Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Purchase and Other Obligations The Company entered into a services and license agreement for cloud platform services in June 2024. The Company has a purchase obligation of $6,739 to be paid over a 48-month period beginning in June 2024 and $5,313 remains to be paid at March 31, 2025. Litigation The Company is involved in legal proceedings from time to time arising in the normal course of business. While any outcome related to such legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty, other than the matters discussed below, the Company believes that the outcome of these proceedings will not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or liquidity. In November 2021, two putative class action complaints were filed against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the first captioned Butala v. Owlet, Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-09016, and the second captioned Cherian v. Owlet, Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-09293. Both complaints alleged violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against the Company and certain of its officers and directors on behalf of a putative class of investors who: (a) purchased the Company’s common stock between March 31, 2021 and October 4, 2021 (“Section 10(b) Claims”); or (b) held common stock in Sandbridge Acquisition Corporation (“SBG”) as of June 1, 2021, and were eligible to vote at SBG's special meeting held on July 14, 2021 (“Section 14(a) Claims”). Both complaints allege, among other things, that the Company and certain of its officers and directors made false and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose certain information regarding the FDA’s likely classification of Smart Sock as a medical device requiring marketing authorization. On September 8, 2023, the Court ruled that while the Butala and Cherian cases were consolidated, there would be two distinct and separate classes to represent the Section 10(b) Claims and Section 14(a) Claims, respectively, and appointed lead plaintiffs and lead counsel for each class. Amended complaints were filed for each class on November 21, 2023, and then further amended in consolidated filings on December 22, 2023. The Company filed motions to dismiss the complaints on February 9, 2024 on behalf of itself and the named officers and directors. The plaintiffs filed oppositions to the motions to dismiss on March 24, 2024, and the Company filed replies in support of the motions to dismiss on May 10, 2024. On August 5, 2024, the Court denied Owlet’s and its officers’ motions to dismiss the Section 10(b) Claims and the Section 14(a) Claims. On September 24, 2024, the Court entered a scheduling order in the case, setting trial to begin on February 17, 2026. On September 26, 2024, the Court granted Owlet’s and its officers’ motion for reconsideration regarding the Section 10(b) Claims and dismissed all claims arising out of statements made prior to the merger. Following mediation, the parties to the Butala action reached agreements in principle to settle both the Section 10(b) Claims and the Section 14(a) Claims. The Section 10(b) Claims would be resolved for $3,500 and the Section 14(a) Claims would be resolved for $1,750. On January 31, 2025, the plaintiffs filed motions seeking preliminary approval of the settlements of the Section 10(b) Claims and Section 14(a) Claims. Those motions remain pending. In accordance with ASC 450, as these amounts have become probable and estimable, the Company recognized $5,250 of general and administrative expense in the consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive income (loss) for the year ended December 31, 2024. The related liability is recorded in accrued and other expenses on the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2025. Further, on August 26, 2024 and October 3, 2024, investors filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, derivatively on behalf of the Company, complaints asserting claims for violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, as well as state law claims, including breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and waste of corporate assets. One complaint (captioned Janet Vargas, Derivatively on Behalf of Nominal Defendant Owlet, Inc., Case No. 2:24 cv-07258-FLA-PVC) asserts claims against twelve of the Company’s current or former directors and officers and six current or former directors and officers of Sandbridge Acquisition Corporation. The other (captioned Nathan Capleton, Derivatively on Behalf of Nominal Defendant Owlet, Inc., Case No. 2:24 cv-08536-JAK-MAA) asserts claims against eleven of the Company’s current or former directors. Both complaints leverage the allegations made in one of the securities class action complaints. Neither complaint specifies the damages claimed in the action. On December 13, 2024, these two complaints were consolidated into a single action captioned Vargas v. Workman, et al., No. 2:24-cv-07258-FLA (C.D. Cal.) On February 7, 2025, the plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated complaint asserting the claims previously made in the two derivative complaints. The parties in the Vargas action reached agreements in principle to settle, and plaintiffs filed a joint Notice of Settlement with the Court on March 3, 2025. On March 6, 2025, the Court vacated deadlines in the Vargas action in light of the plaintiffs’ settlement notice, and set April 2, 2025 as the deadline for plaintiffs to file a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. On March 31, 2025, the plaintiffs filed a joint stipulation with the Court to extend that deadline to April 9, 2025. The Court so ordered the stipulation on April 2, 2025, and the plaintiffs filed the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement on April 9, 2025. In accordance with ASC 450, as these amounts have become probable and estimable, the Company recognized $675 of general and administrative expense in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The related liability is recorded in accrued and other expenses on the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2025. Indemnification In the ordinary course of business, the Company enters into agreements that may include indemnification provisions. Pursuant to such agreements, the Company may indemnify, hold harmless, and defend an indemnified party for losses suffered or incurred by the indemnified party. Some of the provisions will limit losses to those arising from third party actions. In some cases, the indemnification will continue after the termination of the agreement. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these provisions is not determinable. The Company has never incurred material costs to defend lawsuits or settle claims related to these indemnification provisions. The Company has entered into indemnification agreements with its directors and officers that may require the Company to indemnify its directors and officers against liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware corporate law. The Company currently has directors’ and officers’ insurance coverage that may reduce its exposure and enables the Company to recover a portion of any future amounts paid.

