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP EPS”) for the impact of (i) non-cash stock-based compensation charges by adding to GAAP EPS non-cash stock-based compensation expense, and (ii) non-cash charges associated with purchase accounting, including purchase accounting adjustments for inventory and other write-off related expenses by adding to GAAP EPS amortization and write-off of acquired intangible assets and acquired in-process research and development. Share options were granted at the fair market value on the date of grant and fully vest upon achievement of these earnings per share targets within a four-year period. The contractual lives of the options are 10 years from the date of grant. The fair value of the each performance option grant that is expected to vest under these conditions was estimated on the date of grant using the same option valuation model for options granted under the Company’s Option Plan. If such goals are not met, no compensation expense is recognized and any previously recognized compensation expense is reversed.

In the third quarter of fiscal 2009, the Company estimated that specified annual earnings per share targets for common shares granted to certain officers may not be achieved by fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2011. As a result, the Company reversed $6.7 million of stock-based compensation recorded from inception through November 1, 2008 for these common shares granted to certain officers. The underlying stock options continue to be treated as outstanding until the performance period lapses. In the third quarter of fiscal 2010, the Company estimated that some of the specified annual earnings per share targets for common shares granted to certain officers may be achieved by fiscal 2011. As a result, the Company recorded an additional $1.6 million of stock-based compensation recorded from inception.

The aggregate intrinsic value and weighted average remaining contractual term of options vested and expected to vest at January 30, 2010 was $472.7 million and 5.5 years, respectively. The aggregate intrinsic value and weighted average remaining contractual term of options exercisable at January 30, 2010 was $339.0 million and 4.2 years, respectively. The aggregate intrinsic value is calculated based on the Company’s closing stock price for all in-the-money options as of January 30, 2010.

Included in the following table is activity related to the non-vested portion of the restricted stock units as follows (in thousands, except for prices):


	Restricted Stock Outstanding		Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value
Balance at January 27, 2007	2,708		$	20.10
Granted	3,611		$	12.10
Vested	(3,745	)	$	14.33
Canceled/Forfeited	(463	)	$	19.05

Balance at February 2, 2008	2,111		$	16.89
Granted	5,859		$	8.71
Vested	(1,135	)	$	15.97
Canceled/Forfeited	(336	)	$	13.59

Balance at January 31, 2009	6,499		$	9.58
Granted	78		$	13.49
Vested	(3,376	)	$	10.20
Canceled/Forfeited	(455	)	$	6.50

Balance at January 30, 2010	2,746		$	8.99

The aggregate intrinsic value and weighted average remaining contractual term of restricted stock vested and expected to vest as of January 30, 2010 was $43.3 million and 1.1 years, respectively. The number of restricted stock that are vested and expected to vest are 2.5 million shares.

As of January 30, 2010, compensation costs related to non-vested awards not yet recognized amounted to $161.0 million. The unamortized compensation expense for stock options and restricted stock will be amortized on a straight-line basis and is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.3 years and 1.6 years, respectively. Historically, the Company issued new shares to satisfy option exercises.

The total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during fiscal 2010, 2009, and 2008 was $124.5 million, $65.7 million and $71.1 million, respectively. 3.4 million shares, 1.1 million shares and 3.7 million shares of restricted stock were vested during fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

We had the following shares of common stock reserved for future issuance upon the exercise or issuance of equity instruments as of January 30, 2010:


		Number of shares
		(in thousands)
Stock options outstanding		70,966
Authorized for future grants under stock incentive plans		132,151
Authorized for future issuance under stock purchase plan		34,069
Restricted stock units outstanding		2,746

		239,932

Stock-Based Compensation

Total stock compensation expense for fiscal 2010, 2009, and 2008 are represented by expense categories in the table below (in thousands):


	Year Ended
	January 30, 2010		January 31, 2009		February 2, 2008
Cost of goods sold	$	10,690	$	11,644	$	15,530
Research and development		89,766		126,895		152,249
Selling and marketing		15,298		25,081		39,022
General and administrative		10,845		13,512		24,179

	$	126,599	$	177,132	$	230,980

Stock-based compensation of $1.6 million, $3.6 million and $0.8 million was capitalized in inventory as of January 30, 2010, January 31, 2009 and February 2, 2008, respectively.

The following weighted average assumptions were used to calculate the Black-Scholes values for each type of stock instrument:


	Stock Option Plans									ESPP
	Year Ended									Year Ended
	January 30,			January 31,			February 2,			January 30,			January 31,			February 2,
	2010			2009			2008			2010			2009			2008
Estimated fair value	$	6.32		$	4.01		$	7.21		$	4.34		$	5.39		$	6.06
Volatility		53	%		44	%		45	%		51	%		45	%		45	%
Expected term (in years)		4.6			5.2			4.9			1.1			1.3			1.3
Risk-free interest rate		2.14	%		3.1	%		4.4	%		0.6	%		1.8	%		4.7	%
Dividend yield		—			—			—			—			—			—

Under applicable securities laws, the Company suspended all stock option exercise transactions under the Option Plan effective on the close of business on September 7, 2006. On September 8, 2006, management communicated the trading suspension, which lasted until July 13, 2007 when the Company filed all its delinquent SEC reports, to all option holders. As a result, the exercisability of all outstanding options, including vested awards held by certain separated employees, was modified. The Company recorded incremental compensation costs of $8.7 million representing the excess of the fair value of the modified award over the fair value of the original award immediately before filing of the Company’s delinquent SEC reports, on affected awards in the second quarter of fiscal 2008.

In connection with the remediation steps from the recommendations of the Board of Directors’ Special Committee Regarding Deriviative Litigation upon completion of the review of the Company’s past stock option practices during the second quarter of fiscal 2008, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Sehat Sutardja agreed to reduce the number of shares received in his December 26, 2003 option grant by 2,000,000 shares, which is the amount of underlying shares mistakenly awarded by the Executive Compensation Committee in excess of that authorized under the applicable stock option plan. Dr. Sutardja continued employment with the Company as Chief Executive Officer. Additionally, the outstanding options of the Company’s former Chief Operating Officer, Weili Dai, that were unvested as of May 6, 2007 have been cancelled and the exercisability of already vested options have been limited, notwithstanding her continued employment. The cancellations of grants were not accompanied by concurrent replacement grants or other valuable consideration. As a result, the cancellations were considered a repurchase with no consideration and the Company recorded stock compensation expense of $8.4 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2008 for the remaining unrecognized compensation cost as of the date of the cancellation of the awards.

