Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 28, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Legal Proceedings From time to time, the Company is involved in various legal proceedings incidental to its business. Because of the nature and inherent uncertainties of litigation, we cannot predict with certainty the ultimate resolution of these actions and, should the outcome of these actions be unfavorable, the Company’s business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows could be materially and adversely affected. The Company reviews the status of its legal proceedings and records a provision for a liability when it is considered probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. This review is updated periodically as additional information becomes available. If either or both of the criteria are not met, we reassess whether there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss, or additional losses, may be incurred. If there is a reasonable possibility that a loss may be incurred, we disclose the estimate of the amount of the loss or range of losses, or that an estimate of loss cannot be made. The Company expenses its legal fees as incurred. We are currently and may in the future become subject to various claims and pending or threatened lawsuits in the ordinary course of our business. On September 23, 2022, we were served with notice of a lawsuit filed by a former employee in California state court alleging, on behalf of a proposed class of employees, several violations of California wage and hour laws. On December 9, 2022, the case was removed to the federal District Court for the Northern District of California. On January 18, 2023, we were served with a related representative action filed in California state court pursuant to California’s Private Attorneys General Act. We filed an answer to this action on February 17, 2023. On September 29, 2023, the state court set the PAGA action for trial on October 7, 2024. The parties attended mediation on March 11, 2024, but a resolution of the matter was not reached at that time. Following mediation, the parties agreed to a settlement of all claims alleged by the named plaintiff on behalf of himself and all putative class members and other aggrieved employees. The Company will pay $4.5 million for the gross settlement fund in connection with the settlement. The settlement is subject to approval by the court following a fairness hearing. The parties agreed to move the federal and state court actions to state court for review of the settlement terms agreed to by the parties. The Sacramento County state court entered preliminary approval of the settlement on March 21, 2025, and scheduled a hearing for final approval. On July 25, 2025, the court issued final approval of the settlement and, absent any appeals of the court’s final approval or other legal challenges, the settlement agreement is effective and the Company will issue payment by October 7, 2025. On June 6, 2023, the Company was served with notice of a former employee’s intention to file a representative action against the Company pursuant to California’s Private Attorneys General Act based on alleged violations of California’s wage and hour laws. On June 22, 2023, the Company was served with a related lawsuit filed by the former employee in California state court alleging, on behalf of a proposed class of employees, violations of California wage and hour laws. On July 24, 2023, the Company filed its answer and a notice of removal of the case to the federal District Court for the Southern District of California. On July 28, 2023, the Company filed a Notice of Related Cases, seeking for both the case currently pending in the Northern District of California and described in the paragraph above and this case to be assigned to the same Judge/Magistrate Judge in an effort to save judicial effort and avoid duplication of labor. On August 15, 2023, the parties filed a stipulation to stay the case in the Southern District of California pending the resolution of the lawsuit pending in the Northern District of California. On August 21, 2023, the court entered an Order to Show Cause why the action should not be either dismissed or transferred to the federal court for the Northern District of California. Following the parties’ submission of their respective responses, the court dismissed the action without prejudice on September 11, 2023. The plaintiff retains his ability to pursue a PAGA action in state court pursuant to the June 6, 2023, notice. On January 22, 2024, the plaintiff filed a demand for arbitration of the claims set forth in the Complaint previously filed in state court in June 2023. The Company filed its response to the arbitration demand, the arbitrator conducted a scheduling conference on April 4, 2025, and the parties commenced the formal discovery process. On April 17, 2025, the Company served a Section 998 offer of compromise in the amount of $60,000, which was accepted by the plaintiff, and the arbitrator closed its file on June 4, 2025. On January 27, 2023, a purported class action complaint was filed in federal court in the Northern District of Georgia against the Company and two of the Company’s officers (the “Securities Class Action”). The complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, for materially false and misleading statements made between May 2021 and May 2022. The complaint seeks unspecified damages as well as equitable relief. On March 28, 2023, the original plaintiff, City of Southfield General Employees Retirement System, and a new plaintiff, International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 793, Members Pension Benefit Trust of Ontario, filed a lead plaintiff motion, seeking to be appointed co-lead plaintiffs. On April 3, 2023, the Company along with its named officers filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On May 19, 2023, the court granted the lead plaintiff motion. On June 30, 2023, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, which added a claim under Section 20A of the Exchange Act and extended the alleged class period to February 28, 2023. On August 21, 2023, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The plaintiffs filed their response in opposition to this motion on October 5, 2023. On March 30, 2024, the court granted the Company’s motion and dismissed the amended complaint with prejudice. On April 29, 2024, the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the order granting the motion to dismiss. The Company and named officers filed a response in opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration on May 13, 2024, and the plaintiffs then filed a reply in support of their motion on May 28, 2024. The court entered an order denying the motion for reconsideration on March 24, 2025, and no appeal was filed by the plaintiff. On May 23, 2024, a stockholder derivative complaint was filed by a stockholder in the Delaware Court of Chancery, purportedly on behalf of the Company (the “Derivative Action”). The Derivative Action is based on the same alleged facts and circumstances as the Securities Class Action and names certain of the Company’s officers, including our Chief Executive Officer and former Chief Operating Officer, and the Company’s directors who were members of the Company’s Board of Directors during the relevant time period as defendants. The Derivative Action alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and violations of the Exchange Act and seeks to recover damages on behalf of the Company. On July 24, 2024, the Company along with the named defendants, filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On September 9, 2024, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on October 31, 2024. The plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss on December 16, 2024, and the defendants filed a reply brief on January 15, 2025. The court scheduled oral argument on the motion to dismiss for June 20, 2025,which was later cancelled by the court and has not yet been rescheduled. The defendants dispute the allegations made by the plaintiff and intend to vigorously defend the litigation.