The Company entered into a services and license agreement for cloud platform services in June 2024. The Company has a purchase obligation of $6,739 to be paid over a 48-month period beginning in June 2024 and $5,313 remains to be paid at March 31, 2025.

The Company is involved in legal proceedings from time to time arising in the normal course of business. While any outcome related to such legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty, other than the matters discussed below, the Company believes that the outcome of these proceedings will not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or liquidity.

In November 2021, two putative class action complaints were filed against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the first captioned Butala v. Owlet, Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-09016, and the second captioned Cherian v. Owlet,

Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-09293. Both complaints alleged violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against the Company and certain of its officers and directors on behalf of a putative class of investors who: (a) purchased the Company’s common stock between March 31, 2021 and October 4, 2021 (“Section 10(b) Claims”); or (b) held common stock in Sandbridge Acquisition Corporation (“SBG”) as of June 1, 2021, and were eligible to vote at SBG's special meeting held on July 14, 2021 (“Section 14(a) Claims”). Both complaints allege, among other things, that the Company and certain of its officers and directors made false and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose certain information regarding the FDA’s likely classification of Smart Sock as a medical device requiring marketing authorization.

On September 8, 2023, the Court ruled that while the Butala and Cherian cases were consolidated, there would be two distinct and separate classes to represent the Section 10(b) Claims and Section 14(a) Claims, respectively, and appointed lead plaintiffs and lead counsel for each class. Amended complaints were filed for each class on November 21, 2023, and then further amended in consolidated filings on December 22, 2023. The Company filed motions to dismiss the complaints on February 9, 2024 on behalf of itself and the named officers and directors. The plaintiffs filed oppositions to the motions to dismiss on March 24, 2024, and the Company filed replies in support of the motions to dismiss on May 10, 2024. On August 5, 2024, the Court denied Owlet’s and its officers’ motions to dismiss the Section 10(b) Claims and the Section 14(a) Claims. On September 24, 2024, the Court entered a scheduling order in the case, setting trial to begin on February 17, 2026. On September 26, 2024, the Court granted Owlet’s and its officers’ motion for reconsideration regarding the Section 10(b) Claims and dismissed all claims arising out of statements made prior to the merger.

Following mediation, the parties to the Butala action reached agreements in principle to settle both the Section 10(b) Claims and the Section 14(a) Claims. The Section 10(b) Claims would be resolved for $3,500 and the Section 14(a) Claims would be resolved for $1,750. On January 31, 2025, the plaintiffs filed motions seeking preliminary approval of the settlements of the Section 10(b) Claims and Section 14(a) Claims. Those motions remain pending. In accordance with ASC 450, as these amounts have become probable and estimable, the Company recognized $5,250 of general and administrative expense in the consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive income (loss) for the year ended December 31, 2024. The related liability is recorded in accrued and other expenses on the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2025.

Further, on August 26, 2024 and October 3, 2024, investors filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, derivatively on behalf of the Company, complaints asserting claims for violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, as well as state law claims, including breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and waste of corporate assets. One complaint (captioned Janet Vargas, Derivatively on Behalf of Nominal Defendant Owlet, Inc., Case No. 2:24 cv-07258-FLA-PVC) asserts claims against twelve of the Company’s current or former directors and officers and six current or former directors and officers of Sandbridge Acquisition Corporation. The other (captioned Nathan Capleton, Derivatively on Behalf of Nominal Defendant Owlet, Inc., Case No. 2:24 cv-08536-JAK-MAA) asserts claims against eleven of the Company’s current or former directors. Both complaints leverage the allegations made in one of the securities class action complaints. Neither complaint specifies the damages claimed in the action.

On December 13, 2024, these two complaints were consolidated into a single action captioned Vargas v. Workman, et al., No. 2:24-cv-07258-FLA (C.D. Cal.) On February 7, 2025, the plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated complaint asserting the claims previously made in the two derivative complaints. The parties in the Vargas action reached agreements in principle to settle, and plaintiffs filed a joint Notice of Settlement with the Court on March 3, 2025. On March 6, 2025, the Court vacated deadlines in the Vargas action in light of the plaintiffs’ settlement notice, and set April 2, 2025 as the deadline for plaintiffs to file a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. On March 31, 2025, the plaintiffs filed a joint stipulation with the Court to extend that deadline to April 9, 2025. The Court so ordered the stipulation on April 2, 2025, and the plaintiffs filed the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement on April 9, 2025.

In accordance with ASC 450, as these amounts have become probable and estimable, the Company recognized $675 of general and administrative expense in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The related liability is recorded in accrued and other expenses on the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2025.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company enters into agreements that may include indemnification provisions. Pursuant to such agreements, the Company may indemnify, hold harmless, and defend an indemnified party for losses suffered or incurred by the indemnified party. Some of the provisions will limit losses to those arising from third party actions. In some cases, the indemnification will continue after the termination of the agreement. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these provisions is not determinable. The Company has never incurred material costs to defend lawsuits or settle claims related to these indemnification provisions. The Company has entered into indemnification agreements with its directors and officers that may require the Company to indemnify its directors and officers against liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware corporate law. The Company currently has directors’ and officers’ insurance coverage that may reduce its exposure and enables the Company to recover a portion of any future amounts paid.