In December 2008, the Company filed a tender offer option exchange program under which outstanding employee stock options (other than options held by executive officers) with exercise prices of $12.00 or greater per share could be exchanged for a specified number of restricted stock units based on a predetermined exchange ratio granted with a new vesting period. If the number of restricted stock units to be granted was less than 150 shares, then employees received cash instead of restricted stock units. On January 23, 2009, the Company accepted for cancellation options to purchase 31.1 million common shares and in exchange granted to eligible employees restricted stock units to purchase 3.4 million shares of the Company’s common shares. As a result of the exchange, the Company recorded stock-based compensation expense of $5.1 million in fiscal 2009 under the provisions of stock-based compensation authoritative literature, primarily related to employees who received cash in lieu of replacement restricted stock units.

In November 2007, the Company filed a tender offer to correct the misdated stock options. The tender offer permitted the Company to give employees the opportunity to correct the §409A United States tax issues with the stock options and therefore exercise stock options without incurring a penalty tax. The tender offer amended certain outstanding options and provided restricted stock unit grants and/or cash payments as set forth under the Offer to Amend the Exercise Price of Certain Options to employees with misdated options. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008, the tender offer was completed and stock compensation expense of $5.2 million was recorded in connection with the granting of restricted stock to compensate employees for the increase in the exercise price in correcting the misdated options.

As a result of the Company’s acquisitions, the Company assumed stock options previously granted by the acquired companies. As of January 30, 2010, a total of 747,446 common shares were reserved for issuance upon exercise of outstanding options assumed from the acquisitions. The related options are included in the preceding tables. The options vest over four to five years and have eight to ten year terms.

Income Taxes:

12 Months Ended

Jan. 30, 2010

Statement [Line Items]

Income Taxes:

Note 11 — Income Taxes:

The U.S. and non-U.S. components of income before income taxes are (in thousands):


	Year Ended
	January 30, 2010		January 31, 2009		February 2, 2008
U.S. operations	$	12,714	$	13,783	$	21,998
Non-U.S. operations		330,396		157,050		(139,986	)

	$	343,110	$	170,833	$	(117,988	)

The provision for income taxes consists of the following (in thousands):


	Year Ended
	January 30, 2010			January 31, 2009			February 2, 2008
Current income tax expense (benefit):
Federal	$	(35,778	)	$	4,231		$	9,832
State		576			1,606			321
Foreign		11,500			35,222			69

Total current income tax expense		(23,702	)		41,059			10,222

Deferred income tax expense (benefit):
Federal		(254	)		3,793			(2,135	)
State		(556	)		(523	)		(758	)
Foreign		14,166			(20,738	)		(10,890	)

Total deferred income tax expense (benefit)		13,356			(17,468	)		(13,783	)

Total provision (benefit) for income taxes	$	(10,346	)	$	23,591		$	(3,561	)

Deferred tax assets (liabilities) consist of the following (in thousands):


	January 30, 2010			January 31, 2009
Deferred tax assets:
Federal and California research and other tax credits	$	195,156		$	131,558
Reserves and accruals		26,895			30,434
Stock compensation		2,905			4,195
Net operating losses		19,738			24,984

Gross deferred tax assets		244,694			191,171
Valuation allowance		(197,710	)		(134,576	)

Total deferred tax assets		46,984			56,595
Total deferred tax liabilities		(4,381	)		(637	)

Net deferred tax assets	$	42,603		$	55,958

The non-current portion of the deferred tax assets as of January 30, 2010, and January 31, 2009 is $34.6 million and $41.6 million, respectively, and are included with the Other Noncurrent Assets.

As of January 30, 2010, the Company had net operating loss carryforwards available to offset future taxable income of approximately $96.0 million, $3.0 million and $4.1 million for foreign, U.S. federal and state of California purposes, respectively. The federal carryforwards will expire in various fiscal years between 2011 and 2023, and the California carryforwards will expire at various fiscal years between 2013 and 2020, if not utilized before these years. The foreign losses can be carried forward indefinitely. The Company had, for U.S. federal income tax return purposes, research tax credit carryforwards of approximately $130.4 million that expire through fiscal 2030. As of January 30, 2010, the Company had unused California research and tax credit carryforwards of approximately $126.8 million which will carryforward indefinitely. Included in the U.S. federal and California carryforward amounts are $36.3 million and $35.9 million, respectively, that are attributable to excess tax benefits from stock options. Upon realization, the benefit associated with these credits will increase additional paid-in capital. The Company also has unused research tax credits and investment tax credit carryforwards of approximately $10.2 million in other states that expire through fiscal 2025.

During fiscal 2010, the Company generated research credits for federal and other states far in excess of its current year tax liabilities. Based on the available objective positive and negative evidence, the Company has determined that it is more likely than not the federal and California research credits and certain acquired net operating losses will not be realized and therefore the Company has provided a full valuation allowance against these benefits. Because it is not clear whether any of the research credit carryforward of $257.2 million will ever be used, the Company estimates that the entire amount will go unused. Therefore, the Company increased the valuation allowance by $63.1 million from fiscal 2009 all of which is related to research credits. During fiscal 2010, deferred tax assets, net of a corresponding valuation allowance decreased $13.3 million from the end of fiscal 2009, of which $5.4 million relates to a net decrease in foreign net operating losses and the remaining balance of $7.9 million relates to changes other deferred tax assets.

Reconciliation of the statutory federal income tax to the Company’s effective tax:


	Year Ended
	January 30,		January 31,		February 2,
	2010		2009		2008
Provision at U.S. notional statutory rate	35.0	%	35.0	%	(35.0	)%
Non-deductible stock-based compensation	13.3		36.9		69.5
Non-deductible officers’ compensation	0.5		0.0		1.0
Difference in U.S. and non-U.S. tax rates	(41.2	)	(59.8	)	(34.8	)
State taxes, net of federal benefit	(0.1	)	0.6		(0.1	)
Generation of general business credits	(20.3	)	(15.4	)	(22.3	)
Valuation allowance, net of credit utilization	18.4		13.9		18.1
Reserve	(9.2	)	—		—
Other	0.6		2.6		0.6

Effective tax rate	(3.0	)%	13.8	%	(3.0	)%

Uncertain Tax Positions

Effective January 28, 2007, the Company adopted the provisions of ASC 740-10-05, “Income Taxes” (“ASC 740-10-05”). ASC 740-10-05 clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements and prescribes a recognition threshold of more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon examination. Upon adoption of ASC 740-10-05, the Company’s policy to include interest and penalties related to gross unrecognized tax benefits within the Company’s provision for income taxes did not change.

