COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	9 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES From time to time, NetScout is subject to legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the amount of ultimate expense with respect to any current legal proceedings and claims, if determined adversely, will not have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. As previously disclosed, in March 2016, Packet Intelligence LLC (Packet Intelligence or Plaintiff) filed a Complaint against NetScout and two subsidiary entities in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas asserting infringement of five United States patents. Plaintiff's Complaint alleged that legacy Tektronix GeoProbe products, including the G10 and GeoBlade products, infringed these patents. NetScout filed an Answer denying Plaintiff's allegations and asserting that Plaintiff's patents were, among other things, invalid, not infringed, and unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. In October 2017, a jury trial was held to address the parties' claims and counterclaims regarding infringement of three patents by the G10 and GeoBlade products, invalidity of these patents, and damages. In October 2017, the jury rendered a verdict finding in favor of the Plaintiff and that Plaintiff was entitled to $3,500,000 for pre-suit damages and $2,250,000 for post-suit damages. The jury indicated that the awarded damages amounts were intended to reflect a running royalty. In September 2018, the Court entered judgment and "enhanced" the jury verdict in the amount of $2.8 million as a result of a jury finding. The judgment also awarded pre- and post-judgment interest, and a running royalty on the G10 and GeoBlade products until the expiration of the patents at issue, the last date being June 2022. Following the entry of final judgment, NetScout appealed, and in July 2020, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision vacating the $3,500,000 pre-suit damages award, affirming the $2,250,000 post-suit damages award, and remanding to the district court to determine what, if any, enhancement should be awarded. In March 2021, NetScout filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, which was subsequently denied, challenging, among other issues, the basis for enhanced damages and the patentability of the claimed technology. In addition, on September 8 and 9, 2021, in proceedings initiated by third parties that did not involve NetScout, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) invalidated all the patent claims that were also asserted against NetScout in this case. After the PTAB decisions were issued, NetScout moved, among other things, to dismiss the case and enter judgment in its favor on the grounds that the PTAB decisions invalidating the asserted claims precluded Plaintiff from continuing to assert its patent infringement causes of action and from seeking damages from NetScout. The District Court denied NetScout’s motion with respect to its request to dismiss the case and enter judgment in its favor, but in response to alternative requests for relief requested by NetScout, vacated $1.7 million of the "enhanced" jury verdict amount of $2.8 million and also lowered the ongoing royalty rate on the G10 and GeoBlade products. The District Court entered an amended final judgment awarding Plaintiff $2.25 million in post-suit damages, $1.1 million in enhanced damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, and a running royalty on the G10 and GeoBlade products until the expiration of the patents at issue, the last expiration date being June 2022. On July 20, 2022, NetScout filed a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit from, among other things, the amended final judgment. The amended judgment is stayed pending the resolution of the appeal. In view of the current circumstances, and if the post-suit and enhanced damages award along with the associated interest and royalties survives the recent PTAB invalidation decisions and NetScout's appeal, NetScout has concluded that the risk of loss associated with such damages award remains "probable" in accounting terms, and that the risk of loss associated with pre-suit damages is remote.

As previously disclosed, in March 2016, Packet Intelligence LLC (Packet Intelligence or Plaintiff) filed a Complaint against NetScout and two subsidiary entities in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas asserting infringement of five United States patents. Plaintiff's Complaint alleged that legacy Tektronix GeoProbe products, including the G10 and GeoBlade products, infringed these patents. NetScout filed an Answer denying Plaintiff's allegations and asserting that Plaintiff's patents were, among other things, invalid, not infringed, and unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. In October 2017, a jury trial was held to address the parties' claims and counterclaims regarding infringement of three patents by the G10 and GeoBlade products, invalidity of these patents, and damages. In October 2017, the jury rendered a verdict finding in favor of the Plaintiff and that Plaintiff was entitled to $3,500,000 for pre-suit damages and $2,250,000 for post-suit damages. The jury indicated that the awarded damages amounts were intended to reflect a running royalty. In September 2018, the Court entered judgment and "enhanced" the jury verdict in the amount of $2.8 million as a result of a jury finding. The judgment also awarded pre- and post-judgment interest, and a running royalty on the G10 and GeoBlade products until the expiration of the patents at issue, the last date being June 2022. Following the entry of final judgment, NetScout appealed, and in July 2020, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision vacating the $3,500,000 pre-suit damages award, affirming the $2,250,000 post-suit damages award, and remanding to the district court to determine what, if any, enhancement should be awarded. In March 2021, NetScout filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, which was subsequently denied, challenging, among other issues, the basis for enhanced damages and the patentability of the claimed technology. In addition, on September 8 and 9, 2021, in proceedings initiated by third parties that did not involve NetScout, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) invalidated all the patent claims that were also asserted against NetScout in this case. After the PTAB decisions were issued, NetScout moved, among other things, to dismiss the case and enter judgment in its favor on the grounds that the PTAB decisions invalidating the asserted claims precluded Plaintiff from continuing to assert its patent infringement causes of action and from seeking damages from NetScout. The District Court denied NetScout’s motion with respect to its request to dismiss the case and enter judgment in its favor, but in response to alternative requests for relief requested by NetScout, vacated $1.7 million of the "enhanced" jury verdict amount of $2.8 million and also lowered the ongoing royalty rate on the G10 and GeoBlade products. The District Court entered an amended final judgment awarding Plaintiff $2.25 million in post-suit damages, $1.1 million in enhanced damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, and a running royalty on the G10 and GeoBlade products until the expiration of the patents at issue, the last expiration date being June 2022. On July 20, 2022, NetScout filed a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit from, among other things, the amended final judgment. The amended judgment is stayed pending the resolution of the appeal. In view of the current circumstances, and if the post-suit and enhanced damages award along with the associated interest and royalties survives the recent PTAB invalidation decisions and NetScout's appeal, NetScout has concluded that the risk of loss associated with such damages award remains "probable" in accounting terms, and that the risk of loss associated with pre-suit damages is remote.