- Quarterly Report (10-Q)

Large Accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

Smaller reporting company

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

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

For the quarterly period ended June 26, 2011

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

For the transition period from to .

Commission File Number: 001-15181

FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware

04-3363001

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

(I.R.S.Employer

Identification No.)

3030 Orchard Parkway

San Jose, California 95134

(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (408)822-2000

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

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

The number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock as of the close of business on June 26, 2011:


Title of Each Class		Number of Shares
Common Stock		127,682,724

FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

INDEX


		Page
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.	Financial Statements (Unaudited)

	Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 26, 2011 and December 26, 2010		3

	Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Three and Six Months Ended June 26, 2011 and June 27, 2010		4

	Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the Three and Six Months Ended June 26, 2011 and June 27, 2010		5

	Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Six Months Ended June 26, 2011 and June 27, 2010		6

	Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)		7

Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		21

Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk		29

Item 4.	Controls and Procedures		29

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1.	Legal Proceedings		30

Item 1A.	Risk Factors		31

Item 2.	Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds		42

Item 6.	Exhibits		42

Signature			43

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1. Financial Statements

FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(In millions)


	June 26,			December 26,
	2011			2010
ASSETS		(Unaudited	)
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	435.7		$	404.6
Short-term marketable securities		0.2			0.1
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $ 29.8 and $ 26.9 at June 26, 2011 and December 26, 2010, respectively		162.4			156.4
Inventories		253.4			232.7
Deferred income taxes, net of allowances		16.7			13.2
Other current assets		38.9			36.1

Total current assets		907.3			843.1
Property, plant and equipment, net		722.9			689.3
Deferred income taxes, net of allowances		18.3			15.5
Intangible assets, net		74.8			69.7
Goodwill		169.4			164.8
Long-term securities		31.6			30.3
Other assets		37.0			36.4

Total assets		1,961.3		$	1,849.1

LIABILITIES, TEMPORARY EQUITY AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Current liabilities:
Current portion of long-term debt	$	—		$	3.8
Accounts payable		158.1			139.0
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities		132.1			139.2

Total current liabilities		290.2			282.0
Long-term debt, less current portion		300.1			316.9
Deferred income taxes		36.1			33.0
Other liabilities		40.7			38.5

Total liabilities		667.1			670.4
Commitments and contingencies (Note 11)
Temporary equity - deferred stock units		1.9			2.4
Stockholders’ equity:
Common stock		1.3			1.3
Additional paid-in capital		1,471.7			1,432.4
Accumulated deficit		(99.1	)		(187.5	)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(4.5	)		(5.6	)
Less treasury stock (at cost)		(77.1	)		(64.3	)

Total stockholders’ equity		1,292.3			1,176.3

Total liabilities, temporary equity and stockholders’ equity	$	1,961.3		$	1,849.1

See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.

FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(In millions, except per share and percent data)

(Unaudited)


	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	June 26,			June 27,			June 26,			June 27,
	2011			2010			2011			2010
Total revenue	$	433.2		$	409.6		$	846.2		$	787.6
Cost of sales		272.5			266.3			533.5			522.7

Gross margin		160.7			143.3			312.7			264.9

Gross margin %		37.1	%		35.0	%		37.0	%		33.6	%
Operating expenses:
Research and development		39.9			29.1			76.8			57.5
Selling, general and administrative		58.3			56.0			113.4			108.3
Amortization of acquisition-related intangibles		4.7			5.6			10.3			11.2
Restructuring and impairments		2.9			—			5.4			2.4

Total operating expenses		105.8			90.7			205.9			179.4

Operating income		54.9			52.6			106.8			85.5
Other expense, net		3.3			2.6			4.4			5.0

Income before income taxes		51.6			50.0			102.4			80.5
Provision for income taxes		6.7			6.2			14.0			14.1

Net income	$	44.9		$	43.8		$	88.4		$	66.4

Net income per common share:
Basic	$	0.35		$	0.35		$	0.70		$	0.53

Diluted	$	0.34		$	0.34		$	0.67		$	0.52

Weighted average common shares:
Basic		127.9			125.2			127.0			125.0

Diluted		131.7			128.1			131.3			128.3

See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.

FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(In millions)

(Unaudited)


	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	June 26,			June 27,			June 26,			June 27,
	2011			2010			2011			2010
Net income	$	44.9		$	43.8			88.4		$	66.4
Other comprehensive income, net of tax:
Net change associated with hedging transactions		0.5			(0.1	)		0.4			1.7
Net amount reclassified to earnings for hedging		(0.4	)		(1.6	)		(0.4	)		(0.9	)
Net change associated with fair value of securities		0.5			(2.2	)		1.1			0.7
Net change associated with pension transactions		—			(2.4	)		—			(2.4	)

Comprehensive income	$	45.5		$	37.5		$	89.5		$	65.5

See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.

FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(In millions)

(Unaudited)


	Six Months Ended
	June 26,			June 27,
	2011			2010
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income	$	88.4		$	66.4
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		75.6			79.7
Non-cash stock-based compensation expense		13.0			11.2
Non-cash interest income		(0.2	)		(0.3	)
Non-cash financing expense		0.5			0.8
Non-cash write-off of deferred financing fees		2.1			—
Loss on disposal of property, plant, and equipment		0.5			0.1
Deferred income taxes, net		(5.6	)		2.9
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of acquisitions:
Accounts receivable, net		(6.0	)		(39.1	)
Inventories		(20.4	)		(21.6	)
Other current assets		(2.0	)		0.3
Current liabilities		—			51.5
Other assets and liabilities, net		3.9			(10.8	)

Net cash provided by operating activities		149.8			141.1

Cash flows from investing activities:
Maturity of marketable securities		0.1			0.1
Capital expenditures		(88.1	)		(50.9	)
Purchase of molds and tooling		(1.4	)		(0.6	)
Acquisitions, net of cash acquired		(16.5	)		0

Net cash used in investing activities		(105.9	)		(51.4	)

Cash flows from financing activities:
Repayment of long-term debt		(320.6	)		(27.6	)
Borrowing from Revolving Credit Facility		300.0			—
Proceeds from issuance of common stock and from exercise of stock options		35.2			0.2
Purchase of treasury stock		(12.8	)		(17.6	)
Shares withheld for employees taxes		(9.4	)		0
Debt financing costs		(5.2	)		(0.8	)

Net cash used in financing activities		(12.8	)		(45.8	)

Net change in cash and cash equivalents		31.1			43.9
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		404.6			415.8

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	435.7		$	459.7

See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.

FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(Unaudited)

Note 1 – Basis of Presentation

The accompanying interim consolidated financial statements of Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. (the company) have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, consistent in all material respects with those applied in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 26, 2010. The interim financial information is unaudited, but reflects all normal adjustments, which are, in the opinion of management, necessary to provide a fair statement of results for the interim periods presented. The financial statements should be read in conjunction with the financial statements in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 26, 2010. Certain amounts for prior periods have been reclassified to conform to the current presentation. The results for the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations that may be expected for the full year.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. requires management to make estimates and assumptions about future events. These estimates and the underlying assumptions affect the amounts of assets and liabilities reported, disclosures about contingent assets and liabilities, and reported amounts of revenues and expenses. Such estimates include the valuation of accounts receivable, inventories, goodwill, investments, intangible assets, and other long-lived assets, legal contingencies, and assumptions used in the calculation of income taxes and customer incentives, among others. These estimates and assumptions are based on management’s best estimates and judgment. Management evaluates its estimates and assumptions on an ongoing basis using historical experience and other factors, including the current economic environment, which management believes to be reasonable under the circumstances. The company adjusts such estimates and assumptions when facts and circumstances dictate. Illiquid credit markets, volatile equity and foreign currency markets, and declines in consumer spending have combined to increase the uncertainty inherent in such estimates and assumptions. As future events and their effects cannot be determined with precision, actual results could differ significantly from these estimates. Changes in those estimates resulting from continuing changes in the economic environment will be reflected in the financial statements in future periods.

Note 2 – Financial Statement Details


	June 26, 2011		December 26, 2010
	(In millions)
Inventories, net
Raw materials		44.0	$	40.9
Work in process		134.0		121.1
Finished goods		75.4		70.7

		253.4	$	232.7


	June 26, 2011		December 26, 2010
	(In millions)
Property, plant and equipment
Land and improvements	$	24.0	$	24.0
Buildings and improvements		342.9		339.2
Machinery and equipment		1,736.5		1,679.6
Construction in progress		141.9		112.9

Total property, plant and equipment		2,245.3		2,155.7
Less accumulated depreciation		1,522.4		1,466.4

	$	722.9	$	689.3


	June 26, 2011		December 26, 2010
	(In millions)
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities
Payroll and employee related accruals	$	73.0	$	86.5
Taxes payable		27.7		23.0
Restructuring and impairments		12.0		11.0
Other		19.4		18.7

	$	132.1	$	139.2


	Six Months Ended
	June 26, 2011			June 27, 2010
	(in millions)
Other expense, net
Interest expense	$	3.4		$	6.0
Interest income		(1.3	)		(1.4	)
Other (income) expense, net		2.3			0.4

Other expense, net	$	4.4		$	5.0

Note 3 – Computation of Net Income per Share

Basic net income per share is computed using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net income per share is computed using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period, plus the dilutive effect of potential future issuances of common stock relating to potentially dilutive securities. There is no dilution when a net loss exists. Potentially dilutive common equivalent securities consist of stock options, performance units (PUs), deferred stock units (DSUs) and restricted stock units (RSUs). In calculating diluted earnings per share, the dilutive effect of stock options is computed using the average market price for the respective period using the treasury share method. Certain potential shares of the company’s outstanding stock options were excluded because they were anti-dilutive, but could be dilutive in the future. The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share.


	Three Months Ended				Six Months Ended
	June 26, 2011		June 27, 2010		June 26, 2011		June 27, 2010
	(In millions, except per share data)
Basic:
Net income	$	44.9	$	43.8	$	88.4	$	66.4

Weighted average shares outstanding		127.9		125.2		127.0		125.0

Net income per share	$	0.35	$	0.35	$	0.70	$	0.53

Diluted:
Net income	$	44.9	$	43.8	$	88.4	$	66.4

Basic weighted average shares outstanding		127.9		125.2		127.0		125.0
Assumed exercise of common stock equivalents		3.8		2.9		4.3		3.3

Diluted weighted average common and common equivalent shares		131.7		128.1		131.3		128.3

Net income per share	$	0.34	$	0.34	$	0.67	$	0.52

Anti-dilutive common stock equivalents, non-vested stock, DSUs, RSUs, and PUs		4.3		11.0		4.6		12.0

Note 4 – Supplemental Cash Flow Information


	Six Months Ended
	June 26, 2011		June 27, 2010
	(In millions)
Cash paid for:
Income taxes, net	$	15.1	$	7.7

Interest	$	2.5	$	4.9

Note 5 – Fair Value

Fair Value of Financial Instruments. In accordance with the requirements of the Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures Topic of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC), the company groups its financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis in three levels, based on the markets in which the assets and liabilities are traded and the reliability of the assumptions used to determine fair value. These levels are:

•

Level 1 – Valuation is based upon quoted market price for identical instruments traded in active markets.

•

Level 2 – Valuation is based on quoted market prices for similar instruments in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active, and model-based valuation techniques for which all significant assumptions are observable in the market.

•

Level 3 – Valuation is generated from model-based techniques that use significant assumptions not observable in the market. Valuation techniques include use of discounted cash flow models and similar techniques.

In accordance with the requirements of the Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures Topic of the FASB ASC, it is the company’s policy to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when developing fair value measurements. When available, the company uses quoted market prices to measure fair value. If market prices are not available, the fair value measurement is based on models that use primarily market based parameters including interest rate yield curves, option volatilities and currency rates. In certain cases where market rate assumptions are not available, the company is required to make judgments about assumptions market participants would use to estimate the fair value of a financial instrument. Changes in the underlying assumptions used, including discount rates and estimates of future cash flows could significantly affect the results of current or future values. The results may not be realized in an actual sale or immediate settlement of an asset or liability.

The assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis include securities and derivatives. Financial instruments classified as Level 1 are securities traded on an active exchange as well as U.S. Treasury, and other U.S. government and agency-backed securities that are traded by dealers or brokers in active over-the-counter markets. Derivatives are classified as Level 2 financial instruments. The only financial instruments classified as Level 3 are auction rate securities.

The fair value of securities is based on quoted market prices at the date of measurement, except for auction rate securities. The auction rate security market is no longer active and as a result there is no observable market data for these assets. Fair value estimates are based on judgments regarding current economic conditions, liquidity discounts and interest rate risks. These estimates involve significant uncertainties and judgments and cannot be determined with precision. As a result such calculated fair value estimates may not be realizable in a current sale or immediate settlement of the instrument. In addition, changes in the underlying assumptions used in the fair value measurement technique, including discount rates, liquidity risks and estimates of future cash flows could significantly affect these fair value estimates.

A discounted cash flow (DCF) calculation is performed to determine the estimated fair value of the auction rate securities. The assumptions used in preparing the DCF model included estimates for the amount and timing of future interest and principal payments and the rate of return required by investors to own these securities in the current environment. In making these assumptions, relevant factors that were considered included: the formula applicable to each security which defines the interest rate paid to investors in the event of a failed auction; forward projections of the interest rate benchmarks specified in such formulas; the likely timing of principal repayments; the probability of full repayment considering guarantees by third parties and additional credit enhancements provided through other means. The estimate of the rate of return required by investors to own these securities also considers the current reduced liquidity for auction rate

securities. Inputs for DCF calculations are based upon publicly available data as well as the company’s own estimates. The primary unobservable input to the valuation was the maturity assumption which ranged from four to ten years depending on the individual auction rate security. The maturity assumptions were based on the terms of the underlying instrument and the potential for restructuring the auction rate security.

All of the company’s derivatives are traded in over-the-counter markets where quoted market prices are not readily available. For those derivatives, the company measures fair value using prices obtained from the counterparties with whom the company has traded. The counterparties price the derivatives based on models that use primarily market observable inputs, such as yield curves and option volatilities. Accordingly, the company classifies these derivatives as Level 2.

The company is exposed to credit-related losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties to hedging instruments. The counterparties to all derivative transactions are major financial institutions with investment grade credit ratings. However, this does not eliminate the company’s exposure to credit risk with these institutions. This credit risk is generally limited to the unrealized gains in such contracts should any of these counterparties fail to perform as contracted. The company considers the risk of counterparty default to be minimal.

