Commitments and Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2025

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Inventory Purchase and Other Contractual Obligations

As of June 30, 2025, future minimum payments under inventory purchase and other obligations are as follows (in thousands):


	Inventory Purchase Obligations		Other Obligations		Total
2025 (6 months)	$	64,250	$	16,878	$	81,128
2026	9,835		21,536		31,371
2027	9,217		5,748		14,965
2028	—		1,110		1,110
2029	—		629		629
Thereafter	—		3,437		3,437
Total minimum payments	$	83,302	$	49,338	$	132,640

Other obligations consist primarily of contractual payments due for software licenses. Total inventory purchase and other contractual obligations increased from $106.5 million as of December 31, 2024 to $132.6 million as of June 30, 2025 driven by increased sales demand, which resulted in incremental purchase orders.

Jointly Funded Research and Development

From time to time, the Company enters into contracts for jointly funded research and development projects to develop technology that may be commercialized into a product in the future and receives payments as milestones under the contracts are met. If the Company is required to repay all or a portion of the funds provided by the other parties under certain conditions, the Company defers such funds in other-long term liabilities. As of June 30, 2025, funds of $15.0 million received from the other parties have been deferred in other long-term liabilities. The Company de-recognizes the liabilities when the contingencies associated with the repayment conditions have been resolved.

During the three and six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, the Company did not recognize income from any previously deferred amounts from other parties upon resolution of such repayment conditions.

Dispute with Silicon Motion

As previously disclosed, on July 26, 2023, MaxLinear terminated the Merger Agreement on multiple grounds (Note 3). On August 16, 2023, Silicon Motion delivered to MaxLinear a notice, which Silicon Motion publicly disclosed, that it was purporting to terminate the Merger Agreement and that Silicon Motion would be commencing an arbitration before the Singapore International Arbitration Centre to seek damages from MaxLinear arising from MaxLinear’s alleged breaches of the Merger Agreement. Silicon Motion’s position is that MaxLinear’s Willful and Material Breaches (as such term is defined in the Merger Agreement) of the Merger Agreement prevented the Merger from being completed by August 7, 2023, and that MaxLinear is consequently liable for substantial monetary damages in excess of the termination fee as provided in the Merger Agreement.

On October 5, 2023, Silicon Motion filed a Notice of Arbitration with the Singapore International Arbitration Centre alleging that MaxLinear breached the Merger Agreement. Silicon Motion seeks payment of the termination fee, additional damages, fees, and costs. The arbitration will be confidential.

MaxLinear believes that it properly terminated the Merger Agreement. MaxLinear remains confident in its decision and will vigorously defend its right to terminate the Silicon Motion transaction without penalty.

Silicon Motion Stockholder Litigation

MaxLinear and certain of its officers have been named as defendants in two lawsuits brought by stockholders of Silicon Motion.

On August 31, 2023, a Silicon Motion stockholder filed a putative class action complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California captioned Water Island Event-Driven Fund v. MaxLinear, Inc., No. 23-cv-01607 (S.D. Cal.), against MaxLinear and certain of its current officers. The complaint included two claims: (1) an alleged violation of

Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder; and (2) an alleged violation of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. On December 20, 2023, the court appointed the lead plaintiffs, who filed the Consolidated Complaint on February 15, 2024. The Consolidated Complaint alleged that the defendants made false and misleading statements and/or omitted material facts that MaxLinear had a duty to disclose, concerning the Company’s intention to close the merger with Silicon Motion. On August 28, 2024, the court granted the defendants a motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue MaxLinear and its officers. The case was dismissed without prejudice.

On September 18, 2024, the plaintiffs filed an Amended Consolidated Complaint, or the Amended Complaint. The Amended Complaint includes the same two claims as alleged in the Consolidated Complaint and makes similar factual allegations against the MaxLinear defendants, but added Silicon Motion and certain of its officers as additional defendants. On July 15, 2025, the court dismissed the Amended Complaint, “with prejudice”. The plaintiffs cannot amend the Amended Complaint.