The following table reflects changes in the unrecognized tax benefits (in thousands):


	Year Ended
	January 30, 2010			January 31, 2009			February 2, 2008
Unrecognized tax benefits as the beginning of the period	$	115,295		$	109,819		$	100,807
Increases related to prior year tax positions		—			3,733			—
Decreases related to prior year tax positions		(3,226	)		—			—
Increases related to current year tax positions		9,970			16,997			12,948
Settlements		(2,191	)		—			—
Lapse in the statute of limitations		(22,682	)		(1,407	)		(13,680	)
Foreign exchange (gain) loss		6,168			(13,847	)		9,744

Gross amounts of unrecognized tax benefits as of the end of the period	$	103,333		$	115,295		$	109,819

Included in the balances as of January 30, 2010 is $92.0 million of unrecognized tax benefit that would affect the effective income tax rate if recognized.

The amount of interest and penalties accrued as of January 30, 2010 was approximately $22.2 million and $7.7 million, as of January 31, 2009, approximately $22.6 million and $10.8 million and as of February 2, 2008, approximately $14.7 million and $9.2 million.

The Company is subject to income tax audits by the respective tax authorities in all of the jurisdictions in which it operates. The examination of tax liabilities in each of these jurisdictions requires the interpretation and application of complex and sometimes uncertain tax laws and regulations. The Company recognizes liabilities for uncertain tax positions based on the provisions of ASC 740-10-05. The material jurisdictions that are subject to potential examination by tax authorities for tax years after fiscal 2002 throughout the world, include such major jurisdictions as China, Israel, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States.

During fiscal 2011, the Company will continue to review its tax positions and provide for or reverse unrecognized tax benefits as issues arise. At this time, the Company expects a decrease of $14.7 million of unrecognized tax benefits during fiscal 2011 due to the expiration of the statute of limitations over the next 12 months.

As a multinational corporation, the Company conducts its business in many countries and is subject to taxation in many jurisdictions. The taxation of the Company’s business is subject to the application of multiple and sometimes conflicting tax laws and regulations as well as multinational tax conventions. The application of tax laws and regulations is subject to legal and factual interpretation, judgment and uncertainty. Tax laws themselves are subject to change as a result of changes in fiscal policy, changes in legislation, evolution of regulation and court rulings. Consequently, taxing authorities may impose tax assessments or judgments against the Company that could materially impact its tax liability and/or its effective income tax rate. During fiscal 2011, the Company will continue to accrue for unrecognized tax benefits and will reduce reserves due to the lapse of statute of limitations or settlement of audits.

The Economic Development Board of Singapore granted Pioneer Status to the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary in Singapore in July 1999. Initially this tax exemption was to expire after ten years, but the Economic Development Board in June 2006 agreed to extend the term to 15 years through 2014. Fiscal 2010 and 2009 tax savings associated with this tax holiday are approximately $5.8 million and $7.9 million, respectively, which if paid would impact the Company’s earnings per share result by less than $0.01 and $0.01 per share, respectively. In light of the current economic downturn, the Company has agreed with the Economic Development Board of Singapore to amend part of the Pioneer Status conditions for the future years. The Company will receive the official certificates which will preserve the 15 year tax exemption status and the final amendments from the Economic Development Board of Singapore within fiscal 2011.

Under the Israeli law of “approved or benefited enterprise,” two branches, Marvell Israel (“MISL”) and Marvell DSPC, are entitled to a beneficial tax program that includes reduced tax rates and exemption of certain income. The first program was approved for MISL in 1995 and the most recent was approved in 2006. Marvell DSPC has five approved programs with the first approved in 1990 and the most recent in 2007.

The benefit period is generally ten to fifteen years and begins in the first year in which our Israeli branches earn taxable income from the approved or benefited enterprises provided the maximum period has not elapsed. Income from the approved or benefited enterprises is subject to reduced tax rates ranging between 0% and 10% or tax exemptions for fiscal years 2008 through 2020. For fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2009, the benefit associated with these approved enterprise programs was $18.0 million, which provided earnings per share benefit of less than $0.03, and $4.5 million, which provided earnings per share benefit of $0.01, respectively.

During fiscal 2007, the Swiss Federal Department of Economy and the Vaud Cantonal Tax Administration each granted Marvell Switzerland Sarl a total of a ten year tax holiday commencing with its fiscal year beginning January 29, 2006. The fiscal 2010 and 2009 tax savings associated with this tax holiday is approximately $3.7 million and $5.1 million, respectively, which provided an earnings per share benefit of less than $0.01 and $0.01, respectively.

Commitments and Contingencies:

12 Months Ended

Jan. 30, 2010

Statement [Line Items]

Commitments and Contingencies:

Note 13 — Commitments and Contingencies:

Warranty Obligations

The Company’s products typically carry a standard 90 day warranty with certain exceptions in which the warranty period can range from one to five years based on contractual agreements. The following table presents changes in the warranty accrual included in accrued liabilities in the Company’s consolidated balance sheet during fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively (in thousands):


	Years Ended
	January 30, 2010			January 31, 2009			February 2, 2008
Beginning balance	$	2,093		$	2,532		$	2,567
Warranties issued		3,108			876			1,493
Settlements		(3,236	)		(1,315	)		(1,528	)

Ending balance	$	1,965		$	2,093		$	2,532

Lease Commitments

The Company leases some of its facilities under non-cancelable operating leases and leases certain property and equipment under capital leases. Future minimum lease payments, net of estimated sublease income under the operating and capital leases as of January 30, 2010, are presented in the following table (in thousands):


Fiscal Year:	Operating Leases		Estimated Sublease Income			Net Operating Leases		Capital Leases
2011		35,133		(330	)		34,803		2,085
2012		22,941					22,941		521
2013		16,886					16,886
2014		3,002					3,002
2015		1,880					1,880
Thereafter		7,840					7,840

Total future minimum lease payments	$	87,682	$	(330	)	$	87,352	$	2,606

Less: amount representing interest									(155	)

Present value of future minimum lease payments									2,451
Less: current portion of lease obligations									(1,940	)

Long-term lease obligations								$	511

Rent expense, net of sublease income on the operating leases for fiscal 2010, 2009, and 2008 was approximately $18.5 million, $21.1 million and $18.0 million, respectively.