The following table presents the balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of June 26, 2011.


	Fair Value Measurements
	Total			Quoted Prices in Active Markets (Level 1)		Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2)			Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	(In millions)
Foreign Currency Derivatives
Assets	$	3.4			—	$	3.4			—
Liabilities		(1.1	)		—		(1.1	)		—

	$	2.3		$	—	$	2.3		$	—

Securities
Marketable securities	$	2.5		$	2.5		—			—
Auction rate securities		29.3			—		—			29.3

	$	31.8		$	2.5	$	—		$	29.3

The following table summarizes the changes in level 3 securities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the six months ended June 26, 2011.


	Auction Rate Securities
	(In millions)
Balance at beginning of period	$	28.0
Total realized and unrealized gains or (losses)
Included in net income		—
Included in OCI		1.1
Accretion of impairments included in net income		0.2
Sales		—
Purchases, issuances and settlements		—

Balance at end of period	$	29.3

Long term debt is carried at amortized cost. However, the company is required to estimate the fair value of long term debt under the Financial Instrument Topic of the FASB ASC . The fair value of the term loan was determined utilizing current trading prices obtained from indicative market data. The carrying amount of the new revolving facility is considered approximate fair value as the company entered into the new revolving facility during the second quarter of 2011. See Note 12 for more information on the new credit facility.


	June 26, 2011				December 26, 2010
	Carrying Amount		Estimated Fair Value		Carrying Amount		Estimated Fair Value
	(In millions)
Long-Term Debt:
Revolving Credit Facility	$	300.0	$	300.0
Term Loan					$	320.7	$	316.7

Note 6 – Derivatives

Derivatives. The company uses derivative instruments to manage exposures to changes in foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates. In accordance with the requirements of the Derivatives and Hedging Topic of the FASB ASC, the fair value of these hedges is recorded on the balance sheet. For the fair value of derivatives, see Note 5.

Foreign Currency Derivatives. The company uses currency forward and combination option contracts to hedge a portion of its forecasted foreign exchange denominated revenues and expenses. The company monitors its foreign currency exposures to maximize the overall effectiveness of its foreign currency hedge positions. Currencies hedged include the euro, Japanese yen, Philippine peso, Malaysian ringgit, Korean won and Chinese yuan. The company’s objectives for holding derivatives are to minimize the risks using the most effective methods to eliminate or reduce the impacts of these exposures. The maturities of the cash flow hedges are 12 months or less.

Changes in the fair value of derivative instruments related to time value are included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness. Hedge ineffectiveness, determined in accordance the Derivatives and Hedging Topic of the FASB ASC, did not have a material impact on earnings for the three and six months ended June 26, 2011 and June 27, 2010. No cash flow hedges were derecognized or discontinued during the three and six months ended June 26, 2011 and June 27, 2010.

Derivative gains and losses included in accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI) are reclassified into earnings at the time the forecasted transaction is recognized. The company estimates that $2.3 million of net unrealized derivative gains included in AOCI will be reclassified into earnings within the next twelve months.

The company also uses currency forward and combination option contracts to offset the foreign currency impact of balance sheet translation. These derivatives have one month terms and the initial fair value, if any, and the subsequent gains or losses on the change in fair value are reported in earnings within the same income statement line as the impact of the foreign currency translation.

Interest Rate Derivatives. The company’s variable-rate debt exposes the company to variability in interest payments due to changes in interest rates. The company used a forward interest rate swap to mitigate the interest rate risk on a portion of its variable-rate borrowings in order to manage fluctuations in cash flows resulting from changes in interest rates on variable-rate debt. This hedge expired on December 31, 2009.

Effectiveness of this hedge was calculated by comparing the fair value of the derivative to a hypothetical derivative that would be a perfect hedge of floating rate debt. The value of the hedge at inception was zero and any ineffectiveness during the life of the swap was immaterial.

Derivative gains and losses included in AOCI were reclassified into earnings at the time the forecasted transaction was recognized. The amounts were reclassified into interest expense as a yield adjustment in the same period in which the related interest on the floating-rate debt obligations affect earnings.

The tables below show the notional principal and the location and amounts of the derivative fair values in the consolidated balance sheet as of June 26, 2011 and December 26, 2010 as well as the location of derivative gains and losses in the statement of operations for the six months ended June 26, 2011 and June 27, 2010. Pursuant to the Derivatives and Hedging Topic of the FASB ASC, the company nets the fair value of all derivative financial instruments with counterparties for which a master netting arrangement is utilized. The notional principal amounts for these instruments provide one measure of the transaction volume outstanding as of the end of the period and do not represent the amount of the company’s exposure to credit or market loss. The estimates of fair value are based on applicable and commonly used pricing models using prevailing financial market information as of June 26, 2011 and December 26, 2010. Although the following table reflects the notional principal and fair value of amounts of derivative financial instruments, it does not reflect the gains or losses associated with the exposures and transactions that these financial instruments are intended to hedge. The amounts ultimately realized upon settlement of these financial instruments, together with the gains and losses on the underlying exposures will depend on actual market conditions during the remaining life of the instruments.

The following tables present derivatives designated as hedging instruments under the Derivatives and Hedging Topic of the FASB ASC.


	As of June 26, 2011									As of December 26, 2010
	Balance Sheet Classification	Notional Amount		Fair Value			Amount of Gain (Loss) Recognized In AOCI			Balance Sheet Classification	Notional Amount		Fair Value			Amount of Gain (Loss) Recognized In AOCI
	(In millions)									(In millions)
Derivatives in Cash Flow Hedges
Foreign exchange contracts
Derivatives for forecasted revenues	Current assets	$	—	$	—		$	—		Current assets	$	41.9	$	0.8		$	0.8
Derivatives for forecasted revenues	Current liabilities		56.8		(1.1	)		(1.1	)	Current liabilities	$	12.0	$	(0.2	)		(0.2	)
Derivatives for forecasted expenses	Current assets		92.9		3.4			3.4		Current assets		110.3		1.8			1.8
Derivatives for forecasted expenses	Current liabilities		10.2		(0.0	)		(0.0	)	Current liabilities		—		—			—

Total foreign exchange contract derivatives		$	159.9	$	2.3		$	2.3			$	164.2	$	2.4		$	2.4


	For the Six Months Ended June 26, 2011							For the Six Months Ended June 27, 2010
	Income Statement Classification of Gain (Loss)	Amount of Gain (Loss) Recognized In Income			Amount of Gain (Loss) Reclassified from AOCI			Income Statement Classification of Gain (Loss)	Amount of Gain (Loss) Recognized In Income			Amount of Gain (Loss) Reclassified from AOCI
Derivatives in Cash Flow Hedges
Foreign Currency contracts	Revenue	$	(2.4	)	$	(2.4	)	Revenue	$	0.7		$	0.7
Foreign Currency contracts	Expenses		2.8			2.8		Expenses		2.0			2.0
Interest Rate contract	Interest Expense		—			—		Interest Expense		(1.8	)		(1.8	)

		$	0.4		$	0.4			$	0.9		$	0.9


	Gain (Loss) Recognized in OCI for Derivative Instruments (1)
	Six Months Ended June 26, 2011
Foreign exchange contracts	$	—

(1)	This amount is inclusive of both realized and unrealized gains and losses recognized in OCI.

The following tables present derivatives not designated as hedging instruments under Derivatives and Hedging Topic of the FASB ASC.


	As of June 26, 2011						As of December 26, 2010
	Balance Sheet Classification	Notional Amount		Fair Value			Balance Sheet Classification	Notional Amount		Fair Value
	(In millions)						(In millions)
Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments
Foreign Exchange Contracts	Current assets	$	—	$	—		Current assets	$	—	$	—
Foreign Exchange Contracts	Current liabilities		25.6		(0.0	)	Current liabilities		20.7		(0.0	)

Total derivatives, net		$	25.6	$	(0.0	)		$	20.7	$	(0.0	)


	For the Six Months Ended June 26, 2011				For the Six Months Ended June 27, 2010
	Income Statement Classification of Gain (Loss)	Amount of Gain (Loss) Recognized In Income			Income Statement Classification of Gain (Loss)	Amount of Gain (Loss) Recognized In Income
	(In millions)
Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments
Foreign Exchange Contracts	Revenue	$	(0.2	)	Revenue	$	0.1
Foreign Exchange Contracts	Expenses		0.8		Expenses		0.4

Net gain (loss) recognized in income		$	0.6			$	0.5

Note 7 – Securities

The company invests excess cash in marketable securities consisting primarily of money markets, commercial paper, corporate notes and bonds, and U.S. government securities. While the company still holds auction rate securities, the company no longer actively invests in them.

All of the company’s securities are classified as available-for-sale. In accordance with the Investments – Debt and Equity Securities Topic of the FASB ASC, available-for-sale securities are carried at fair value with unrealized gains and losses included as a component of AOCI within stockholders’ equity, net of any related tax effect, if such gains and losses are considered temporary. Realized gains and losses on these investments are included in interest income and expense. Declines in value judged by management to be other-than-temporary and credit related are included in impairment of investments in the statement of operations. The noncredit component of impairment is included in AOCI. For the purpose of computing realized gains and losses, cost is identified on a specific identification basis. There were no material realized gains or losses on sales of securities in the first six months of 2011 or 2010.

Securities are summarized as of June 26, 2011:


	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Gains		Gross Unrealized Losses			Market Value
	(In millions)
Short-term available for sale securities:
U.S. Treasury securities and obligations of U.S. government agencies	$	0.2	$	—	$	—		$	0.2

Total marketable securities	$	0.2	$	—	$	—		$	0.2


	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Gains		Gross Unrealized Losses			Market Value
	(In millions)
Long-term available for sale securities:
U.S. Treasury securities and obligations of U.S. government agencies	$	1.7	$	0.3				$	2.0
Corporate debt securities		0.3							0.3
Auction rate securities		35.6				(6.3	)		29.3

Total securities	$	37.6	$	0.3	$	(6.3	)	$	31.6

In aggregate, the auction rate securities have been in an unrealized loss position for a year. The continued unrealized loss is attributable to the ongoing volatility in the global equities markets and uncertainty in the credit markets primarily from European debt situation and other global economic uncertainty. However, the company does not intend to sell or believe it is more likely than not that the company would be required to sell the securities before a recovery of the amortized cost basis of the investment. In addition, as a result of the continued performance of the issue and its’ insurance guarantee, the company considers this decrease in fair value to be temporary in nature.

Securities are summarized as of December 26, 2010:


	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Gains		Gross Unrealized Losses			Market Value
	(In millions)
Short-term available for sale securities:
U.S. Treasury securities and obligations of U.S. government agencies	$	0.1	$	—	$	—		$	0.1

Total marketable securities	$	0.1	$	—	$	—		$	0.1


	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Gains		Gross Unrealized Losses			Market Value
	(In millions)
Long-term available for sale securities:
U.S. Treasury securities and obligations of U.S. government agencies	$	1.9	$	0.1	$	—		$	2.0
Corporate debt securities		0.3		—		—		$	0.3
Auction rate securities		35.3				(7.3	)		28.0

Total securities	$	37.5	$	0.1	$	(7.3	)	$	30.3

The following table presents the amortized cost and estimated fair market value of available-for-sale securities by contractual maturity as of June 26, 2011.


	Amortized Cost		Market Value
	(In millions)
Due in one year or less	$	0.2	$	0.2
Due after one year through three years		0.4		0.4
Due after three years through ten years		1.2		1.4
Due after ten years	$	36.0	$	29.8

	$	37.8	$	31.8

As of June 26, 2011, auction rate securities with a market value of $29.3 million are included in the table above in contractual maturities due after ten years. The company’s auction rate securities are composed of approximately $17.1 million of securities that are structured obligations of special purpose reinsurance entities associated with life insurance companies and $12.2 million of corporate debt securities issued by a special purpose financial services corporation that offers credit risk protection through writing credit derivatives. The company continues to accrue and receive interest on these securities based on a contractual rate.

In the fourth quarter of 2008, the company concluded that the impairment of its auction rate securities was other-than-temporary and recognized a loss of $19.0 million in the income statement. However, the company does not intend to sell or believe it is more likely than not that the company would be required to sell the securities before a recovery of the amortized cost basis of the investment. In the second quarter of 2009, based on the requirements of the Investments – Debt and Equity Securities Topic of the FASB ASC, the company analyzed the $19.0 million other-than-temporary loss that was recognized in the income statement in the fourth quarter of 2008 to determine the noncredit component. It was determined that $15.5 million of the loss was attributable to credit loss. As a result, in the second quarter of 2009, a cumulative adjustment of the remaining $3.5 million, which was attributable to changes in interest rates, was reclassified from retained earnings to AOCI. There is no portion of other-than-temporary impairment related to credit loss currently included in AOCI.

The following table presents a roll forward of the amount related to credit losses recognized in earnings during the six months ended June 26, 2011.


	Credit Losses Recognized in Earnings
	(In millions)
Balance at beginning of period	$	14.5
Accretion of impairments included in net income		(0.2	)

Balance at end of period	$	14.3

Note 8 – Segment Information

The company is currently organized into three reportable segments. The organization is an application based structure which corresponds with the way the company manages the business. The majority of the company’s activities are aligned into two focus areas; MCCC, which focuses on handset, computing and multimedia applications, and PCIA, which focuses on power supply and motor control solutions. Each of these segments has a relatively small set of leading customers, common technology requirements and similar design cycles. The Standard Discrete and Standard Linear (SDT) business is managed separately as a third segment. As of the first day of fiscal 2011, the infrared group was moved from PCIA to SDT. Prior year numbers have been restated to reflect this change which was not material to reported amounts.

The following table presents selected operating segment financial information for the three and six months ended June 26, 2011 and June 27, 2010.