On June 13, 2024, HBK Master Fund L.P. and HBK Merger Strategies Master Fund L.P., stockholders of Silicon Motion, or collectively, the HBK Plaintiffs, filed an additional complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California captioned HBK Master Fund L.P. v. MaxLinear, Inc., No. 24-cv-01033 (S.D. Cal.), against MaxLinear and certain of its current officers, which also alleges violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, and other violations. The complaint alleges that the defendants concealed their intention to terminate the merger with Silicon Motion from Silicon Motion’s shareholders. The complaint seeks compensatory damages, including interest, costs and expenses, punitive damages, and such other equitable or injunctive relief that the court deems appropriate. On January 2, 2025, the court granted the defendants a motion to dismiss holding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue MaxLinear and its officers. The case was dismissed without prejudice.

On January 17, 2025, the HBK Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, including the same two claims as alleged previously with similar factual allegations. The amended complaint seeks compensatory damages, including interest, costs and expenses, punitive damages, and such other relief that the court deems appropriate. On February 18, 2025, the MaxLinear defendants filed a motion to dismiss this amended complaint. Briefing on the motion is complete and MaxLinear is awaiting a decision by the court. MaxLinear intends to continue to vigorously defend its position.

MaxLinear Stockholder Litigation

On February 12, 2025, the plaintiff, Joshua M. Steffens, brought a shareholder derivative action on behalf of MaxLinear in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, against current and former members of MaxLinear’s Board of Directors and certain of its executive officers. The complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duties and violation of federal securities laws. This is a follow-on derivative lawsuit alleging that the defendants concealed their intention to terminate the merger with Silicon Motion, leading to the filing of the Silicon Motion stockholder lawsuits referenced above, thereby causing harm to MaxLinear. The complaint seeks money damages, directing the individual defendants to account for all damages caused by them and all profits, special benefits and unjust enrichment they have obtained as a result of their unlawful conduct, including all salaries, bonuses, fees, stock award, options and common stock sale proceeds, and imposing a constructive trust thereon, punitive damages, costs and expenses, and such other relief that the court deems appropriate. This matter is stayed pending resolution of the Silicon Motion stockholder lawsuits referenced above.

Comcast Litigation

On December 1, 2023, MaxLinear filed claims against Comcast Management, LLC and Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, or together, Comcast, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. MaxLinear alleges that in 2020, MaxLinear shared its proprietary design and know-how for a full-duplex, or FDX, amplifier with Comcast in the hope of securing future business with Comcast. MaxLinear shared its design and know-how on several occasions, all pursuant to a non-disclosure agreement between MaxLinear and Comcast, with the expectation that Comcast would keep the information confidential. MaxLinear alleges that Comcast needed this technology in order to effectively compete with fiber-optic internet providers. Instead of engaging MaxLinear to develop the FDX amplifier, Comcast allegedly shared MaxLinear’s proprietary designs with MaxLinear’s direct competitor. Comcast allegedly then worked with MaxLinear’s competitor to develop the FDX-amplifier technology. MaxLinear brought claims for trade secret misappropriation, unfair competition, and breach of the parties’ non-disclosure agreement, and it sought an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, punitive damages, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, costs, expenses, and attorney fees as well as an injunction against Comcast’s use or disclosure of MaxLinear’s trade secrets.

On March 19, 2024, Comcast amended its claims for declaratory judgments, indemnification, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and on April 3, 2024, MaxLinear moved to dismiss all claims against it. On September 19, 2024, the court granted the motion to dismiss with respect to certain claims for declaratory judgment claim and denied the

motion to dismiss with respect to the remaining claims. On September 23, 2024, Comcast filed amended claims for declaratory judgment, indemnification, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and on October 14, 2024, MaxLinear amended and refiled its trade secret and related claims. MaxLinear intends to continue to vigorously prosecute its claims and defend its position.

Dish Litigation

On February 10, 2023, Entropic Communications, LLC, or Entropic, filed claims for patent infringement against Dish Network Corporation, Dish Network LLC, Dish Network Service, LLC, and Dish Network California Service Corporation in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. At that time, MaxLinear was not a party to the action. On September 21, 2023, Dish Network California Service Corporation, or Dish California, filed four counterclaims against MaxLinear. The four claims are declaratory judgment, breach of contract, fraud and negligent misrepresentation, and civil conspiracy.