Included in operating lease commitments are lease payments for computer aided software license agreements and airplane lease commitments.

Purchase Commitments

Under the Company’s manufacturing relationships with all other foundries, cancellation of all outstanding purchase orders are allowed but require repayment of all expenses incurred through the date of cancellation. As of January 30, 2010, these foundries had incurred approximately $186.6 million of manufacturing expenses on the Company’s outstanding purchase orders.

On February 28, 2005 and as amended on March 31, 2005, the Company entered into an agreement with a foundry to reserve and secure foundry fabrication capacity for a fixed number of wafers at agreed upon prices for a period of five and a half years beginning on October 1, 2005. In return, the Company agreed to pay the foundry $174.2 million over a period of eighteen months. The amendment extends the term of the agreement and the agreed upon pricing terms. As of January 30, 2010, all payments (included in prepaid expenses and other current assets and other noncurrent assets) had been made and approximately $160.2 million of the prepayment had been utilized. At January 30, 2010, there were no outstanding commitments under the agreement.

Intellectual Property Indemnification

The Company has agreed to indemnify certain customers for claims made against the Company’s products, where such claims allege infringement of third party intellectual property rights, including, but not limited to, patents, registered trademarks, and/or copyrights. Under the aforementioned indemnification clauses, the Company may be obligated to defend the customer and pay for the damages awarded against the customer under an infringement claim as well as the customer’s attorneys’ fees and costs. The Company’s indemnification obligations generally do not expire after termination or expiration of the agreement containing the indemnification obligation. In certain cases, there are limits on and exceptions to the Company’s potential liability for indemnification. Although historically the Company has not made significant payments under these indemnification obligations, the Company cannot estimate the amount of potential future payments, if any, that it might be required to make as a result of these agreements. The maximum potential amount of any future payments that the Company could be required to make under these indemnification obligations could be significant.

As of January 30, 2010, the Company had approximately $26.7 million of other outstanding non-cancelable purchase orders for capital purchase obligations.

Contingencies

IPO Securities Litigation. On July 31, 2001, a putative class action suit was filed against two investment banks that participated in the underwriting of the Company’s initial public offering (the “IPO”) on June 29, 2000. That lawsuit, which did not name the Company or any of its officers or directors as defendants, was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs allege that the underwriters received “excessive” and undisclosed commissions and entered into unlawful “tie-in” agreements with certain of their clients in violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Thereafter, on September 5, 2001, a second putative class action was filed in the Southern District of New York relating to the Company’s IPO. In this second action, plaintiffs named three underwriters as defendants and also named as defendants the Company and two of its officers, one of whom is also a director. Relying on many of the same allegations contained in the initial complaint, plaintiffs allege that the defendants violated various provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Exchange Act. In both actions, plaintiffs seek, among other items, unspecified damages, pre-judgment interest and reimbursement of attorneys’ and experts’ fees. These two actions have been consolidated and coordinated with hundreds of other lawsuits filed by plaintiffs against approximately 40 underwriters and approximately 300 issuers across the United States. Defendants in the coordinated proceedings moved to dismiss the actions. In February 2003, the trial court granted the motions in part and denied them in part, thus allowing the case to proceed against the Company and the underwriters. Claims against the individual officers have been voluntarily dismissed with prejudice by agreement with plaintiffs. In June 2004, a stipulation of settlement and release of claims against the issuer defendants, including the Company, was submitted to the Court for approval. On August 31, 2005, the Court preliminarily approved the settlement. In December 2006, the appellate court overturned the certification of classes in the six focus cases that were selected by the underwriter defendants and plaintiffs in the coordinated proceedings (the action involving the Company is not one of the six cases). Because class certification was a condition of the settlement, it was unlikely that the settlement would receive final Court approval. On June 25, 2007, the Court entered an order terminating the proposed settlement based upon a stipulation among the parties to the settlement. Plaintiffs filed amended master allegations and amended complaints in the six focus cases. Defendants’ motions to dismiss those new complaints were denied in part and granted in part.

The parties have reached a global settlement of the coordinated litigation. Under the settlement, the insurers will pay the full amount of settlement share allocated to the Company, and the Company will bear no financial liability. The Company, as well as the officer and director defendants who were previously dismissed from the action pursuant to tolling agreements, will receive complete dismissals from the case. On October 5, 2009, the Court issued an order of final approval of the settlement. Certain objectors have appealed the Court’s October 5, 2009 final order to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. If for any reason the settlement does not become effective, the Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the claims against it and intends to defend the action vigorously.

Section 16(b) Litigation. On October 9, 2007, a purported shareholder of the Company filed a complaint for violation of Section 16(b) of the Exchange Act, which prohibits short swing trading, against the Company’s IPO underwriters. The complaint Vanessa Simmonds v. The Goldman Sachs Group, et al., Case No. C07-1632 filed in District Court for the Western District of Washington, seeks the recovery of short-swing profits. The Company is named as a nominal defendant. No recovery is sought from the Company. Numerous similar suits were filed by the same plaintiff against other underwriters relating to other issuers. The underwriter defendants and some of the issuer defendants (excluding the Company) filed a motion to dismiss, and on March 12, 2009, the district court ordered dismissal of all claims against the moving issuer defendants without prejudice. The court also ordered dismissal of all claims against the underwriter defendants with prejudice. On April 10, 2009, the plaintiffs filed their notice of appeal to those dismissal orders. In accordance with the briefing schedule set by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on August 18, 2009, plaintiff filed her opening brief on August 26, 2009. On October 2, 2009, the underwriter defendants/appellees/cross-appellants filed their answering brief, and the moving issuers/appellees filed their principal brief as well. Plaintiff/appellant/cross-appellee filed her response and reply briefs on November 2, 2009. The underwriter defendants/appellees/cross-appellants filed their reply brief on November 17, 2009. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has not set a hearing date. No discovery has taken place.