	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	June 26, 2011			June 27, 2010			June 26, 2011			June 27, 2010
				(In millions)
Revenue and operating income:
MCCC
Total revenue	$	166.1		$	168.8		$	328.1		$	324.9
Operating income		32.7			41.2			68.6			73.2

PCIA
Total revenue		224.4			190.6			434.3			369.7
Operating income		66.0			51.7			124.6			94.8

SDT
Total revenue		42.7			50.2			83.8			93.0
Operating income		8.8			10.3			17.7			18.1

Corporate
Restructuring and impairments expense		(2.9	)		0.0			(5.4	)		(2.4	)
Stock-based compensation expense		(8.0	)		(5.9	)		(13.0	)		(11.7	)
Selling, general and administrative expense		(41.4	)		(43.1	)		(85.0	)		(83.2	)
Other (1)		(0.3	)		(1.6	)		(0.7	)		(3.3	)

Total consolidated
Total revenue		433.2			409.6			846.2			787.6
Operating income		54.9			52.6			106.8			85.5
Other expense, net		3.3			2.6			4.4			5.0

Income before income taxes	$	51.6		$	50.0		$	102.4		$	80.5

(1)	Other primarily consists of accelerated depreciation related to the planned closure of the Mountaintop facility.

Note 9 – Goodwill and Intangible Assets

The following table presents a summary of acquired intangible assets.


		As of June 26, 2011					As of December 26, 2010
	Period of Amortization	Gross Carrying Amount		Accumulated Amortization			Gross Carrying Amount		Accumulated Amortization
		(In millions)
Identifiable intangible assets:
Developed technology	2 - 15 years	$	250.7	$	(207.1	)	$	238.9	$	(199.0	)
Customer base	8 - 10 years		81.6		(67.2	)		81.6		(65.9	)
Core technology	10 years		15.7		(2.1	)		13.1		(1.6	)
In Process R&D	indefinite lived		2.8		—			1.8		—
Covenant not to compete	5 years		30.4		(30.4	)		30.4		(30.4	)
Assembled workforce	5 years		1.0		(1.0	)		1.0		(0.9	)
Process technology	5 years		1.6		(1.4	)		1.6		(1.2	)
Patents	4 years		5.9		(5.7	)		5.9		(5.6	)
Trademarks and tradenames	1 year		25.2		(25.2	)		25.2		(25.2	)

Subtotal			414.9		(340.1	)		399.5		(329.8	)
Goodwill			169.4		—			164.8		—

Total		$	584.3	$	(340.1	)	$	564.4	$	(329.8	)

As a result of the TranSiC acquisition in the first quarter of 2011, the company added $15.4 million of intangible assets, $2.6 million to Core Technology, $1.0 million to In Process R&D, and $11.8 million to Developed Technology. See Footnote 13 for further details on the TranSiC acquisition.

The following table presents the carrying value of goodwill by reporting unit.


	MCCC		PCIA			SDT			Total
	(In millions)
Balance as of December 26, 2010
Goodwill	$	164.8	$	148.8		$	54.5		$	368.1
Accumulated Impairment Losses		—		(148.8	)		(54.5	)		(203.3	)

	$	164.8	$	—		$	—		$	164.8

TranSiC acquisition	$	—	$	4.3		$	—		$	4.3
Other tax acquisition adjustment		0.3		—			—			0.3
Balance as of June 26, 2011
Goodwill	$	165.1	$	153.1		$	54.5		$	372.7
Accumulated Impairment Losses		—		(148.8	)		(54.5	)		(203.3	)

	$	165.1	$	4.3		$	—		$	169.4

During the first quarter of 2011, goodwill of $4.3 million was recorded as a result of the company’s acquisition of TranSiC. See Footnote 13 for further details. In addition, a tax adjustment was recorded for $0.3 million.

The following table presents the estimated amortization expense for intangible assets for the remainder of 2011 and for each of the five succeeding fiscal years.


Estimated Amortization Expense:	(In millions)
Remaining Fiscal 2011		9.4
Fiscal 2012		18.0
Fiscal 2013		15.5
Fiscal 2014		7.6
Fiscal 2015		5.2
Fiscal 2016		5.5

Note 10 – Restructuring and Impairments

During the three and six months ended June 26, 2011, the company recorded restructuring and impairment charges, net of releases, of $2.9 million and $5.4 million, respectively. The detail of these charges is presented in the summary table below.

During the three and six months ended June 27, 2010, the company recorded restructuring and impairment charges, net of releases, of $0 and $2.4 million, respectively. The net amount of $0 recorded during the second quarter is comprised of a $2.4 million restructuring expense reversal as well as charges of $1.3 million in employee separation costs, $0.5 million of fab closure costs and $0.2 million in releases associated with the 2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program and $0.8 million in employee separation costs associated with the 2010 Infrastructure Realignment Program. The charges in the first quarter include $1.6 million of employee separation costs, $0.6 million of fab closure costs and $0.2 million in releases associated with the 2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program as well as $0.4 million in employee separation costs associated with the 2010 Infrastructure Realignment Program.

The 2011 Infrastructure Realignment Program includes costs for organizational changes in the company’s supply chain management group, the website technology group, and both the PCIA and MCCC groups. The 2010 Infrastructure Realignment Program includes costs to simplify and realign some activities within the MCCC segment, costs for the continued refinement of the company’s manufacturing strategy, and costs associated with centralizing the company’s accounting functions. The 2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program includes costs associated with the planned closure of the Mountaintop, Pennsylvania manufacturing facility and the four-inch manufacturing line in Bucheon, South Korea, both of which were announced in the first quarter of 2009. The 2009 Program also includes charges for a smaller worldwide cost reduction plan to further right-size our company and remain financially healthy.

The following table presents a summary of the activity in the company’s accrual for restructuring and impairment costs for the quarterly periods ended March 27, 2011 and June 26, 2011 (in millions).


	Accrual Balance at 12/26/2010		New Charges		Cash Paid			Reserve Release			Non-Cash Items		Accrual Balance at 3/27/2011
2008 Infrastructure Realignment Program:
Lease Impairment Costs		0.7		—		(0.2	)		—			—		0.5
2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program:
Employee Separation Costs		8.1		0.6		(0.3	)		—			—		8.4
Fab Closure Costs		—		0.2		(0.2	)		—			—		—
2010 Infrastructure Realignment Program:		.
Employee Separation Costs		2.2		1.0		(1.5	)		—			—		1.7
2011 Infrastructure Realignment Program:
Employee Separation Costs		—		0.7		(0.7	)		—			—		—

	$	11.0	$	2.5	$	(2.9	)	$	—		$	—	$	10.6


	Accrual Balance at 3/27/2011		New Charges		Cash Paid			Reserve Release			Non-Cash Items		Accrual Balance at 6/26/2011
2008 Infrastructure Realignment Program:
Lease Impairment Costs		0.5		—		(0.2	)		—			—		0.3
2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program:
Employee Separation Costs		8.4		0.5		—			(0.1	)		—		8.8
Fab Closure Costs		—		0.3		(0.3	)		—			—		—
2010 Infrastructure Realignment Program:
Employee Separation Costs		1.7		0.9		(0.3	)		—			—		2.3
2011 Infrastructure Realignment Program:
Employee Separation Costs		—		1.3		(0.7	)		—			—		0.6

	$	10.6		3.0		(1.5	)		(0.1	)		0.0	$	12.0

Payouts associated with the 2008 lease impairment will be made on a regular basis and will be complete by the fourth quarter of 2011. The consolidation of the South Korea fabrication processes and the planned closure of the Mountaintop facility are expected to be completed by the end of 2012.

Note 11 – Contingencies

Patent Litigation with Power Integrations, Inc. There are four outstanding proceedings with Power Integrations.

POWI 1 : On October 20, 2004, the company and our wholly owned subsidiary, Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, were sued by Power Integrations, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Power Integrations alleged that certain of the company’s pulse width modulation (PWM) integrated circuit products infringed four Power Integrations U.S. patents, and sought a permanent injunction preventing the company from manufacturing, selling or offering the products for sale in the U.S., or from importing the products into the U.S., as well as money damages for past infringement.

The trial in the case was divided into three phases. In the first phase of the trial that occurred in October of 2006, a jury returned a verdict finding that thirty-three of the companies PWM products willfully infringed one or more of seven claims asserted in the four patents and assessed damages against the company. The company voluntarily stopped U.S. sales and importation of those products in 2007 and has been offering replacement products since 2006. Subsequent phases of the trial conducted during 2007 and 2008 focused on the validity and enforceability of the patents. In December of 2008, the judge overseeing the case reduced the jury’s 2006 damages award from $34 million to approximately $6.1 million and ordered a new trial on the issue of willfulness. The new trial was held in June of 2009 and then in January of 2011 the court awarded Power Integrations final damages in the amount of $12.2 million. We have challenged the final damages award, willfulness finding, injunction, and other issues on appeal. As a result of the appeal, the company may be required to post a bond or provide other security in an amount equal to the final damages award for the duration of the appeal process.

POWI 2: On May 23, 2008, Power Integrations filed another lawsuit against the company, Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation and our wholly owned subsidiary System General Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of three patents. Of the three patents claimed in this lawsuit, two are patents that were asserted against the company and Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation in the October 2004 lawsuit described above. As mentioned below, the majority of the claims asserted in the first lawsuit from these two patents have now received final rejections from the patent office, and the third patent has also received preliminary rejections. The company believes that it has strong defenses against Power Integrations’ claims and intends to vigorously defend this second lawsuit.

On October 14, 2008, Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation and System General Corporation filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Power Integrations in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging that certain PWM integrated circuit products infringe one or more claims of three U.S. patents owned by System General. The lawsuit seeks monetary damages and an injunction preventing the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale or importation of Power Integrations products found to infringe the asserted patents.

Both lawsuits have been consolidated and will be heard together in Delaware District Court. The trial is currently scheduled for spring of 2012.

POWI 3: On November 4, 2009, Power Integrations, Inc. filed a complaint for patent infringement against the company and two of the company’s subsidiaries in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California alleging that several of our products infringe three of Power Integrations’ patents. One of those patents has since been dropped from the case. The company intends to put on a vigorous defense against these claims. In the same lawsuit we have filed counterclaims against Power Integrations, alleging Power Integrations’ products infringe certain claims of one of our patents.

Reexaminations: Parallel to the above federal court proceedings, the company also petitioned the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for reexamination of all unexpired patents claims asserted in POWI 1 and POWI 2 (those being all asserted claims from three of the four patents asserted in POWI 1 (the fourth patent has expired) and all of the patent claims asserted in POWI 2). Of the claims asserted in the four patents from POWI 1 and POWI 2, Power Integrations has amended or cancelled a majority of those at issue.

POWI 4 : On February 10, 2010 Fairchild and System General filed a lawsuit in Suzhou, China against four Power Integrations entities and seven vendors. The lawsuit claims that Power Integrations violates four Fairchild/System General patents. Fairchild is seeking an injunction against the Power Integrations products and over $17.0 million in damages . Power Integrations is currently seeking to invalidate the Fairchild/System General patents in proceedings before the Chinese patent office.

Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation v. Cadeka Microcircuits, LLC. Fairchild filed this lawsuit against a competitor for misappropriation of trade secrets, tortuous interference with contract and breach of contract. The competitor filed counterclaims alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment and other claims. The case is pending in Colorado Larimer County District Court and will likely proceed to trial in late 2011 or early 2012. Fairchild is vigorously prosecuting and defending this case.

Other Legal Claims. From time to time the company is involved in legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business. The company believes that there is no such ordinary-course litigation pending that could have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Legal costs are expensed as incurred.

The company has analyzed the potential litigation outcomes from current litigation in accordance with the Contingency Topic of the FASB ASC. The company estimates the loss contingency by undertaking a process to determine an estimate of the possible loss or range of losses. For cases where the company believes it is probable that a loss has occurred, the company believes the range of possible losses is approximately $13.0 to $30.0 million. Based upon assessments of the potential liabilities using analysis of claims and historical experience in defending and/or resolving these claims, the company has recorded reserves for potential litigation outcomes of $14.7 million as of June 26, 2011. For cases where the company believes it is reasonably possible that a loss has occurred, the company believes the range of possible losses is approximately zero to $5.0 million. The company has recorded no reserves for potential litigation outcomes for reasonably possible losses.

Note 12 – Long-Term Debt

Long-term debt consists of the following at:


	June 26, 2011		December 26, 2010
	(In millions)
Revolving Credit Facility borrowings	$	300.0	$	—
Term Loan	$	—	$	320.7
Other	$	0.1	$	—

Total debt		300.1		320.7
Current portion of long-term debt		—		(3.8	)

Long-term debt, less current portion	$	300.1	$	316.9

On May 20, 2011, the company entered into a new senior secured revolving credit facility (Credit Facility.) Proceeds from the Credit Facility and an additional $18.8 million in cash were used to extinguish all outstanding obligations under the previous credit facility, which consisted of a term loan and an undrawn revolving credit facility which were scheduled to mature in June of 2013 and June of 2012, respectively. The Credit Facility consists of a $400.0 million revolving loan agreement, of which $300.0 million was drawn as of June 26, 2011. In addition, the new Credit Facility includes an incremental revolving commitment that enables the company to increase the size of the facility in an aggregate amount not to exceed $150 million. The maturity date of the Credit Facility is May 20, 2016. The company incurred cash charges of $5.2 million related to this financing, all of which was deferred and will be amortized over the term of the debt. Additionally, the company wrote off $2.1 million of the remaining deferred financing fees related to the prior facility.

Under the Credit Facility, borrowing may be in the form of either Eurocurrency Loans or Alternate Base Rate (ABR) loans. Eurocurrency Loans accrue interest at the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) plus 1.75%. The ABR is the highest of JP Morgan Chase Bank prime rate, the federal funds effective rate plus ¹ / 2 of 1 percent, or adjusted LIBOR, as defined by the credit agreement, plus 1%. ABR loans accrue interest at the ABR rate plus 0.75%. The company also pays a commitment fee of 0.35% per annum on the unutilized commitments. There are also outstanding letters of credit under the Credit Facility totaling $1.3 million. These outstanding letters of credit reduce the amount available under the Credit Facility to $98.7 million. Borrowings under the Credit Facility are secured by a pledge of common stock of the company’s first tier domestic subsidiaries and 65% of the stock of the company’s first tier foreign subsidiaries. The payment of principal and interest on the Credit Facility is fully and unconditionally guaranteed by Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. and each of its domestic subsidiaries.