On January 31, 2024, the Dish defendants, together with DISH Technologies L.L.C., or collectively, Dish, filed eight counterclaims (amended counterclaims for Dish California) against MaxLinear. The eight counterclaims are (1) breach of contract, (2) fraud and negligent misrepresentation, (3) fraud arising from a civil conspiracy, (4) quasi-contract for restitution/unjust enrichment, (5) combination in restraint of trade, (6) violation of the Cartwright Act (by Dish California only), (7) patent misuse, and (8) violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq. Dish’s eight counterclaims revolve around a core allegation that MaxLinear is a member of the Multimedia over Coax Alliance (MoCA) and that MaxLinear violated its obligation under MoCA’s Intellectual Property Rights Policy, or IPR Policy, by acting with Entropic to rid the asserted patents of the RAND encumbrances. Dish seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, disgorgement, attorneys’ fees, experts’ fees, and costs.

On February 14, 2025, the court dismissed with prejudice six of the eight counterclaims against MaxLinear, as follows: (1) fraud arising from a civil conspiracy, (2) quasi-contract for restitution/unjust enrichment, (3) combination in restraint of trade, (4) violation of the Cartwright Act (by Dish California only), (5) patent misuse, and (6) violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.

MaxLinear intends to continue to vigorously defend its position against Dish’s remaining two counterclaims.

Cox Litigations

On February 10, 2023, Entropic sued Cox Communications, Inc., CoxCom, LLC, and Cox Communications California, LLC, or together, Cox, in two separate actions in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. On October 6, 2023, Cox filed counterclaims against MaxLinear in each of the two actions.

In the first action, Cox alleges that when MaxLinear assigned certain patents to Entropic, MaxLinear violated its obligations under MoCA’s IPR Policy by assigning these patents and by allegedly failing to ensure that Cox would be offered a FRAND license for these patents. Cox amended its counterclaims on January 9, 2024 and asserted claims of breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and declaratory judgment against MaxLinear. Cox seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, equitable relief, attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs. MaxLinear moved to dismiss Cox’s amended counterclaims on February 6, 2024.

On February 14, 2025, the court dismissed with prejudice the unjust enrichment counterclaim against MaxLinear.

In the second action, in response to Entropic suing Cox for patent infringement, Cox filed counterclaims against MaxLinear. Cox alleges that MaxLinear granted CableLabs a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to all patents essential for compliance with DOCSIS specifications. It further alleges that MaxLinear breached this agreement when MaxLinear assigned certain patents to Entropic. Cox amended its counterclaims on January 9, 2024 and asserted claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and declaratory judgment. Cox seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, equitable relief, attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs. MaxLinear moved to dismiss Cox’s amended counterclaims on February 6, 2024.

On February 14, 2025, the court dismissed with prejudice all the counterclaims against MaxLinear in this matter.

MaxLinear intends to continue to vigorously defend its position against Cox’s remaining two counterclaims.

DIRECTV Litigation

On November 7, 2023, Entropic filed an amended complaint against DIRECTV, LLC, AT&T, Inc., AT&T Services, Inc., and AT&T Communications, LLC, in the Central District of California, for infringement of twelve patents. DIRECTV,

LLC, or DIRECTV, filed its answer to the amended complaint on March 28, 2025. DIRECTV’s answer asserted five counterclaims against MaxLinear. The counterclaims against MaxLinear include two separate breach of contract claims, failure to negotiate in good faith, and declaratory judgment that MaxLinear’s transfer of patents to Entropic was void. MaxLinear intends to vigorously defend its position against these counterclaims.

* * *

The Company records a provision for contingent losses when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. As of June 30, 2025, no material loss contingencies have been accrued for litigation and other legal claims in the consolidated financial statements, since the Company’s management currently does not believe that the ultimate outcome of any of the matters described above is probable. An unfavorable outcome of these matters may be reasonably possible in excess of recorded amounts; however, a reasonable estimate of the amount or range of such loss cannot be made at this time.

Other Matters

From time to time, the Company is subject to threats of litigation or actual litigation in the ordinary course of business as described above and in “Part II. — Other Information, Item 1. — Legal Proceedings,” some of which may be material. The results of any litigation cannot be predicted with certainty, and regardless of the outcome, litigation can have a material adverse impact on the Company because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources, and other factors.

MAXLINEAR, INC 10-Q