From time to time, the Company is involved in various legal proceedings incidental to its business. Because of the nature and inherent uncertainties of litigation, we cannot predict with certainty the ultimate resolution of these actions and, should the outcome of these actions be unfavorable, the Company’s business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.

The Company reviews the status of its legal proceedings and records a provision for a liability when it is considered probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. This review is updated periodically as additional information becomes available. If either or both of the criteria are not met, we reassess whether there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss, or additional losses, may be incurred. If there is a reasonable possibility that a loss may be incurred, we disclose the estimate of the amount of the loss or range of losses, or that an estimate of loss cannot be made. The Company expenses its legal fees as incurred.

On September 23, 2022, we were served with notice of a lawsuit filed by a former employee in California state court alleging, on behalf of a proposed class of employees, several violations of California wage and hour laws. On December 9, 2022, the case was removed to the federal District Court for the Northern District of California. On January 18, 2023, we were served with a related representative action filed in California state court pursuant to California’s Private Attorneys General Act. We filed an answer to this action on February 17, 2023. On September 29, 2023, the state court set the PAGA action for trial on October 7, 2024. The parties attended mediation on March 11, 2024, but a resolution of the matter was not reached at that time. Following mediation, the parties agreed to a settlement of all claims alleged by the named plaintiff on behalf of himself and all putative class members and other aggrieved employees. The Company will pay $4.5 million for the gross settlement fund in connection with the settlement. The settlement is subject to approval by the court following a fairness hearing. The parties agreed to move the federal and state court actions to state court for review of the settlement terms agreed to by the parties. The Sacramento County state court entered preliminary approval of the settlement on March 21, 2025, and scheduled a hearing for final approval. On July 25, 2025, the court issued final approval of the settlement and, absent any appeals of the court’s final approval or other legal challenges, the settlement agreement is effective and the Company will issue payment by October 7, 2025.

On June 6, 2023, the Company was served with notice of a former employee’s intention to file a representative action against the Company pursuant to California’s Private Attorneys General Act based on alleged violations of California’s wage and hour laws. On June 22, 2023, the Company was served with a related lawsuit filed by the former employee in California state court alleging, on behalf of a proposed class of employees, violations of California wage and hour laws. On July 24, 2023, the Company filed its answer and a notice of removal of the case to the federal District Court for the Southern District of California. On July 28, 2023, the Company filed a Notice of Related Cases, seeking for both the case currently pending in the Northern District of California and described in the paragraph above and this case to be assigned to the same Judge/Magistrate Judge in an effort to save judicial effort and avoid duplication of labor. On August 15, 2023, the parties filed a stipulation to stay the case in the Southern District of California pending the resolution of the lawsuit pending in the Northern District of California. On August 21, 2023, the court entered an Order to Show Cause why the action should not be either dismissed or transferred to the federal court for the Northern District of California. Following the parties’ submission of their respective responses, the court dismissed the action without prejudice on September 11, 2023. The plaintiff retains his ability to pursue a PAGA action in state court pursuant to the June 6, 2023, notice. On January 22, 2024, the plaintiff filed a demand for arbitration of the claims set forth in the Complaint previously filed in state court in June 2023. The Company filed its response to the arbitration demand, the arbitrator conducted a scheduling conference on April 4, 2025, and the parties commenced the formal discovery process. On April 17, 2025, the Company served a Section 998 offer of compromise in the amount of $60,000, which was accepted by the plaintiff, and the arbitrator closed its file on June 4, 2025.

On January 27, 2023, a purported class action complaint was filed in federal court in the Northern District of Georgia against the Company and two of the Company’s officers (the “Securities Class Action”). The complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, for materially false and misleading statements made between May 2021 and May 2022. The complaint seeks unspecified damages as well as equitable relief. On March 28, 2023, the original plaintiff, City of Southfield General Employees Retirement System, and a new plaintiff, International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 793, Members Pension Benefit Trust of Ontario, filed a lead plaintiff motion, seeking to be appointed co-lead plaintiffs. On April 3, 2023, the Company along with its named officers filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On May 19, 2023, the court granted the lead plaintiff motion. On June 30, 2023, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, which added a claim under Section 20A of the Exchange Act and extended the alleged class period to February 28, 2023. On August 21, 2023, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The plaintiffs filed their response in opposition to this motion on October 5, 2023. On March 30, 2024, the court granted the Company’s motion and dismissed the amended complaint with prejudice. On April 29, 2024, the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the order granting the motion to dismiss. The Company and named officers filed a response in opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration on May 13, 2024, and the plaintiffs then filed a reply in support of their motion on May 28, 2024. The court entered an order denying the motion for reconsideration on March 24, 2025, and no appeal was filed by the plaintiff.