The Credit Facility includes restrictive covenants that place limitations on the company’s ability to consolidate, merge, or enter into acquisitions, create liens or pay dividends, or make similar restricted payments, sell assets, invest in capital expenditures, and incur indebtedness. It also places limitations on the company’s ability to modify its certificate of incorporation and bylaws, or enter into shareholder agreements, voting trusts or similar arrangements. In addition, the affirmative covenants in the Credit Facility also require the company’s financial performance to comply with certain financial measures, as defined by the credit agreement. These financial covenants require us to maintain a minimum interest coverage ratio of 3.0 to 1.0 and a maximum leverage ratio of 3.25 to 1.0. It defines the interest coverage ratio as the ratio of cumulative four quarter trailing consolidated earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) to consolidated cash interest expense and defines the maximum leverage ratio as the ratio of total consolidated debt to the cumulative four quarter trailing consolidated EBITDA. Consolidated EBITDA, as defined by the credit agreement excludes restructuring, non-cash equity compensation and other certain adjustments. At June 26, 2011, the company was in compliance with these covenants.

Note 13 – Acquisitions and Divestitures

On March 15, 2011, the company completed the acquisition of TranSiC, a silicon carbide power transistor company for $17.4 million. The acquisition provides the company with bipolar silicon carbide technology with demonstrated efficiencies and strong performance advantages over MOSFET and JFET technology. As part of the acquisition, the company also acquired a team of experienced silicon carbide engineers and scientists, and multiple patents in silicon carbide technology. Products using this technology will be sold as discrete solutions and as part of our smart power modules. No pro forma results of operations are presented because the disclosures are not material.

Note 14 – Subsequent Events

The company has evaluated subsequent events and did not identify any events that required disclosure.

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

Except as otherwise indicated in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, the terms “we,” “our,” the “company,” “Fairchild” and “Fairchild International” refer to Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries, including Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, our principal operating subsidiary. We refer to individual subsidiaries where appropriate.

Overview

We entered 2011 as a different company than we were just a few years ago. Over the last 5 years we have sharpened our product and end market focus which has enabled us to deepen our application knowledge and provide innovative solutions to our customers. As we invested in new technologies, we reduced our exposure to less differentiated, more mature products. In addition to improvements in our technology and product focus, we have redesigned our supply chain and operations processes to support strong growth. In 2011, our major focus is to drive sales higher while continuing our gross margin progression as we take advantage of the strong industrial, automotive and appliance demand for high voltage products and to increase market share for our mobile analog and latest MOSFET solutions.

We strive to keep inventory as lean as possible while maintaining customer service. We prefer to maintain maximum flexibility by adjusting internal inventories in response to higher demand before adding more inventory to our distribution channels. We continue to manage our production output to maintain channel inventories within a target range of 7.5 to 8.5 weeks. At the end of the second quarter internal inventories were at $ 253.4 million, an increase of $20.7 million over the end of 2010; however days of internal inventory remained fairly flat.

The Mobile, Computing, Consumer and Communication (MCCC) group’s main focus is to supply the mobile, computing, consumer and communication end market segments with innovative power and signal path solutions including our low voltage metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistors (MOSFETs), Power Management integrated circuits (IC’s,) Mixed Signal Analog and Logic products. We seek to deliver exceptional product performance by optimizing silicon processes and application specific design to satisfy specific requirements for our customers. This enables us to deliver solutions with greater energy efficiency and smaller footprint than is commonly available. We expect a steady acceleration of new product sales especially for solutions addressing the handset and ultraportable market.

The Power Conversion, Industrial, and Automotive (PCIA) group’s focus is to capitalize on the growing demand for greater energy efficiency in power supplies, consumer electronics, battery chargers, electric motors, industrial electronics and automobiles. We are a leader in power factor correction, low standby power consumption designs, innovative switching techniques and power module technology that enable greater efficiency and better performance. Improving the efficiency of our customers’ products is vital to meeting new energy efficiency regulations. Effectively managing the power conversion and initial voltage regulation in power supplies is one of the greatest opportunities we have to improve overall system efficiency. We believe the growing global focus on energy efficiency will continue to drive growth in this product line.

Standard Discrete and Standard Linear (SDT) products are core building block components for many electronic applications. This segment is moving to a more simplified and focused operating model to make the selling and support of these products easier and more profitable. The right operational structure and part portfolio should enable our standard products group to continue to generate solid cash flow with minimal investment.

Results of Operations

The following table summarizes certain information relating to our operating results as derived from our unaudited consolidated financial statements.


	Three Months Ended								Six Months Ended
	June 26, 2011				June 27, 2010				June 26, 2011				June 27, 2010
	(Dollars in millions)
Total revenue	$	433.2	100.0	%	$	409.6	100.0	%	$	846.2	100.0	%	$	787.6	100.0	%
Gross margin		160.7	37.1	%		143.3	35.0	%		312.7	37.0	%		264.9	33.6	%
Operating expenses:
Research and development		39.9	9.2	%		29.1	7.1	%		76.8	9.1	%		57.5	7.3	%
Selling, general and administrative		58.3	13.5	%		56.0	13.7	%		113.4	13.4	%		108.3	13.8	%
Amortization of acquisition-related intangibles		4.7	1.1	%		5.6	1.4	%		10.3	1.2	%		11.2	1.4	%
Restructuring and impairments		2.9	0.7	%		—				5.4	0.6	%		2.4	0.3	%

Total operating expenses		105.8	24.4	%		90.7	22.1	%		205.9	24.3	%		179.4	22.8	%
Operating income		54.9	12.7	%		52.6	12.8	%		106.8	12.6	%		85.5	10.9	%
Other expense, net		3.3	0.8	%		2.6	0.6	%		4.4	0.5	%		5.0	0.6	%

Income before income taxes		51.6	11.9	%		50.0	12.2	%		102.4	12.1	%		80.5	10.2	%
Provision for income taxes		6.7	1.5	%		6.2	1.5	%		14.0	1.7	%		14.1	1.8	%

Net income	$	44.9	10.4	%	$	43.8	10.7	%	$	88.4	10.4	%	$	66.4	8.4	%

Adjusted net income, adjusted gross margin, and free cash flow are also included in the table below. These are non-GAAP financial measures and should not be considered a replacement for GAAP results. We present adjusted results because we use them as additional measures of our operating performance. We believe the adjusted information is useful to investors because it illuminates underlying operational trends by excluding certain significant non-recurring or otherwise unusual transactions. Our criteria for adjusted results may differ from methods used by other companies and may not be comparable and should not be considered as alternatives to net income or loss, gross margin, or other measures of consolidated operations and cash flow data prepared in accordance with US GAAP as indicators of our operating performance or as alternatives to cash flow as a measure of liquidity.


	Three Months Ended										Six Months Ended
	June 26, 2011					June 27, 2010					June 26, 2011					June 27, 2010
	(Dollars in millions )
Non GAAP measures
Adjusted net income	$	54.6				$	51.3				$	105.9				$	83.1
Adjusted gross margin		161.0		37.2	%		144.2		35.2	%		313.2		37.0	%		267.0		33.9	%
Free cash flow		39.3					54.5					61.7					90.2
Reconciliation of Net Income to Adjusted Net Income
Net income		44.9					43.8					88.4					66.4
Adjustments to reconcile net income to adjusted net income:
Restructuring and impairments		2.9					—					5.4					2.4
Gain on sale of equity investment							—										—
Net impairment/gain on equity investments							—										—
Gain associated with debt buyback							—										—
Accelerated depreciation on assets related to fab closure		0.3					0.9					0.5					2.2
Goodwill impairment charge
Write off of deferred financing fees		2.1										2.1
Impairment of investments
Charge for litigation
Inventory release associated with fab closure		—					—										(0.1	)
Amortization of acquisition-related intangibles		4.7					5.6					10.3					11.2
Associated net tax effects of the above and other acquisition-related intangibles		(0.3	)				1.0					(0.8	)				1.0

Adjusted net income	$	54.6				$	51.3				$	105.9				$	83.1

Reconciliation of Gross Margin to Adjusted Gross Margin
Gross margin		160.7					143.3					312.7					264.9
Adjustments to reconcile gross margin to adjusted gross margin:
Accelerated depreciation on assets related to fab closure		0.3					0.9					0.5					2.2
Inventory release associated with fab closure		—					—					—					(0.1	)

Adjusted gross margin	$	161.0				$	144.2				$	313.2				$	267.0

Reconciliation of Operating Cash Flow to Free Cash Flow
Cash provided by operating activities	$	93.1				$	87.6				$	149.8				$	141.1
Capital expenditures		(53.8	)				(33.1	)				(88.1	)				(50.9	)

Free cash flow	$	39.3				$	54.5				$	61.7				$	90.2

Total Revenue. Total revenue in the second quarter and first six months of 2011 increased by $23.6 million and $58.6 million or approximately 6% and 7%, respectively, on fewer overall unit sales when compared to the same periods in 2010. The increase in average selling prices was driven by an improvement in product mix.

Geographic revenue information is based on the customer location within the indicated geographic region. The following table presents, as a percentage of sales, geographic sales for the U.S., Other Americas, Europe, China, Taiwan, Korea and Other Asia/Pacific (which for our geographic reporting purposes includes Japan and Singapore) for the three months ended June 26, 2011. The increase in other Asia/Pacific revenue was driven by increased demand in our Japan sales region after the earthquake and tsunami.


	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	June 26, 2011			June 27, 2010			June 26, 2011			June 27, 2010
U.S.		11	%		12	%		11	%		11	%
Other Americas		2			3			2			3
Europe		14			13			14			13
China		34			33			34			33
Taiwan		14			15			14			16
Korea		11			13			11			13
Other Asia/Pacific		14			11			14			11

Total		100	%		100	%		100	%		100	%

Gross Margin. In the second quarter and first six months of 2011 gross margin dollars increased by $17.4 million and $47.8 million and gross margin percent improved from 35.0% to 37.1 % and 33.6% to 37.0%, respectively, as compared to the same periods in 2010. The increase in gross margin is due to increased revenue from higher average selling prices and improvements in product mix as we continue to divest our product portfolio of lower margin products. This was partially offset by an increase in currency, commodity prices, and labor costs in 2011.

Adjusted Gross Margin. In the second quarter and first six months of 2011 adjusted gross margin dollars increased by $16.8 million and $46.2 million and adjusted gross margin percent improved from 35.2% to 37.2% and 33.9% to 37.0%, respectively, as compared to the same periods in 2010 for the reasons listed above. Adjusted gross margin does not include the accelerated depreciation due to the planned closure of the Mountaintop facility. See reconciliation of gross margin to adjusted gross margin above.

Operating Expenses. Research and development (R&D) expenses increased during the second quarter and first six months of 2011 as compared to the same periods in 2010 as a result of increased investment in R&D programs and resources, including costs associated with the design center in Irvine, California that was purchased in the third quarter of 2010, the acquisition of a MEMs business in December 2010, and the Transic acquisition in the first quarter of 2011. These increases were offset slightly by decreases in variable compensation expenses. Selling expenses increased but were down as a percentage of revenue from 8% in 2010 to 7% in 2011. The increase in selling expense was driven by increased spending on payroll, travel, and advertising which was offset in part by a reduction in variable compensation. General and administrative (G&A) expenses were up slightly but were flat as a percentage of revenue. The increase was driven primarily by increases in equity compensation which were partially offset by decreases in variable compensation.

Restructuring and Impairment. During the three and six months ended June 26, 2011, the company recorded restructuring and impairment charges, net of releases, of $2.9 million and $5.4 million, respectively. The second quarter charges include $0.5 million of employee separation costs, $0.3 million of fab closure costs, and $0.1 million of reserve releases associated with the 2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program as well as $0.9 million in employee separation costs associated with the 2010 Infrastructure Realignment Program and $1.3 million in employee separation costs associated with the 2011 Infrastructure Realignment Program. First quarter charges include $0.6 million of employee separation costs and $0.2 million of fab closure costs associated with the 2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program as well as $1.0 million in employee separation costs associated with the 2010 Infrastructure Realignment Program and $0.7 million in employee separations costs associated with the 2011 Infrastructure Realignment Program.

During the three and six months ended June 27, 2010, we recorded restructuring and impairment charges, net of releases, of $0 and $2.4 million, respectively. The net amount of $0 recorded during the second quarter is comprised of a $2.4 million restructuring expense reversal as well as charges of $1.3 million in employee separation costs, $0.5 million of fab closure costs and $0.2 million in releases associated with the 2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program and $0.8 million in employee separation costs associated with the 2010 Infrastructure Realignment Program. The charges in the first quarter include $1.6 million of employee separation costs, $0.6 million of fab closure costs and $0.2 million in releases associated with the 2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program as well as $0.4 million in employee separation costs associated with the 2010 Infrastructure Realignment Program.

The 2011 Infrastructure Realignment Program includes costs for organizational changes in our supply chain management group, changes to our website technology organization, as well as costs for some organization changes in the PCIA segment. The 2010 Infrastructure Realignment Program includes costs to simplify and realign some of the activities within the MCCC and PCIA segments, costs for the continued refinement of our manufacturing strategy and costs to centralize several of our accounting functions.

The closure of the Mountaintop, Pennsylvania manufacturing facility and the four-inch manufacturing line in Bucheon, South Korea was announced in the first quarter of 2009 and the charges associated with those programs are included in the 2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program. The 2009 Infrastructure Realignment Program also includes charges for a smaller worldwide cost reduction plan to further right-size our company and remain financially healthy. While we had originally anticipated that this closure would be completed in 2010, we extended the Mountaintop closure until the end of 2012 to better support strong customer demand and our significant pipeline of new products.

Once the planned closure of the Mountaintop facility and the consolidation of South Korea fabrication process are complete we expect to achieve annualized cost savings ranging from $20 to $25 million from the 2008 baseline. We anticipate that the financial impact of higher revenues as a result of extending the Mountaintop closure will more than offset the cost savings delayed from continuing to operate the facility. We expect to transfer the majority of Mountaintop’s manufacturing capacity to other Fairchild facilities and support similar revenue levels upon closure.

Other Expense, net.

The following table presents a summary of other expense, net for the three months ended June 26, 2011 and March 28, 2010.


	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	June 26, 2011			June 27, 2010			June 26, 2011			June 27, 2010
	(In millions)
Other expense, net
Interest expense	$	1.7		$	3.0		$	3.4		$	6.0
Interest income		(0.6	)		(0.7	)		(1.3	)		(1.4	)
Other (income) expense, net		2.2			0.3			2.3			0.4

Other expense, net	$	3.3		$	2.6		$	4.4		$	5.0

Interest expense. Interest expense in the second quarter and first six months of 2011 decreased $1.3 million and $2.6, respectively, when compared to the same periods in 2010, primarily due to lower debt balances.