Jasmine Networks Litigation. On September 12, 2001, Jasmine Networks, Inc. (“Jasmine”) filed a lawsuit in the Santa Clara County Superior Court alleging claims against the Company and three of its officers for allegedly improperly obtaining and using information and technologies during the course of the negotiations with its personnel regarding the potential acquisition of certain Jasmine assets by the Company. The lawsuit claims that the Company’s officers used such information and technologies after the Company signed a nondisclosure agreement with Jasmine. The Company believes the claims asserted against its officers and the Company are without merit and the Company intends to defend all claims vigorously.

On June 21, 2005, the Company filed a cross complaint in the above disclosed action in the Santa Clara County Superior Court asserting claims against Jasmine and unnamed Jasmine officers and employees. The cross complaint was later amended to name two individual officers of Jasmine and a second amended cross complaint was filed in May 2007 adding additional causes of action for declaratory relief against Jasmine. The second amended cross complaint alleges that Jasmine and its personnel engaged in fraud in connection with their effort to sell the Company technology that Jasmine and its personnel wrongfully obtained from a third party in violation of such third party’s rights, and that such technology does not constitute trade secrets or property of Jasmine. The cross complaint seeks a declaratory judgment that the Company’s technology does not incorporate any of Jasmine’s alleged technology. The cross complaint seeks further a declaratory judgment that Jasmine and its personnel misappropriated certain aspects of Jasmine’s allegedly proprietary technology. The Company defeated Jasmine’s demurrer to certain of the causes of action in the cross complaint and Jasmine filed its answer. The Company thereafter filed its motion for summary adjudication on its fifth and sixth causes of action for declaratory relief seeking, among other things, a determination that Jasmine held no proprietary interest in the “JSLIP” algorithm, which was one of the core technologies Jasmine asserts was misappropriated by the Company. The motion was denied on November 14, 2007. However, in its opposition, Jasmine admitted that JSLIP had been taken from the work of a third party and is embodied in patents held by the University of California and Cisco Systems. These admissions are significant with respect to both Jasmine’s assertion of trade secret rights and any damages claimed by Jasmine.

In addition, on December 28, 2001 and January 7, 2002, the trial court issued a preliminary injunction precluding Jasmine from using, disclosing or disseminating the contents of a privileged communication between certain officers of the Company and its counsel. The order granting injunctive relief was reversed by the California Court of Appeal, but review was granted by the California Supreme Court on a “grant and hold” basis pending the Court’s decision on a case involving closely related issues, Rico v. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 51. The effect of the California Supreme Court’s grant of review was to depublish the Court of Appeal’s decision. On December 13, 2007, the California Supreme Court ruled in the Rico v. Mitsubishi case in a manner consistent with the position asserted by the Company that attorney work product and attorney-client privileges are not waived by inadvertent disclosure of a privileged communication, and that any party receiving such information (i) is required to notify opposing counsel immediately; and (ii) may not read such document more closely than is necessary to determine it is privileged. Rico v. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. (2007) 42 Cal.4^th 807. Following its decision in Rico v. Mitsubishi, on April 23, 2008, the California Supreme Court issued an order dismissing the Company’s petition for review. As a result the decision of the Court of Appeal, which remains unpublished, became final.

The case then proceeded in the trial court. On January 13, 2009, the Court granted a motion disqualifying the Company’s counsel and the Company engaged new counsel. The trial date was continued from March 2, 2009 to May 4, 2009. The claims against the three Company officers were dropped. The parties engaged in extensive discovery. Motions for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication filed by the parties were heard on February 3, 2009 and were all denied except for Jasmine’s motions directed to the Company’s declaratory judgment claims, which were granted. On June 3, 2009, the Court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss Jasmine’s Second Amended Complaint in its entirety with prejudice, for lack of standing. On December 29, 2009, the Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District reversed that dismissal with directions to proceed in the trial court. On February 10, 2010, the California Supreme Court declined to review that decision. The first status conference in the trial is set for April 22, 2010. A new trial date has not been set.

CSIRO Litigation. As of January 2007, Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (“CSIRO”) has been and continues to be involved in several patent litigations in the Eastern District of Texas, in which it has accused a number of wireless LAN system manufacturers, including some of the Company’s customers, of infringing CSIRO’s patent, U.S. Patent No. 5,487,069 (the “069 Patent”). CSIRO’s claims of infringement relate to wireless standards known as IEEE 802.11a, 802.11g and 802.11n. As a result of CSIRO’s claims for patent infringement, a number of the Company’s customers have sought or may in the future seek, indemnification from the Company. In response to these demands for indemnification, the Company has acknowledged certain of the demands and incurred costs in response to them.

On May 4, 2007, Marvell Semiconductor, Inc., (“MSI”), Marvell Asia Pte., Ltd. (“MAPL”), and Marvell International Ltd. (“MIL”) (collectively, the “Company’s Subsidiaries”) filed an action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (the “Marvell CSIRO Litigation”) seeking a declaratory judgment against CSIRO that the ‘069 Patent is invalid and unenforceable and that the Company’s Subsidiaries and the Company’s customers do not infringe the ‘069 Patent. The complaint also seeks damages and a license that also covers the Company’s customers on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms in the event the Company’s 802.11a/g/n wireless LAN products are found to infringe and the ‘069 Patent is found to be valid and enforceable.

On December 5, 2007, CSIRO filed its answer to the complaint filed by the Company’s Subsidiaries, as well as counterclaims for willful and deliberate infringement of the ‘069 Patent. CSIRO’s counterclaims included a claim for monetary damages, including treble damages based on its allegation of willful and deliberate infringement, attorneys’ fees and injunctive relief. On April 10, 2008, the Company’s Subsidiaries filed a First Amended Complaint and First Amended Reply to CSIRO’s Answer and Counterclaims. On April 23, 2008, CSIRO filed its Answer and Counterclaims to the First Amended Complaint. On May 12, 2008, the Company’s Subsidiaries filed a Reply and Affirmative Defenses to CSIRO’s amended counterclaims.