Interest income. Interest income in the second quarter and first six months of 2011 remained fairly flat when compared to the same periods in 2010.

Other (income) expense, net. Other expense in the second quarter and first six months of 2011 increased $1.9 million. The increase was caused by the $2.1 million write off of deferred financing fees associated with the pay down of our term loan in the second quarter of 2011.

Income Taxes. Income tax provision in the second quarter and first six months of 2011 was $6.7 million and $14.0 million on income before taxes of $51.6 million and $102.4 million, respectively, as compared to income tax provisions of $6.2 million and $14.1 million on income before taxes of $50.0 million and $80.5 million, respectively, for the same periods of 2010. The effective tax rate for the second quarter and first six months of 2011 was 13.0% and 13.7% compared to 12.4% and 17.5%, respectively, for the comparable periods of 2010. The change in effective tax rate is primarily due to shifts of income and loss among jurisdictions with differing tax rates. In the first six months of 2011, the valuation allowance on our deferred tax assets decreased by $9.0 million. The overall decrease did not impact our results of operations.

In accordance with the Income Taxes Topic in the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC), deferred taxes have not been provided on undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries which are reinvested indefinitely. Certain non-U.S. earnings, which have been taxed in the U.S. but earned offshore, have and continue to be part of our repatriation plan. As of June 26, 2011, we have recorded a deferred tax liability of $1.4 million, with no impact to the consolidated statement of operations as we have a full valuation allowance against our net U.S. deferred tax assets.

Free Cash Flow. Free cash flow is a non-GAAP financial measure. To determine free cash flow, we subtract capital expenditures from cash provided by operating activities. Free cash flow decreased approximately $28.5 million in the first six months of 2011 when compared to the same period in 2010. The decrease was mainly due to an increase in capital expenditures and a decrease in accrued liabilities related to variable compensation payments in the first quarter of 2011. Capital expenditures were $37.2 million higher in the first six months of 2011. This increase was partially offset by increased net income and favorable changes in our working capital accounts. See free cash flow reconciliation in the results of operations section above.

Reportable Segments.

The following tables present comparative disclosures of revenue and gross margin of our reportable segments.


	Three Months Ended
	June 26, 2011											June 27, 2010
	Revenue		% of total			Gross Margin %			Operating Income (loss)			Revenue		% of total			Gross Margin %			Operating Income (loss)
	(Dollars in millions)
MCCC	$	166.1		38.3	%		37.2	%	$	32.7		$	168.8		41.2	%		38.4	%	$	41.2
PCIA		224.4		51.8	%		39.7	%		66.0			190.6		46.5	%		36.6	%		51.7
SDT		42.7		9.9	%		26.4	%		8.8			50.2		12.3	%		23.8	%		10.3
Corporate (1)		—		—			—			(52.6	)		—		—			—			(50.6	)

Total	$	433.2		100.0	%		37.1	%	$	54.9		$	409.6		100.0	%		35.0	%	$	52.6


	Six Months Ended
	June 26, 2011											June 27, 2010
	Revenue		% of total			Gross Margin %			Operating Income (loss)			Revenue		% of total			Gross Margin %			Operating Income (loss)
	(Dollars in millions)
MCCC	$	328.1		38.8	%		38.3	%	$	68.6		$	324.9		41.3	%		37.0	%	$	73.2
PCIA		434.3		51.3	%		38.6	%		124.6			369.7		46.9	%		35.3	%		94.8
SDT		83.8		9.9	%		26.1	%		17.7			93.0		11.8	%		23.0	%		18.1
Corporate (1)		—		—						(104.1	)		—		—			—			(100.6	)

Total	$	846.2		100.0	%		37.0	%	$	106.8		$	787.6		100.0	%		33.6	%	$	85.5

(1)

The three and six months ended June 26, 2011 includes $8.0 million and $13.0 million of stock-based compensation expense, $2.9 million and $5.4 million of restructuring and impairments expense, $0.3 million and $0.7 million of other costs which primarily consist of accelerated depreciation related to the closure of the Mountaintop facility, and $41.4 million and $85.0 million of SG&A expenses, respectively. The three and six months ended June 27, 2010 includes $5.9 million and $11.7 million of stock-based compensation expense, $0.0 million and $2.4 million of restructuring and impairments expense, $1.6 million and $3.3 million of other costs which primarily consist of accelerated depreciation related to the closure of the Mountaintop facility, and $43.1 million and $83.2 million of SG&A expenses, respectively.

MCCC revenue decreased $2.7 million or approximately 2% in the second quarter of 2011 when compared to the same period in 2010. Revenue increased $3.2 or approximately 1% in the first six months of 2011, compared to the first six months of 2010. The revenue decrease in the second quarter was driven by a decrease in the number of units sold, which was partially offset by higher average selling prices. The revenue increase in the first six months was driven by higher average selling prices which offset the 8% decrease in the number of units sold over 2010. The improvement in average selling prices was driven by improved product mix in the Mobile Solutions group within MCCC, primarily in logic and switch products. This pricing improvement was driven by application specific solutions for mobile customers and the demand for USB and multimedia switch solutions. Gross margin dollars decreased $3.2 million in the second quarter of 2011 compared to the same period in 2010 driven by the decrease in revenue. Gross margin dollars increased $5.7 million in the first six months of 2011 when compared to the same period in 2010 attributable to increased revenue and the introduction of new products at higher gross margins.

MCCC had operating income of $32.7 million and $68.6 million for the second quarter and six months of 2011, respectively, as compared to $41.2 million and $73.2 million in the same period of 2010. Operating income decreased as a result of decreased gross margin in the second quarter and increased R&D expenses in both the second quarter and first six months of 2011. The increase in R&D resulted from an increased investment in R&D programs focused primarily on MPS, signal conditioning and switch products as well as additional spending as a result of the MEMS company we acquired during the fourth quarter of 2010 and the design center we purchased in the third quarter of 2010.

PCIA revenue increased $33.8 million and $64.6 million or approximately 18% and 17% in the second quarter and first six months of 2011, respectively, as compared to the same periods in 2010. Revenue was higher in the auto, high voltage and optoelectronics product lines due to higher average selling prices driven by sales of our smart power modules, high voltage MOSFETS and IGBT’s as well as strong demand for our electronic power steering modules, and ignition IGBT products. Increased unit sales in the auto and optoelectronics groups were offset by a reduction in unit sales in the high voltage group. This increased revenue in auto, high voltage and opto was partially offset by a slight decrease in power conversion revenues driven by the weakness in the display market. Gross margin increased $19.5 million and $17.8 million in second quarter and first six months of 2011, as compared to the same periods in 2010. Increased gross margin was driven by higher revenue, improved product mix, and a customs duty settlement offset by an unfavorable impact from a strengthening of the Korean Won and the Taiwan Dollar.

PCIA had operating income of $66.0 million and $124.6 million for the second quarter and six months of 2011, respectively, as compared to $51.7 million and $94.8 million in the same period of 2010. Increased operating income was mainly attributed to higher gross margin as mentioned above. The increase was partially offset by higher R&D and SG&A expenses as a result of increased investment in R&D programs, the acquisition of Transic in the first quarter of 2011, as well as increased headcount, travel, and an unfavorable impact from a strengthening of the Korean Won and Taiwan Dollar.

SDT revenue decreased $7.5 million and $9.2 million or approximately 15% and 10% in the second quarter and first six months of 2011, respectively, as compared to the same periods in 2010. An increase in average selling prices was offset by a decrease in the numbers of units sold as we strategically target a richer portfolio of products with higher selling prices. Gross margin dollars were lower by $1.3 million and $0.1 million in second quarter and first six months of 2011, as compared to the same periods in 2010. However, gross margin percent increased from 23.8% to 26.4% and 23.0% to 26.1%, respectively, for the second quarter and first six months of 2011 compared to 2010. Increased gross margin percent was driven by strategic mix management as lower margin products continue to be mixed out in order to support top tier customers and best utilize available manufacturing capacities.

SDT had operating income of $8.8 million and $17.7 million for the second quarter and six months of 2011, respectively, as compared to $10.3 million and $18.1 million in the same period of 2010. The decrease in operating income was due to lower gross margin dollars. Operating expenses were up slightly in the second quarter and the first six months of 2011 resulting from higher selling expenses.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Our main sources of liquidity are our cash flows from operations, cash and cash equivalents and revolving credit facility. As of June 26, 2011, $171.4 million of our $435.7 million cash and cash equivalents balance is located in the United States. We believe that funds generated from operations, together with existing cash and funds from our revolving credit facility will be sufficient to meet our cash needs over the next twelve months.

We entered into a new senior secured revolving credit facility (Credit Facility) in May of 2011. The Credit Facility consists of a $400.0 million revolving loan agreement of which $300 million was drawn as of June 26, 2011. After adjusting for outstanding letters of credit, we had $98.7 million available under the Credit Facility. This revolving borrowing capacity is available for working capital and general corporate purposes, including acquisitions. We had additional outstanding letters of credit of $2.4 million that do not fall under the senior credit facility. We also had $3.2 million of undrawn credit facilities at certain of our foreign subsidiaries. These outstanding amounts do not impact available borrowings under the senior credit facility.

The Credit Facility includes restrictive covenants that place limitations on our ability to consolidate, merge, or enter into acquisitions, create liens or pay dividends, or make similar restricted payments, sell assets, invest in capital expenditures, and incur indebtedness. It also places limitations on our ability to modify our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, or enter into shareholder agreements, voting trusts or similar arrangements. In addition, the affirmative covenants in the Credit Facility also require our financial performance to comply with certain financial measures, as defined by the credit agreement. These financial covenants require us to maintain a minimum interest coverage ratio of 3.0 to 1.0 and a maximum leverage ratio of 3.25 to 1.0. It defines the interest coverage ratio as the ratio of the cumulative four quarter trailing consolidated earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) to consolidated cash interest expense and defines the maximum leverage ratio as the ratio of total consolidated debt to the cumulative four quarter trailing consolidated EBITDA. Consolidated EBITDA, as defined by the credit agreement excludes restructuring, non-cash equity compensation and other certain adjustments.

At June 26, 2011, we were in compliance with these covenants and we expect to remain in compliance with the covenants. This expectation is subject to various risks and uncertainties discussed more thoroughly in Item 1A, and include, among others, the risk that our assumptions and expectations about business conditions, expenses and cash flows for the remainder of the year may be inaccurate.

While our senior credit facility places restrictions on the payment of dividends, it does not restrict the subsidiaries of Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, except to a limited extent, from paying dividends or making advances to Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation. As a result, we believe that funds generated from operations, together with existing cash and funds from our senior credit facility will be sufficient to meet our debt obligations, operating requirements, capital expenditures and research and development funding needs over the next twelve months. In the first six months 2011, our capital expenditures totaled $88.1 million.

We frequently evaluate opportunities to sell additional equity or debt securities, obtain credit facilities from lenders or restructure our long-term debt to further strengthen our financial position. The sale of additional equity securities could result in additional dilution to our stockholders. Additional borrowing or equity investment may be required to fund future acquisitions.

During the first six months of 2011, our cash provided by operating activities was $149.8 million compared to $141.1 million in the same period of 2010. The following table presents a summary of net cash provided by operating activities during the first six months of 2011 and 2010.


	Six Months Ended
	June 26, 2011			June 27, 2010
Net income (loss)	$	88.4		$	66.4
Depreciation and amortization		75.6			79.7
Non-cash stock-based compensation		13.0			11.2
Deferred income taxes, net		(5.6	)		2.9
Other, net		2.9			0.6
Change in other working capital accounts		(24.5	)		(19.7	)

Net cash provided by operating activities		149.8			141.1

Cash provided by operating activities increased $8.7 million during the first six months of 2011 as compared to the same period of 2010 as the $22.0 million increase in net income was offset by unfavorable changes in our working capital and deferred income tax accounts.

Cash used in investing activities during the first six months of 2011 totaled $105.9 million compared to $51.4 million for the same period of 2010. The increase in the use of cash is the result of higher capital expenditures as well as the $16.5 million cost for our TranSiC acquisition, net of cash acquired, in the first quarter of 2011. Our capital expenditures during the first six months of 2011 were $88.1 million compared to $50.9 million in the same period in 2010.

Cash used in financing activities totaled $12.8 million in the first six months of 2011 compared to $45.8 million in the same period of 2010. In 2011, we received $35.2 million in proceeds from the exercise of stock options which partially offset our debt payments and purchases of treasury stock. There were minimal proceeds from stock options in 2010.

As of June 26, 2011 and December 26, 2010, we have not recorded any net unrecognized tax benefits.

Liquidity and Capital Resources of Fairchild International, Excluding Subsidiaries

Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. is a holding company, the principal asset of which is the stock of its sole subsidiary, Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. on a stand-alone basis had no cash flow from operations and has no cash requirements for the next twelve months.

Forward Looking Statements

This quarterly report contains “forward-looking statements” as that term is defined in Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “we believe,” “we expect,” “we intend,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “seeks,” “approximately,” “plans,” “estimates,” “anticipates,” or “hopeful,” or the negative of those terms or other comparable terms, or by discussions of our strategy, plans or future performance. All forward-looking statements in this report are made based on management’s current expectations and estimates, which involve risks and uncertainties, including those described below and more specifically in the Risk Factors section. Among these factors are the following: current economic uncertainty, including disruptions in the credit markets, as well as future economic conditions; changes in demand for our products; changes in inventories at our customers and distributors; changes in regional or global economic or political conditions (including as a result of terrorist attacks and responses to them); technological and product development risks, including the risks of failing to

maintain the right to use some technologies or failing to adequately protect our own intellectual property against misappropriation or infringement; availability of manufacturing capacity; the risk of production delays; the inability to attract and retain key management and other employees; risks related to warranty and product liability claims; risks inherent in doing business internationally; changes in tax regulations or the migration of profits from low tax jurisdictions to higher tax jurisdictions; availability and cost of raw materials; competitors’ actions; loss of key customers, including but not limited to distributors; order cancellations or reduced bookings; changes in manufacturing yields or output; and significant litigation. Factors that may affect our operating results are described in the Risk Factors section in the quarterly and annual reports we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Such risks and uncertainties could cause actual results to be materially different from those in the forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements.

Recently Issued Financial Accounting Standards

In June 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05 (ASU 2011-05), Comprehensive Income: Presentation of Comprehensive Income. This standard increases the prominence of other comprehensive income in the financial statements. Under the standard, an entity will have the option to present the components of net income and comprehensive income in either one or two consecutive statements. The standard eliminates the option to present other comprehensive income in the statement of changes in equity. This statement is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of ASU 2011-05 will not impact our consolidated financial statements as we already present a separate statement of comprehensive income following the income statement.

In May 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-04 (ASU 2011-04), Fair Value Measurement: Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in US GAAP and IFRS. This update was issued concurrently with IFRS 13, Fair Value Measurements, to provide largely identical guidance about fair value measurement and disclosure requirements. The new standard does not extend the use of fair value but provides guidance about how fair value should be applied where it is already required or permitted under IFRS or US GAAP. This statement is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of ASU 2011-04 is not expected to have a material effect on our consolidated financial position and results of operations and statements of cash flows.

In December 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2010-29 (ASU 2010-29), Business Combinations: Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations. The amendments in this update address the diversity in the interpretation of pro forma revenue and earnings disclosure requirements for business combinations. This statement is effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The adoption of ASU 2010-29 did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.

In December 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2010-28 (ASU 2010-289), Intangibles: When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts . The amendments in this modify Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. This statement is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010. The adoption of ASU 2010-28 will not have a material effect on our consolidated financial position and results of operations and statements of cash flows.

Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

Reference is made to Part II, Item 7A, Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk, in Fairchild Semiconductor International’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 26, 2010 and under the subheading “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” on page 52 of the Form 10-K. There were no material changes in the information we provided in our Form 10-K during the period covered by this Quarterly Report.

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures designed to assure, as much as is reasonably possible, that information required to be disclosed in reports filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, is communicated to management and recorded, processed, summarized and disclosed within the specified time periods. As of the end of the period covered by this report, our chief executive officer (CEO) and chief financial officer (CFO), with the participation of our management, have evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures. Based on the evaluation, our CEO and CFO concluded that as of June 26, 2011, our disclosure controls and procedures are effective.

Inherent Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls

The company’s management, including the CEO and CFO, does not expect that our disclosure controls or our internal control over financial reporting will prevent or detect all error and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. The design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Further, because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Controls can also be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the controls. The design of any system of controls is based in part on certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events. There can be no assurance that any control system will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate if conditions change or compliance with policies or procedures deteriorates.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the second three months of 2011 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, internal control over financial reporting.

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

There are four outstanding proceedings with Power Integrations.

POWI 1 : On October 20, 2004, we and our wholly owned subsidiary, Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, were sued by Power Integrations, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Power Integrations alleged that certain of our pulse width modulation (PWM) integrated circuit products infringed four Power Integrations U.S. patents, and sought a permanent injunction preventing us from manufacturing, selling or offering the products for sale in the U.S., or from importing the products into the U.S., as well as money damages for past infringement.

The trial in the case was divided into three phases. In the first phase of the trial that occurred in October of 2006, a jury returned a verdict finding that thirty-three of our PWM products willfully infringed one or more of seven claims asserted in the four patents and assessed damages against us. We voluntarily stopped U.S. sales and importation of those products in 2007 and have been offering replacement products since 2006. Subsequent phases of the trial conducted during 2007 and 2008 focused on the validity and enforceability of the patents. In December of 2008, the judge overseeing the case reduced the jury’s 2006 damages award from $34 million to approximately $6.1 million and ordered a new trial on the issue of willfulness. The new trial was held in June of 2009 and then in January of 2011 the court awarded Power Integrations final damages in the amount of $12.2 million. We have challenged the final damages award, willfulness finding, injunction, and other issues on appeal. As a result of the appeal, we may be required to post a bond or provide other security in an amount equal to the final damages award for the duration of the appeal process.

POWI 2 : On May 23, 2008, Power Integrations filed another lawsuit against us, Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation and our wholly owned subsidiary System General Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of three patents. Of the three patents claimed in this lawsuit, two are patents that were asserted against us and Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation in the October 2004 lawsuit described above. As mentioned below, the majority of the claims asserted in the first lawsuit from these two patents have now received final rejections from the patent office, and the third patent has also received preliminary rejections. We believe we have strong defenses against Power Integrations’ claims and intend to vigorously defend this second lawsuit.

Both lawsuits have been consolidated and will be heard together in Delaware District Court. The trial is currently scheduled for spring of 2012.

POWI 3 : On November 4, 2009, Power Integrations, Inc. filed a complaint for patent infringement against us and two of our subsidiaries in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California alleging that several of our products infringe three of Power Integrations’ patents. One of those patents has since been dropped from the case. We intend to put on a vigorous defense against these claims. In the same lawsuit we have filed counterclaims against Power Integrations, alleging Power Integrations’ products infringe certain claims of one of our patents.

Reexaminations: Parallel to the above federal court proceedings, we also petitioned the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for reexamination of all unexpired patents claims asserted in POWI 1 and POWI 2 (those being all asserted claims from three of the four patents asserted in POWI 1 (the fourth patent has expired) and all of the patent claims asserted in POWI 2). Of the claims asserted in the four patents from POWI 1 and POWI 2, Power Integrations has amended or cancelled a majority of those at issue.

POWI 4: On February 10, 2010 Fairchild and System General filed a lawsuit in Suzhou, China against four Power Integrations entities and seven vendors. The lawsuit claims that Power Integrations violates four Fairchild/System General patents. Fairchild is seeking an injunction against the Power Integration products and over $17.0 million in damages. Power Integrations is currently seeking to invalidate the Fairchild/System General patents in proceedings before the Chinese patent office.

Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation v. Cadeka Microcircuits, LLC. We filed this lawsuit against a competitor for misappropriation of trade secrets, tortuous interference with contract and breach of contract. The competitor filed counterclaims alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment and other claims. The case is pending in Colorado Larimer County District Court and will likely proceed to trial in late 2011 or early 2012. We are vigorously prosecuting and defending this case.

Other Legal Claims . From time to time we are involved in legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business. We believe that there is no such ordinary-course litigation pending that could have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

We have analyzed the potential litigation outcomes from current litigation in accordance with the Contingency Topic of the FASB ASC. We estimate the loss contingency by undertaking a process to determine an estimate of the possible loss or range of losses. For cases where we believe it is probable that a loss has occurred, we believe the range of possible losses is approximately $13.0 to $30.0 million. Based upon assessments of the potential liabilities using analysis of claims and historical experience in defending and/or resolving these claims, the company has recorded reserves for potential litigation outcomes of $14.7 million as of June 26, 2011. For cases where we believe it is reasonably possible that a loss has occurred, we believe the range of possible losses is approximately zero to $5.0 million. We have recorded no reserves for potential litigation outcomes for reasonably possible losses.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

A description of the risk factors associated with our business is set forth below. We review and update our risk factors each quarter. The description set forth below includes any changes to and supersedes the description of the risk factors associated with our business previously disclosed in Part I, Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2010. The risks described below are not the only ones facing us. Additional risks not currently known to us or that we currently believe are immaterial also may impair our business operations and financial condition.

The price of our common stock has fluctuated widely in the past and may fluctuate widely in the future.

Our common stock is traded on The New York Stock Exchange and significantly increased in value during 2010. Additionally, our stock has experienced and may continue to experience significant price and volume fluctuations that could adversely affect its market price without regard to our operating performance. We believe that factors such as quarterly fluctuations in financial results, earnings below analysts’ estimates and financial performance and other activities of other publicly traded companies in the semiconductor industry could cause the price of our common stock to fluctuate substantially. In addition, our common stock, the stock market in general and the market for shares of

semiconductor industry-related stocks in particular have experienced extreme price fluctuations which have often been unrelated to the operating performance of the affected companies. Similar fluctuations in the future could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

We maintain a backlog of customer orders that is subject to cancellation, reduction or delay in delivery schedules, which may result in lower than expected revenues.

We manufacture products primarily pursuant to purchase orders for current delivery or to forecast, rather than pursuant to long-term supply contracts. The semiconductor industry is occasionally subject to double booking and rapid changes in customer outlooks or unexpected build ups of inventory in the supply channel as a result of shifts in end market demand and macro economic conditions. Accordingly, many of these purchase orders or forecasts may be revised or canceled without penalty. As a result, we must commit resources to the manufacture of products without binding purchase commitments from customers. Even in cases where our standard terms and conditions of sale or other contractual arrangements do not permit a customer to cancel an order without penalty, we may from time to time accept cancellations to maintain customer relationships or because of industry practice, custom or other factors. Our inability to sell products after we devote significant resources to them could have a material adverse effect on both our levels of inventory and revenues. While we currently believe our inventory levels are appropriate for the current economic environment, continued global economic uncertainty may result in lower than expected demand. While we anticipate increasing demand in many of our markets, lower demand than anticipated may impact our customers’ target inventory levels. During 2010 we successfully lowered channel inventory and we continue to carefully manage our inventory in 2011; however our current business forecasting is still qualified by the risk that our backlog may deteriorate as a result of customer cancellations.

Downturns in the highly cyclical semiconductor industry or changes in end user market demands could reduce the profitability and overall value of our business, which could cause the trading price of our stock to decline or have other adverse effects on our financial position.

The semiconductor industry is highly cyclical, and the value of our business may decline as a result of market response to this cyclicality. As we have experienced in the past, uncertainty in global economic conditions may continue to negatively affect us and the rest of the semiconductor industry, by causing us to experience backlog cancellations, higher inventory levels and reduced demand for our products. We may experience renewed, possibly severe and prolonged, downturns in the future as a result of this cyclicality. Even as demand increases following such downturns, our profitability may not increase because of price competition and supply shortages that historically accompany recoveries in demand. In addition, we may experience significant fluctuations in our profitability as a result of variations in sales, product mix, end user markets, the costs associated with the introduction of new products, and our efforts to reduce excess inventories that may have built up as a result of any of these factors. The markets for our products depend on continued demand for consumer electronics such as personal computers, cellular telephones, tablet devices, digital cameras, and automotive, household and industrial goods. Deteriorating global economic conditions may cause these end user markets to experience decreases in demand that could adversely affect our business and future prospects.

Our failure to execute on our cost reduction initiatives and the impact of such initiatives could adversely affect our business.

We continue to take cost reduction initiatives to keep pace with the evolving economic and competitive conditions. These actions include plans to streamline and consolidate wafer manufacturing by closing our wafer manufacturing facility in Pennsylvania, closing our four-inch manufacturing line in South Korea and converting to 8 inch wafers in Salt Lake City, Utah, Bucheon, South Korea and South Portland, Maine. Additionally, we initiated several insourcing programs to replace higher-cost outside subcontractors with internal manufacturing, we lowered our materials costs and implemented workforce reductions in an effort to simplify operations, improve productivity and reduce costs.

We cannot guarantee that we will successfully implement any of these actions, or if these actions and other actions we may take will help reduce costs. Because restructuring activities involve changes to many aspects of our business, the cost reductions could adversely impact productivity and sales to an extent we have not anticipated. Even if we fully execute and implement these activities and they generate the anticipated cost savings, there may be other unforeseeable and unintended factors or consequences that could adversely impact our profitability and business.

We may not be able to develop new products to satisfy changing customer demands or we may develop the wrong products.

Our success is largely dependent upon our ability to innovate and create revenues from new product introductions. Failure to develop new technologies, or react to changes in existing technologies, could materially delay development of new products and lead to decreased revenues and a loss of market share to our competitors. The semiconductor industry is characterized by rapidly changing technologies and industry standards, together with frequent new product introductions. Our financial performance depends on our ability to identify important new technology advances and to design, develop, manufacture, assemble, test, market and support new products and enhancements on a timely and cost-effective basis. While new products often command higher prices and higher profit margins, we may not successfully identify new product opportunities and develop and bring new products to market or succeed in selling them for use in new customer applications in a timely and cost-effective manner. Products or technologies developed by other companies may render our products or technologies obsolete or noncompetitive. Many of our competitors are larger, older and more established companies with greater engineering and research and development resources than us. If we fail to identify a fundamental shift in technologies or in our product markets such failure could have material adverse effects on our competitive position within the industry. In addition, to remain competitive, we must continue our efforts to reduce die sizes, develop new packages and improve manufacturing yields. We cannot assure you that we can accomplish these goals.

If some original equipment manufacturers do not design our products into their equipment, our revenue may be adversely affected.

We depend on our ability to have OEMs, or their contract manufacturers, choose our products. Frequently, an OEM will incorporate or specifically design our products into the products it produces. In such cases the OEM may identify our products, with the products of a limited number of other vendors, as approved for use in particular OEM applications. Without “design wins,” we may only be able to sell our products to customers as a secondary source, if at all. If an OEM designs another supplier’s product into one of its applications, it is more difficult for us to achieve future design wins for that application because changing suppliers involves significant cost, time, effort and risk for the OEM. Even if a customer designs in our products, we are not guaranteed to receive future sales from that customer. We may be unable to achieve these “design wins” because of competition or a product’s functionality, size, electrical characteristics or other aspect of its design or price. Additionally, we may be unable to service expected demand from the customer. In addition, achieving a design win with a customer does not ensure that we will receive significant revenue from that customer and we may be unable to convert design into actual sales.

We depend on demand from the consumer, original equipment manufacturer, contract manufacturing, industrial, automotive and other markets we serve for the end market applications which incorporate our products. Reduced consumer or corporate spending due to increased energy and commodity prices or other economic factors could affect our revenues.

If we provide revenue, margin or earnings per share guidance, it is generally based on certain assumptions we make concerning the health of the overall economy and our projections of future consumer and corporate spending. If our projections of these expenditures are inaccurate or based upon erroneous assumptions, our revenues, margins and earnings per share could be adversely affected. For example, beginning in the third quarter and continuing into the fourth quarter of 2008, we observed progressively weakening order rates which we attributed to uncertainty and deterioration of global economic conditions. While order rates and profitability improved throughout 2010, we cannot be certain that a change in consumer demand will not have an adverse effect on our business.

Our failure to protect our intellectual property rights could adversely affect our future performance and growth.