On May 22, 2008, the Company’s Subsidiaries filed a motion for summary judgment seeking to invalidate the ‘069 Patent on indefiniteness grounds. The motion was denied on August 14, 2008. The claim construction hearing was held on June 26, 2008 and the claim construction order was issued on August 14, 2008. On September 25, 2009, the Company’s Subsidiaries filed a motion to stay pending reexamination of the ‘069 Patent. The motion was denied on December 16, 2009. On December 23, 2009, the Company’s Subsidiaries filed two motions for summary judgment. In one, the Company’s Subsidiaries moved that the Company’s Subsidiaries did not willfully infringe the ‘069 Patent. In the other, the Company’s Subsidiaries moved to establish the U.S. filing date as the priority date of the ‘069 Patent. Also, on December 23, 2009, CSIRO filed two motions for summary judgment. In one of its motions, CSIRO moved that the Company’s customers directly infringe claim 42 of the ‘069 Patent and that the Company’s Subsidiaries cannot show reliance on CSIRO’s letter of assurance that it would license the ‘069 Patent on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and therefore cannot sustain its third through sixth causes of action. The issues have been fully briefed. The trial for the Marvell CSIRO Litigation is scheduled to commence on May 10, 2010. The Company’s Subsidiaries believe that they do not infringe any valid and enforceable claims of the ‘069 Patent and intend to litigate this action vigorously.

Shareholder Derivative Litigation. Between June 22, 2006 and August 2, 2006, three purported shareholder derivative actions were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Each of these lawsuits named the Company as a nominal defendant and a number of the Company’s current and former directors and officers as defendants. Each lawsuit sought to recover damages purportedly sustained by the Company in connection with its option granting processes, and sought certain corporate governance and internal control changes. Pursuant to orders of the court dated August 17, 2006 and October 17, 2006, the three actions were consolidated as a single action, entitled In re Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Derivative Litigation. The plaintiffs filed an amended and consolidated complaint on November 1, 2006. On or about March 5, 2008, the parties entered into a memorandum of understanding to resolve the lawsuit, and, on March 20, 2009, the parties submitted formal settlement documentation to the Court seeking preliminary and thereafter final approval of the settlement. The terms of the settlement included certain corporate governance enhancements and an agreement by the Company to pay up to $16 million in plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees. The Company accrued the $16 million settlement amount in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008. On March 20, 2009, the parties submitted formal settlement documentation to the Court seeking preliminary and thereafter final approval for the settlement. After a hearing held on May 8, 2009, the Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement by written order on May 21, 2009. The hearing for the final court approval was held on July 17, 2009, and the Court granted final approval of the settlement by written order on August 12, 2009, and the settlement amount was paid shortly thereafter.

Class Action Securities Litigation. Between October 5, 2006 and November 13, 2006, four putative class actions were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against the Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors. The complaints allege that the Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors violated the federal securities laws by making false and misleading statements and omissions relating to the grants of stock options. On February 2, 2007, these four putative class actions were consolidated as a single action entitled In re Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Securities Litigation. On August 16, 2007, plaintiffs filed a consolidated class action complaint. The consolidated complaint seeks, on behalf of persons who purchased the Company’s common shares during the period from February 27, 2003 to October 2, 2006, inclusive, unspecified damages, interest, costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees and disbursements. The Company filed its answer to the complaint on January 12, 2009. On June 9, 2009, the parties entered into a stipulation of settlement to resolve the lawsuit. The settlement provides for a payment by the Company to the class of $72 million. On July 31, 2009, the Court granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement. On November 6, 2009, the Court held a hearing to consider whether to grant final approval of the settlement. The hearing for the final Court approval was held on November 6, 2009, and the Court granted final approval of the settlement by written order on November 13, 2009. The Company accrued $72 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2010 and paid the amount into escrow in August 2009.

Wi-LAN Litigation. On December 21, 2006, MSI received a letter from Wi-LAN, Inc. (“Wi-LAN”) accusing MSI of infringing five United States patents and one Canadian patent allegedly owned by Wi-LAN. On October 31, 2007, Wi-LAN sued two groups of system and chip manufacturers in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, in both cases naming MSI as a defendant and alleging patent infringement. The complaints seek unspecified damages and an injunction. In the first case, Wi-LAN alleges that defendants infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 5,282,222 and RE 37,802 (“the ‘222 and ‘802 patents”) that allegedly relate to the 802.11 wireless standards. In the second case, Wi-LAN alleges that defendants infringe the same ‘222 and ‘802 patents, and in addition Wi-LAN alleges that some of the defendants in the second case infringe a third patent that allegedly relates to Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (“ADSL”) technology. In the second case, MSI is not accused of infringing the ADSL patent.

On September 10, 2008, the Court granted the defendant’s motion to consolidate both actions but denied as premature having the defendant suppliers’ case proceed first. On February 3, 2009, the Court granted Wi-LAN’s motion to add an additional patent, U.S. Patent No. 6,549,759 (the “‘759 Patent”). The Claim Construction Hearing was held on March 11, 2010, for the ‘222 and ‘802 patents, and is scheduled for September 1, 2010, for the ‘759 Patent, and the trial for all three patents is set to begin on January 4, 2011. MSI believes it does not infringe any valid and enforceable claims of the asserted Wi-LAN patents and will vigorously defend itself in these matters.

Carnegie Mellon Litigation. On March 6, 2009, Carnegie Mellon University (“CMU”) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania naming MSI and the Company as defendants and alleging patent infringement. CMU has asserted two patents (U.S. Patent Nos. 6,201,839 and 6,438,180) purportedly relating to read-channel integrated circuit devices and the hard disk drive products incorporating such devices. The complaint seeks unspecified damages and an injunction. On June 1, 2009, MSI and the Company filed their answers and MSI filed counterclaims to the complaint seeking declaratory judgments of non-infringement and invalidity as to both of the asserted patents. The Court has scheduled a claim construction hearing for April 12, 2010. The Court has not yet scheduled a trial date. MSI and the Company believe that they do not infringe any valid and enforceable claims of the asserted CMU patents and intend to contest this action vigorously.

PACid Patent Litigation. On March 30, 2009, The PACid Group, LLC filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, case no. 6:09-cv-00143 LED, which named MSI, Marvell Technology, Inc. (“MTI”), Marvell Semiconductor, Ltd. (“MSL”), the Company and 15 other companies as defendants. The complaint alleged infringement of two patents purportedly relating to encryption: U.S. Patent Nos. 5,963,646 and 6,049,612. The complaint seeks unspecified damages and an injunction. On May 22, 2009, MSI filed its answer and counterclaims to the complaint. On June 1, 2009, MTI, MSL and the Company were dismissed without prejudice. MSI believes that it does not infringe any valid and enforceable claims of the asserted PACid patents and intends to contest this action vigorously. The Court has scheduled a claim construction hearing for March 25, 2010 and has scheduled trial for February 14, 2011.