Failure to protect our intellectual property rights may result in the loss of valuable technologies. We rely on patent, trade secret, trademark and copyright law to protect such technologies. These laws are subject to legislative and regulatory change or through changes in court interpretations of those laws and regulations. For example, there have been recent developments in the laws and regulations governing the issuance and assertion of patents in the U.S., including modifications to the rules governing patent prosecution. There have also been court rulings on the issues of willfulness, obviousness and injunctions, that may affect our ability to obtain patents and/or enforce our patents against others. Some of our technologies are not covered by any patent or patent application. With respect to our intellectual property generally, we cannot assure you that:

•

the patents owned by us or numerous other patents which third parties license to us will not be invalidated, circumvented, challenged or licensed to other companies; or

•

any of our pending or future patent applications will be issued within the scope of the claims sought by us, if at all.

In addition, effective patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret protection may be unavailable, limited or not applied for in some countries. We cannot assure that we will be able to effectively enforce our intellectual property rights in every country in which our products are sold or manufactured.

We also seek to protect our proprietary technologies, including technologies that may not be patented or patentable, in part by confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, inventors’ rights agreements with our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants. We cannot assure you that these agreements will not be breached, that we will have adequate remedies for any breach or that such persons or institutions will not assert rights to intellectual property arising out of such research. We have non-exclusive licenses to some of our technology from National Semiconductor, Infineon, Samsung Electronics and other companies. These companies may license such technologies to others, including our competitors or may compete with us directly. In addition, National Semiconductor and Infineon have limited royalty-free, worldwide license rights to some of our technologies. If necessary or desirable, we may seek licenses under patents or intellectual property rights claimed by others. However, we cannot assure you that we will obtain such licenses or that the terms of any offered licenses will be acceptable to us. The failure to obtain a license from a third party for technologies we use could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and to suspend the manufacture or shipment of products or our use of processes requiring the technologies.

Our failure to obtain or maintain the right to use some technologies may negatively affect our financial results.

Our future success and competitive position depend in part upon our ability to obtain or maintain proprietary technologies used in our principal products. From time to time we are required to defend against claims by competitors and others of intellectual property infringement. Claims of intellectual property infringement and litigation regarding patent and other intellectual property rights are commonplace in the semiconductor industry and are frequently time consuming and costly. From time to time, we may be notified of claims that we may be infringing patents issued to other companies. Such claims may relate both to products and manufacturing processes. We may engage in license negotiations regarding these claims from time to time. Even though we maintain procedures to avoid infringing others’ rights as part of our product and process development efforts, it is impossible to be aware of every possible patent which our products may infringe, and we cannot assure you that we will be successful in our efforts to avoid infringement claims. Furthermore, even if we conclude our products do not infringe another’s patents, others may not agree. We have been and are involved in lawsuits, and could become subject to other lawsuits, in which it is alleged that we have infringed upon the patent or other intellectual property rights of other companies. For example, since October 2004, we have been in litigation with Power Integrations, Inc. See Item 3, Legal Proceedings. Our involvement in this litigation and future intellectual property litigation, or the costs of avoiding or settling litigation by purchasing licenses rights or by other means, could result in significant expense to our company, adversely affecting sales of the challenged products or technologies and diverting the efforts and attention of our technical and management personnel, whether or not such litigation is resolved in our favor. We may decide to settle patent infringement claims or litigation by purchasing license rights from the claimant, even if we believe we are not infringing, in order to reduce the expense of continuing the dispute or because we are not sufficiently confident that we would eventually prevail. In the event of an adverse outcome as a defendant in any such litigation, we may be required to:

•

pay substantial damages;

•

indemnify our customers for damages they might suffer if the products they purchase from us violate the intellectual property rights of others;

•

stop our manufacture, use, sale or importation of infringing products;

•

expend significant resources to develop or acquire non-infringing technologies;

•

discontinue manufacturing processes; or

•

obtain licenses to the intellectual property we are found to have infringed.

We cannot assure you that we would be successful in such development or acquisition or that such licenses would be available under reasonable terms. Any such development, acquisition or license could require the expenditure of substantial time and other resources.

We may not be able to consummate future acquisitions or successfully integrate acquisitions into our business.

We have made numerous acquisitions of various sizes since we became an independent company in 1997 and we plan to pursue additional acquisitions of related businesses. The costs of acquiring and integrating related businesses, or our failure to integrate them successfully into our existing businesses, could result in our company incurring unanticipated expenses and losses. In addition, we may not be able to identify or finance additional acquisitions or realize any anticipated benefits from acquisitions we do complete.

We are constantly evaluating acquisition opportunities and consolidation possibilities and are frequently conducting due diligence or holding preliminary discussions with respect to possible acquisition transactions, some of which could be significant.

If we acquire another business, the process of integrating an acquired business into our existing operations may result in unforeseen operating difficulties and may require us to use significant financial resources on the acquisition that may otherwise be needed for the ongoing development or expansion of existing operations. Some of the risks associated with acquisitions include:

•

unexpected losses of key employees, customers or suppliers of the acquired company;

•

conforming the acquired company’s standards, processes, procedures and controls with our operations;

•

coordinating new product and process development;

•

hiring additional management and other critical personnel;

•

inability to realize anticipated synergies;

•

negotiating with labor unions; and

•

increasing the scope, geographic diversity and complexity of our operations.

In addition, we may encounter unforeseen obstacles or costs in the integration of other businesses we acquire.

Possible future acquisitions could result in the incurrence of additional debt, contingent liabilities and amortization expenses related to intangible assets, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating results.

We may face risks associated with dispositions of assets and businesses.

From time to time we may dispose of assets and businesses in an effort to grow our more profitable product lines. When we do so, we face certain risks associated with these exit activities, including but not limited the risk that we will disrupt service to our customers, the risk of inadvertently losing other business not related to the exit activities, the risk that we will be unable to effectively continue, terminate, modify and manage supplier and vendor relationships, and the risk that we may be subject to consequential claims from customers or vendors as a result of eliminating, or transferring the production of affected products or the renegotiation of commitments related to those products.

We depend on suppliers for timely deliveries of raw materials of acceptable quality. Production time and product costs could increase if we were to lose a primary supplier or if we experience a significant increase in the prices of our raw materials. Product performance could be affected and quality issues could develop as a result of a significant degradation in the quality of raw materials we use in our products.

Our manufacturing processes use many raw materials, including silicon wafers, gold, copper lead frames, mold compound, ceramic packages and various chemicals and gases. Our manufacturing operations depend upon our ability to obtain adequate supplies of raw materials on a timely basis. Our results of operations could be adversely affected if we were unable to obtain adequate supplies of raw materials in a timely manner or if the costs of raw materials increased significantly. If the prices of these raw materials rise significantly we may be unable to pass on our increased operating expenses to our customers. This could result in decreased profit margins for the products in which the materials are used. Results could also be adversely affected if there is a significant degradation in the quality of raw materials used in our

products, or if the raw materials give rise to compatibility or performance issues in our products, any of which could lead to an increase in customer returns or product warranty claims. Although we maintain rigorous quality control systems, errors or defects may arise from a supplied raw material and be beyond our detection or control. For example, some phosphorus-containing mold compound received from one supplier and incorporated into our products in the past resulted in a number of claims for damages from customers. We purchase some of our raw materials such as silicon wafers, lead frames, mold compound, ceramic packages and chemicals and gases from a limited number of suppliers on a just-in-time basis. From time to time, suppliers may extend lead times, limit supplies or increase prices due to capacity constraints or other factors. We subcontract a minority of our wafer fabrication needs, primarily to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation, Central Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation, Jilin Magic Semiconductor, Macronix International Co. Ltd., and Phenitec Semiconductor. In order to maximize our production capacity, some of our back-end assembly and testing operations are also subcontracted. Primary back-end subcontractors include Amkor, ASE, AUK, GEM Services, Hana Semiconductor, Liteon, Tak Cheong Electronics, Greatek, Etrend, AIC and UTAC Thai Ltd. Our operations and ability to satisfy customer obligations could be adversely affected if our relationships with these subcontractors were disrupted or terminated.

Delays in expanding capacity at existing facilities, implementing new production techniques, or incurring problems associated with technical equipment malfunctions, all could adversely affect our manufacturing efficiencies.

Our manufacturing efficiency is an important factor in our profitability, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to maintain our manufacturing efficiency or increase manufacturing efficiency to the same extent as our competitors. Our manufacturing processes are highly complex, require advanced and costly equipment and are continuously being modified in an effort to improve yields and product performance. Impurities or other difficulties in the manufacturing process can lower yields. We are constantly looking for ways to expand capacity or improve efficiency at our manufacturing facilities. For example, we are currently in the process of converting our facilities in South Korea, Utah and Maine from 6 inch wafers to 8 inch wafers. As is common in the semiconductor industry, we may experience difficulty in completing transitions to new manufacturing processes at existing facilities. As a consequence, we have suffered delays in product deliveries or reduced yields in the past and may experience such delays again in the future.

We may experience delays or problems in bringing new manufacturing capacity to full production. Such delays, as well as possible problems in achieving acceptable yields, or product delivery delays relating to existing or planned new capacity could result from, among other things, capacity constraints, construction delays, upgrading or expanding existing facilities or changing our process technologies, any of which could result in a loss of future revenues. Our operating results could also be adversely affected by the increase in fixed costs and operating expenses related to increases in production capacity if revenues do not increase proportionately.

We rely on subcontractors to reduce production costs and to meet manufacturing demands, which may adversely affect our results of operations.

Many of the processes we use in manufacturing our products are complex requiring, among other things, a high degree of technical skill and significant capital investment in advanced equipment. In some circumstances, we may decide that it is more cost effective to have some of these processes performed by qualified third party subcontractors. In addition, we may utilize a subcontractor to fill unexpected customer demand for a particular product or process or to guaranty supply of a particular product that may be in great demand. More significantly, as a result of the expense incurred in qualifying multiple subcontractors to perform the same function, we may designate a subcontractor as a single source for supplying a key product or service. If a single source subcontractor were to fail to meet our contractual requirements, our business could be adversely affected and we could incur production delays and customer cancellations as a result. We would also be required to qualify other subcontractors, which would be time consuming and cause us to incur additional costs. In addition, even if we qualify alternate subcontractors, those subcontractors may not be able to meet our delivery, quality or yield requirements, which could adversely affect our results of operations. In addition to these operational risks, some of these subcontractors are smaller businesses that may not have the financial ability to acquire the advanced tools and equipment necessary to fulfill our requirements. In some circumstances, we may find it necessary to provide financial support to our subcontractors in the form of advance payments, loans, loan guarantees, equipment financing and similar financial arrangements. In those situations, we could be adversely impacted if the subcontractor failed to comply with its financial obligations to us.

Approximately two-thirds of our sales are made to distributors who can terminate their relationships with us with little or no notice. The termination of a distributor could reduce sales and result in inventory returns.

Distributors accounted for 68% of our net sales for the quarter ended June 26, 2011. Our top five distributors worldwide accounted for 21% of our net sales for the quarter ended June 26, 2011. As a general rule, we do not have long-term agreements with our distributors, and they may terminate their relationships with us with little or no advance notice. Distributors generally offer competing products. The loss of one or more of our distributors, or the decision by one or more of them to reduce the number of our products they offer or to carry the product lines of our competitors, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The termination of a significant distributor, whether at our or the distributor’s initiative, or a disruption in the operations of one or more of our distributors, could reduce our net sales in a given quarter and could result in an increase in inventory returns.

The semiconductor business is very competitive, especially in the markets we serve, and increased competition could reduce the value of an investment in our company.

We participate in the standard component or “multi-market” segment of the semiconductor industry. While the semiconductor industry is generally highly competitive, the “multi-market” segment is particularly so. Our competitors offer equivalent or similar versions of many of our products, and customers may switch from our products to our competitors’ products on the basis of price, delivery terms, product performance, quality, reliability and customer service or a combination of any of these factors. Competition is especially intense in the multi-market semiconductor segment because it is relatively easy for customers to switch between suppliers of more standardized, multi-market products like ours. In the past we have experienced decreases in prices during “down” cycles in the semiconductor industry, and this may occur again as a result of the recent downturn in global economic conditions. Even in strong markets, price pressures may emerge as competitors attempt to gain a greater market share by lowering prices. We compete in a global market and our competitors are companies of various sizes in various countries around the world. Many of our competitors are larger than us and have greater financial resources available to them. As such, they tend to have a greater ability to pursue acquisition candidates and can better withstand adverse economic or market conditions. Additionally, companies with whom we do not currently compete may introduce new products that may cause them to compete with us in the future.

We may not be able to attract or retain the technical or management employees necessary to remain competitive in our industry.

Our continued success depends on our ability to attract, motivate and retain skilled personnel, including technical, marketing, management and staff personnel. In the semiconductor industry, the competition for qualified personnel, particularly experienced design engineers and other technical employees, is intense, particularly when the business cycle is improving. During such periods competitors may try to recruit our most valuable technical employees. While we devote a great deal of our attention to designing competitive compensation programs aimed at accomplishing this goal, specific elements of our compensation programs may not be competitive with those of our competitors and there can be no assurance that we will be able to retain our current personnel or recruit the key personnel we require.

If we must reduce our use of equity awards to compensate our employees, our competitiveness in the employee marketplace could be adversely affected. Our results of operations could vary as a result of the methods, estimates and judgments we use to value our stock-based compensation.

Like most technology companies, we have a history of using employee stock based incentive programs to recruit and retain our workforce in a competitive employment marketplace. Our success will depend in part upon the continued use of stock options, restricted stock units, deferred stock units and performance-based equity awards as a compensation tool. Our current practice is to seek stockholder approval for increases in the number of shares available for grant under the Fairchild Semiconductor 2007 Stock Plan as well as other amendments that may be adopted from time to time which require stockholder approval. If these proposals do not receive stockholder approval, we may not be able to grant stock options and other equity awards to employees at the same levels as in the past, which could adversely affect our ability to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel, and we may need to increase cash compensation in order to attract, retain and motivate employees, which could adversely affect our results of operations. Additionally, since 2009 we have relied almost exclusively on grants of restricted stock units, deferred stock units and performance based equity awards in place of stock options. We expect to continue that practice in 2011. While we believe that our compensation policies are competitive with our peers, we cannot provide any assurance that we have not, and will not continue in the future to lose opportunities to recruit and retain key employees as a result of these changes.

Changes in forecasted stock-based compensation expense could impact our gross margin percentage, research and development expenses, marketing, general and administrative expenses and our tax rate.

We may face product warranty or product liability claims that are disproportionately higher than the value of the products involved.

Our products are typically sold at prices that are significantly lower than the cost of the equipment or other goods in which they are incorporated. For example, our products that are incorporated into a personal computer may be sold for several dollars, whereas the personal computer might be sold by the computer maker for several hundred dollars. Although we maintain rigorous quality control systems, we manufacture and sell approximately 16 billion individual semiconductor devices per year to customers around the world, and in the ordinary course of our business we receive warranty claims for some of these products that are defective or that do not perform to published specifications. Since a defect or failure in our product could give rise to failures in the goods that incorporate them (and consequential claims for damages against our customers from their customers), we may face claims for damages that are disproportionate to the revenues and profits we receive from the products involved. We attempt, through our standard terms and conditions of sale and other customer contracts, to limit our liability by agreeing only to replace the defective goods or refund the purchase price. Nevertheless, we have received claims for other charges, such as for labor and other costs of replacing defective parts or repairing the products into which the defective products are incorporated, lost profits and other damages. In addition, our ability to reduce such liabilities, whether by contracts or otherwise, may be limited by the laws or the customary business practices of the countries where we do business. And, even in cases where we do not believe we have legal liability for such claims, we may choose to pay for them to retain a customer’s business or goodwill or to settle claims to avoid protracted litigation. Our results of operations and business could be adversely affected as a result of a significant quality or performance issue in our products, if we are required or choose to pay for the damages that result. For example, from 2001 to 2008 we received claims from a number of customers seeking damages resulting from certain products manufactured with a phosphorus-containing mold compound, and we were named in lawsuits relating to these mold compound claims.

Our operations and business could be significantly harmed by natural disasters .

Our manufacturing facilities in China, South Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines and the many of the third party contractors and suppliers that we currently use are located in countries that are in seismically active regions of the world where earthquakes and other natural disasters, such as floods and typhoons may occur. While we take precautions to mitigate these risks, we cannot be certain that they will be adequate to protect our facilities in the event of a major earthquake, flood, typhoon or other natural disaster. Although we maintain insurance for some of the damage that may be caused by natural disasters, our insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover all of our potential losses and would not cover us for lost business. As a result, a natural disaster in one of these regions could severely disrupt the operation of our business and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Natural disasters could affect our supply chain or our customer base which, in turn, could have a negative impact on our business, the cost of and demand for our products and our results of operations.

While the recent earthquake and tsunami in Japan had only limited direct impact on us, the occurrence of natural disasters in certain regions, could have a negative impact on our supply chain, our ability to deliver products, the cost of our products and the demand for our products. These events could cause consumer confidence and spending to decrease or result in increased volatility to the U.S. and worldwide economies. Any such occurrences could have a material adverse effect on our business, our results of operations and our financial condition.

Our international operations subject our company to risks not faced by domestic competitors.

Through our subsidiaries we maintain significant operations and facilities in the Philippines, Malaysia, China, South Korea and Singapore. We have sales offices and customers around the world. Approximately 74% of our revenues in the first six months 2011 were from Asia. The following are some of the risks inherent in doing business on an international level:

•

economic and political instability;

•

foreign currency fluctuations;

•

transportation delays;

•

trade restrictions;

•

changes in laws and regulations relating to, amongst other things, import and export tariffs, taxation, environmental regulations, land use rights and property,

•

work stoppages; and

•

the laws of, including tax laws, and the policies of the U.S. toward, countries in which we manufacture our products.

We acquired significant operations and revenues when we acquired a business from Samsung Electronics and, as a result, are subject to risks inherent in doing business in Korea, including political risk, labor risk and currency risk.

We have significant operations and sales in South Korea and are subject to risks associated with doing business there. Korea accounted for approximately 11% of our revenue for the quarter ended June 26, 2011.

Relations between South Korea and North Korea have been tense over most of South Korea’s history, and more recent concerns over North Korea’s nuclear capability, and relations between the U.S. and North Korea, have created a global security issue that may adversely affect Korean business and economic conditions. We cannot assure you as to whether or when this situation will be resolved or change abruptly as a result of current or future events. An adverse change in economic or political conditions in South Korea or in its relations with North Korea could have a material adverse effect on our Korean subsidiary and our company. In addition to other risks disclosed relating to international operations, some businesses in South Korea are subject to labor unrest.

Our Korean sales are increasingly denominated primarily in U.S. dollars while a significant portion of our Korean operations’ costs of goods sold and operating expenses are denominated in South Korean won. Although we have taken steps to fix the costs subject to currency fluctuations and to balance won revenues and won costs as much as possible, a significant change in this balance, coupled with a significant change in the value of the won relative to the dollar, could have a material adverse effect on our financial performance and results of operations (see Item 7a, Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk).

A change in foreign tax laws or a difference in the construction of current foreign tax laws by relevant foreign authorities could result in us not recognizing any anticipated benefits.

Some of our foreign subsidiaries have been granted preferential income tax or other tax holidays as an incentive for locating in those jurisdictions. A change in the foreign tax laws or in the construction of the foreign tax laws governing these tax holidays, or our failure to comply with the terms and conditions governing the tax holidays, could result in us not recognizing the anticipated benefits we derive from them, which would decrease our profitability in those jurisdictions. We continue to monitor the tax holidays, the income tax laws governing the tax holidays, and our compliance with the terms and conditions of the tax holidays, to ensure that the current and future tax impacts on our subsidiaries in these countries are anticipated and refined.

We have significantly expanded our manufacturing operations in China and, as a result, will be increasingly subject to risks inherent in doing business in China, which may adversely affect our financial performance.

We expect a significant portion of our production from our Suzhou, China facility will be exported out of China, however, we are hopeful that a significant portion of our future revenue will result from the Chinese markets in which our products are sold, and from demand in China for goods that include our products. Our ability to operate in China may be adversely affected by changes in that country’s laws and regulations, including those relating to taxation, foreign exchange restrictions, import and export tariffs, environmental regulations, land use rights, property and other matters. In addition, our results of operations in China are subject to the economic and political situation there. We believe that our operations in China are in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements. However, there can be no assurance that China’s central or local governments will not impose new, stricter regulations or interpretations of existing regulations that would require additional expenditures. Changes in the political environment or government policies could result in revisions to laws or regulations or their interpretation and enforcement, increased taxation, restrictions on imports, import duties or currency revaluations. In addition, a significant destabilization of relations between China and the U.S. could result in restrictions or prohibitions on our operations or the sale of our products in China. The legal system of China relating to foreign trade is relatively new and continues to evolve. There can be no certainty as to the application of its laws and regulations in particular instances. Enforcement of existing laws or agreements may be sporadic and implementation and interpretation of laws inconsistent. Moreover, there is a high degree of fragmentation among regulatory authorities resulting in uncertainties as to which authorities have jurisdiction over particular parties or transactions.

We are subject to many environmental laws and regulations that could affect our operations or result in significant expenses.

Increasingly stringent environmental regulations restrict the amount and types of pollutants that can be released from our operations into the environment. While the cost of compliance with environmental laws has not had a material adverse effect on our results of operations historically, compliance with these and any future regulations could require significant capital investments in pollution control equipment or changes in the way we make our products. In addition, because we use hazardous and other regulated materials in our manufacturing processes, we are subject to risks of liabilities and claims, regardless of fault, resulting from our use, transportation, emission, discharge, storage, recycling or disposal of hazardous materials, including personal injury claims and civil and criminal fines, any of which could be material to our cash flow or earnings. For example:

•

we currently are remediating contamination at some of our operating plant sites;

•

we have been identified as a potentially responsible party at a number of Superfund sites where we (or our predecessors) disposed of wastes in the past; and

•

significant regulatory and public attention on the impact of semiconductor operations on the environment may result in more stringent regulations, further increasing our costs.

Although most of our known environmental liabilities are covered by indemnification agreements with Raytheon Company, National Semiconductor, Samsung Electronics and Intersil Corporation, these indemnities are limited to conditions that occurred prior to the consummation of the transactions through which we acquired facilities from those companies. Moreover, we cannot assure you that their indemnity obligations to us for the covered liabilities will be available, or, if available, adequate to protect us.

Our senior credit facility limits our flexibility and places restrictions on the manner in which we run our operations.

At June 26, 2011 we had total debt of $300.1 million and the ratio of this debt to equity was approximately 0.2 to 1. As of June 26, 2011, our senior credit facility includes $400 million in a revolving line of credit. Adjusted for outstanding letters of credit, we had up to $98.7 million available under the revolving loan portion of the senior credit facility. In addition, there is a $150 million uncommitted incremental revolving loan feature. Despite the significant reductions we have made in our long-term debt, we continue to carry indebtedness which could have significant consequences on our operations. For example, it could:

•

require us to dedicate a portion of our cash flow from operations to payments on our indebtedness, thereby reducing the availability of our cash flow to fund working capital, capital expenditures, research and development efforts and other general corporate purposes;

•

increase the amount of our interest expense, because our borrowings are at variable rates of interest, which, if interest rates increase, could result in higher interest expense;

•

increase our vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions;

•

limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate;

•

restrict us from making strategic acquisitions, introducing new technologies or exploiting business opportunities;

•

make it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to the instruments governing our indebtedness;

•

place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our competitors that have less indebtedness; or

•

limit, along with the financial and other restrictive covenants in our debt instruments, among other things, our ability to borrow additional funds, dispose of assets, repurchase stock or pay cash dividends. Failing to comply with those covenants could result in an event of default which, if not cured or waived, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may not be able to generate the necessary amount of cash to service our indebtedness, which may require us to refinance our indebtedness or default on our scheduled debt payments. Our ability to generate cash depends on many factors beyond our control.

Our historical financial results have been, and we anticipate that our future financial results may be subject to substantial fluctuations. While we currently have sufficient cash flow to satisfy all of our current obligations, we cannot assure you that our business will continue to generate sufficient cash flow from operations to enable us to pay our indebtedness or to fund our other liquidity needs in the future. Further, we can make no assurances that our currently anticipated cost savings and operating improvements will be realized on schedule or at all, or that future borrowings will be available to us under our senior credit facility in an amount sufficient to satisfy our liquidity needs. In addition, because our senior credit facility has a variable interest rate, our cost of borrowing will increase if market interest rates increase. If we are unable to meet our expenses and debt obligations, we may need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness on or before maturity, sell assets or raise equity. We cannot assure you that we would be able to renew or refinance any of our indebtedness, sell assets or raise equity on commercially reasonable terms or at all, which could cause us to default on our obligations and impair our liquidity. Restrictions imposed by the credit agreement relating to our senior credit facility restrict or prohibit our ability to engage in or enter into some business operating and financing arrangements, which could adversely affect our ability to take advantage of potentially profitable business opportunities.

The operating and financial restrictions and covenants in the credit agreement relating to our senior credit facility may limit our ability to finance our future operations or capital needs or engage in other business activities that may be in our interests. The credit agreement imposes significant operating and financial restrictions on us that affect our ability to incur additional indebtedness or create liens on our assets, pay dividends, sell assets, engage in mergers or acquisitions, make investments or engage in other business activities. These restrictions could place us at a disadvantage relative to our competitors many of which are not subject to such limitations.

In addition, the senior credit facility also requires us to maintain specified financial ratios. Our ability to meet those financial ratios can be affected by events beyond our control, and we cannot assure you that we will meet those ratios. As of June 26, 2011, we were in compliance with these ratios. A breach of any of these covenants, ratios or restrictions could result in an event of default under the senior credit facility. Upon the occurrence of an event of default under the senior credit facility, the lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under the senior credit facility, together with accrued interest, to be immediately due and payable. If we were unable to repay those amounts, the lenders could proceed against our assets, including any collateral granted to them to secure the indebtedness. If the lenders under the senior credit facility accelerate the payment of the indebtedness, we cannot assure you that our assets would be sufficient to repay in full that indebtedness and our other indebtedness.

We have investments in auction rate securities that subject us to market risk which could adversely affect our liquidity and financial results.

As of June 26, 2011, we owned auction rate securities with a par value of $49.5 million and market value of $29.3 million. We originally purchased these securities believing them to be safe, short-term and highly liquid investments. However, as a result of the systemic failure of the auction rate securities market, these securities are no longer liquid. While we continue to accrue and receive interest on these securities at the contractual rate, there can be no assurance that there will ever be an active market for our auction rate securities. Uncertainties in the credit and capital markets could lead to further downgrades of our auction rate securities and additional impairments. Additionally, auction failures have limited our ability to fully recover the par value of our investment in the short term and even if we hold the securities to maturity, the long-term value of the auction rate securities may potentially be impacted by issuer defaults. We do not anticipate that the lack of liquidity or future downgrades and impairments will materially impact our ability to fund out working capital needs, capital expenditures or other business requirements.

Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds

The following table provides information with respect to purchases made by the company of its own common stock during the second quarter of 2011.


Period	Total Number of Shares (or Units) Purchased		Average Price Paid per Share		Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs	Maximum Number (or Approximate Dollar Value) of Shares that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs
March 28, 2011 - April 24, 2011		96,485	$	18.00	—	—
April 25, 2011 - May 22, 2011		—		—	—	—
May 23, 2011 - June 26, 2011		627,383		17.54	—	—

Total		723,868		17.60	—	—

For the majority of restricted stock units granted, the number of shares issued on the date the restricted stock units vest is net of the minimum statutory withholding requirements that we pay in cash to the appropriate taxing authorities on behalf of our employees. Although these withheld shares are not issued or considered common stock repurchases and are not included in the table above, the cash paid for taxes is treated in the same manner as common stock repurchases in our financial statements, as they reduce the number of shares that would have been issued upon vesting.

Item 6. Exhibits


Exhibit No.		Description

10.35		Credit Agreement dated as of May 20, 2011, among Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, as borrower, the lenders thereto and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent.

31.01		Section 302 Certification of the Chief Executive Officer.

31.02		Section 302 Certification of the Chief Financial Officer.

32.01		Certification, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, by Mark S. Thompson.

32.02		Certification, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, by Mark S. Frey.

101.INS ¹		XBRL Instance Document

101.SCH ¹		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document

101.CAL ¹		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document

101. DEF		XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase Document

101.LAB ¹		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document

101.PRE ¹		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language) information is furnished and not filed or a part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, is deemed not filed for purposes of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and otherwise is not subject to liability under these sections.

Items 3, 4 and 5 are not applicable and have been omitted.

SIGNATURE

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


						Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc.

		Date: August 5, 2011				/ S / R OBIN A. S AWYER
						Robin A. Sawyer
						Vice President, Corporate Controller
						(Principal Accounting Officer)