Xpoint Patent Litigation. On August 21, 2009, Xpoint Technologies, Inc. filed a complaint in the United States District of Delaware, which names the Company, MSI and thirty-six other companies as defendants. The complaint alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,913,028 which purportedly relates to data traffic delivery. The complaint seeks unspecified damages and an injunction. On September 18, 2009 an amended complaint was filed. On October 28, 2009, the Company was dismissed from the lawsuit, although MSI remains a defendant. An answer to the complaint is due December 18, 2009 was filed on December 18, 2009 asserting multiple defenses and counterclaims. The Court has scheduled a claim construction hearing for January 13, 2012, and trial for May 7, 2012. MSI intends to contest this action vigorously. Because this action is in the early stages, the Company is unable to predict the outcome of this litigation at this time.

General. The Company is also party to other legal proceedings and claims arising in the normal course of business. The legal proceedings and claims described above could result in substantial costs and could divert the attention and resources of the Company’s management. Although the legal responsibility and financial impact with respect to these proceedings and claims cannot currently be ascertained, an unfavorable outcome in such actions could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s cash flows. Litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties and unfavorable rulings could occur. An unfavorable ruling in litigation could require the Company to pay damages or one-time license fees or royalty payments, which could adversely impact gross margins in future periods, or could prevent the Company from manufacturing or selling some of its products or limit or restrict the type of work that employees involved in such litigation may perform for the Company. There can be no assurance that these matters will be resolved in a manner that is not adverse to the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Indemnities, Commitments and Guarantees

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 indemnities include intellectual property indemnities to the Company’s customers in connection with the sales of its products, indemnities for liabilities associated with the infringement of other parties’ technology based upon the Company’s products, indemnities to various lessors in connection with facility leases for certain claims arising from such facility or lease, and indemnities to directors and officers of the Company to the maximum extent permitted under the laws of Bermuda. In addition, the Company has contractual commitments to various customers, which could require the Company to incur costs to repair an epidemic defect with respect to its products outside of the normal warranty period if such defect were to occur. The duration of these indemnities, commitments and guarantees varies, and in certain cases, is indefinite. The majority of these indemnities, commitments and guarantees do not provide for any limitation of the maximum potential future payments that the Company could be obligated to make. The Company has not recorded any liability for these indemnities, commitments and guarantees in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Company does, however, accrue for losses for any known contingent liability, including those that may arise from indemnification provisions, when future payment is probable.

Related Party Transactions:

12 Months Ended

Jan. 30, 2010

Statement [Line Items]

Related Party Transactions:

Note 15 — Related Party Transactions:

In August, 2005, through its subsidiaries MSI and MIL, the Company entered into a License and Manufacturing Services Agreement with C2 Microsystems, Inc. (“C2Micro License Agreement”). The C2Micro License Agreement has substantially similar terms as other license and manufacturing services agreements of the Company with other third parties for similar technology. The Company recognized $2.1 million and $2.6 million of revenue under the C2Micro License Agreement during fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2009, respectively. Dr. Sehat Sutardja, the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, and Weili Dai, the Vice President of Sales for Communications and Consumer Business of MSI and Vice President and General Manager of Communications and Computing Business Unit of MSI, through their ownership and control of Estopia LLC, are indirect shareholders of C2 Microsystems. Dr. Sehat Sutardja and Weili Dai are husband and wife. Kuo Wei (Herbert) Chang, a member of our Board of Directors, is also an indirect shareholder of C2 Microsystems as a partner of entities who have invested in C2 Microsystems. Dr. Pantas Sutardja, the Company’s Vice President, Chief Technology Officer and Chief Research and Development Officer, is also a shareholder of C2 Microsystems.

In January 2007, the Company, through MIL, entered into a Library/IP/Software Evaluation License Agreement (the “Evaluation License Agreement”) with VeriSilicon Holdings Co., Ltd. (“VeriSilicon”). The Evaluation License Agreement has no consideration. The Company incurred $6,000 and $200,000 of royalty expense from VeriSilicon under a core license agreement assumed from its acquisition of the UTStarcom Business during fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2009, respectively. This core license agreement had been assumed by VeriSilicon after its acquisition of certain assets from LSI Corporation. In March 2009, the Company entered into an addendum to this core license agreement with VeriSilicon. The Company recorded a license fee of $0.5 million and maintenance fees of $80,000. In June 2009, the Company entered into a second addendum to this technology license agreement with VeriSilicon for VeriSilicon to perform services for a fee of $40,000. In December 2009, the Company entered into a third addendum to this technology agreement with Verisilicon to license additional technology for a license fee of $275,000 with an annual support fee of $47,500. Weili Dai’s brother (and Dr. Sehat Sutardja’s brother-in-law) is the Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of VeriSilicon. Ms. Dai is also a shareholder of VeriSilicon.

In October 2007, the Company entered into a License Agreement with Vivante Corporation (the “Vivante Agreement”). The Vivante Agreement has substantially similar terms as the Company would expect to obtain for license agreements with other third parties for similar technology. In August 2008, the Company entered into a Technology License Agreement with Vivante. This Technology License Agreement, as amended, also has substantially similar terms as the Company would expect to obtain for license agreements with other third parties for similar technology. The Company recorded $2.0 million for the license fee and $200,000 of maintenance during fiscal 2009 in connection with this Technology License Agreement. In January 2009, the Company entered into an agreement with Vivante to disclose certain cell libraries to Vivante at no additional cost. In April 2009, the Company entered into an amendment to the Technology License Agreement with Vivante. The Company recorded $1.0 million for the license fee and $70,000 of maintenance during the three months ended May 2, 2009 in connection with the amendment to the Technology License Agreement. In June 2009, the Company entered into the second amendment to the Technology License Agreement with Vivante. The Company recorded $500,000 for the license fee and $50,000 of maintenance during the three months ended August 1, 2009. In December 2009, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Technology License Agreement with Vivante for additional license technology and recorded $12.0 million for the license fee and $350,000 of maintenance. Dr. Sehat Sutardja and Weili Dai, through their ownership and control of Estopia LLC, are indirect shareholders of Vivante. In addition, Dr. Sehat Sutardja is also a direct shareholder and Chairman of the board of directors of Vivante. Weili Dai’s brother (and Dr. Sehat Sutardja’s brother-in-law) is the Chief Executive Officer of Vivante. Kuo Wei (Herbert) Chang, a member of the Company’s Board of Directors, is also an indirect shareholder of Vivante as a partner of entities who have invested in Vivante.

Supplementary Data (Unaudited)

The following table presents the unaudited consolidated statements of operations data for each of the eight quarters in the period ended January 30, 2010. In management’s opinion, this information has been presented on the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements included in a separate section of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and all necessary adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, have been included in the amounts below to fairly state the unaudited quarterly results when read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes. The operating results for any period should not be considered indicative of results to be expected in any future period. The Company expects the quarterly operating results to fluctuate in future periods due to a variety of reasons, including those discussed in Part I, Item 1A “Risk Factors.”


	Fiscal 2010
	First Quarter			Second Quarter		Third Quarter		Fourth Quarter
	(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Net revenue	$	521,434		$	640,620	$	803,098	$	842,535
Gross profit	$	263,804			352,561		461,481		502,745
Net income (loss) (1)		(111,457	)		58,493		201,599		204,821
Net income (loss) per share:
Basic	$	(0.18	)	$	0.09	$	0.32	$	0.33
Diluted	$	(0.18	)	$	0.09	$	0.31	$	0.31

	Fiscal 2009
	First Quarter			Second Quarter		Third Quarter		Fourth Quarter
	(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Net revenue	$	804,075		$	842,575	$	791,046	$	512,867
Gross profit	$	415,233			436,662		411,909		260,135
Net income (loss) (2)		69,939			71,367		70,946		(65,010	)
Net income (loss) per share:
Basic	$	0.12		$	0.12	$	0.12	$	(0.11	)
Diluted	$	0.11		$	0.11	$	0.11	$	(0.11	)

(1)

Includes a $72.0 million charge in connection with the settlement of the class action litigation in the first quarter of fiscal 2010, net impact of $2.6 million for our payroll related settlement with the IRS related to the Company’s historical stock option granting practices, a $27.4 million benefit as a result of the expiration of the statute of limitations related to a tax contingency reserve, a $5.3 million income tax benefit relating to the correction of taxes payable related to periods in 2002 through 2006 of a non-US entity in the third quarter of fiscal 2010 and a $1.0 million intangible asset write-off in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010.

(2)

Includes $24.5 million payment from the Company’s directors and officers liability insurers in connection with pending securities litigation including the settlement of shareholder derivative litigation settlement in the first quarter of fiscal 2009, $10.0 million settlement with the SEC in connection with the SEC’s investigation into the Company’s historic stock option granting practices in the first quarter of fiscal 2009, $15.6 million intangible asset write-off in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, reversal of $5.3 million of remaining payroll related tax liabilities initially recorded in prior year in connection with the stock option backdating and $14.9 million income tax benefit arising out of a favorable tax ruling in a non-U.S. jurisdiction in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009.

Statement Of Financial Position Classified (Parenthetical) - USD ($) shares in Thousands, $ in Thousands	Jan. 30, 2010	Jan. 31, 2009
Statement [Line Items]
Accounts receivable, allowances	$ 5,912	$ 3,206
Preferred shares, par value	$ 0.002	$ 0.002
Preferred shares, shares authorized	8,000	8,000
Preferred shares, shares issued	0	0
Preferred shares, shares outstanding	0	0
Common shares, par value	$ 0.002	$ 0.002
Common shares, shares authorized	992,000	992,000
Common shares, shares issued	638,341	616,388
Common shares, shares outstanding	638,341	616,388

Business Combinations:	12 Months Ended
Business Combinations:	Jan. 30, 2010
Statement [Line Items]
Business Combinations:	Note 2 — Business Combinations: Fiscal 2009 During fiscal 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of an unrelated private company. The company was acquired for $5.3 million and is engaged in developing Gigabit Passive Optical Networks solutions for telecommunications equipment manufacturers and original device manufacturers. Under the purchase method of accounting, the total purchase price was allocated to net tangible and intangible assets based on their fair values as of the date of the completion of the acquisition. The Company recorded acquired net liabilities of $1.4 million, amortizable intangible assets of $6.2 million and goodwill of $0.5 million. The intangible assets are being amortized over their useful lives. Fiscal 2008 During fiscal 2008, the Company completed the acquisition of two unrelated private companies. One of the companies was acquired for $9.7 million and designed and developed software for optical storage applications. The second company was acquired for $13.4 million and provided IP Multimedia Subsystem middleware and applications for multi-mode cellular mobile devices. Under the purchase method of accounting, the total purchase price was allocated to net tangible and intangible assets based on their fair values as of the date of the completion of the respective acquisitions. The Company recorded acquired net tangible assets of $4.1 million, a deferred tax asset of $0.9 million, a deferred tax liability of $3.8 million, amortizable intangible assets of $9.2 million and goodwill of $12.7 million. The intangible assets are being amortized over their useful lives ranging from one to seven years.

Term Loans:	12 Months Ended
Term Loans:	Jan. 30, 2010
Statement [Line Items]
Term Loans:	Note 9 — Term Loans: In November 2006, the Company borrowed $400.0 million from a group of lenders in the form of term loans to partially finance the acquisition of the ICAP Business. Debt issuance costs of approximately $5.7 million were being amortized to interest expense over the term of the loan through November 9, 2009. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, the Company made a full repayment on the term loans and concurrently wrote-off $2.0 million of remaining unamortized debt issuance costs to interest expense.

Entity Information - USD ($)	12 Months Ended
Entity Information - USD ($)	Jan. 30, 2010	Mar. 15, 2010	Jul. 31, 2009
Statement [Line Items]
Trading Symbol	MRVL
Entity Registrant Name	MARVELL TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD
Entity Central Index Key	0001058057
Current Fiscal Year End Date	--01-30
Entity Well-known Seasoned Issuer	Yes
Entity Current Reporting Status	Yes
Entity Voluntary Filers	No
Entity Filer Category	Large Accelerated Filer
Entity Common Stock, Shares Outstanding		640,025,848
Entity Public Float			$ 4,346,076,405

Document Information	12 Months Ended
Document Information	Jan. 30, 2010
Statement [Line Items]
Document Type	10-K
Amendment Flag	false
Document Period End Date	Jan. 30, 2010