Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2026
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Letters of Credit In connection with certain office leasehold interests in real property located in San Francisco (350 Treat Ave. and 2741 16th Street), the Company obtained letters of credit from certain banks as required by the lease agreements. If the Company defaults under the terms of the applicable lease, the lessor will be entitled to draw upon the letters of credit in the amount necessary to cure the default. The amounts covered by the letters of credit are collateralized by certificates of deposit, which are included in restricted cash on the condensed consolidated balance sheets as of March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025. The amount collateralizing the 2741 16th Street lease letter of credit following the purchase of the property and the termination of the 2741 16th Street lease was released during the first fiscal quarter of 2026. The outstanding amount of the letters of credit was $0.3 million and $1.4 million as of March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025, respectively. Non-cancelable purchase commitments As of March 31, 2026, the Company had non-cancelable purchase commitments to third-party contract manufacturers for approximately $13.0 million and other vendors for approximately $26.3 million. Contingencies From time to time, the Company may be involved in legal and administrative proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company records a liability in its consolidated financial statements for these matters when a loss is known or considered probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. Management reviews these estimates in each accounting period as additional information becomes known and adjusts the loss provision when appropriate. If the loss is not probable or cannot be reasonably estimated, a liability is not recorded in the consolidated financial statements. If a loss is probable but the amount of loss cannot be reasonably estimated, the Company discloses the loss contingency and an estimate of possible loss or range of loss (unless such an estimate cannot be made). Legal costs incurred in connection with loss contingencies are expensed as incurred. Litigation The Company is involved in various legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. Significant judgment is required in both the determination of probability and the determination as to whether any exposure is reasonably estimable. Actual outcomes of these legal and regulatory proceedings may materially differ from our current estimates. Velodyne Legacy Litigation In 2022, David and Marta Hall filed a lawsuit against current and former officers and directors of Velodyne, which proceeded through arbitration. In addition, in 2023, David and Marta Hall filed a separate complaint against Velodyne seeking indemnification for legal fees. The parties agreed to a confidential settlement, without any admission or concession of wrongdoing or liability, for both matters and executed the definitive agreement on April 16, 2025. As of December 31, 2024, the Company accrued the settlement expenses associated with these actions, and paid an immaterial amount in settlement expenses in the second quarter of fiscal 2025. An insurance receivable allowed the Company to recover the majority of the settlement expenses, resulting in a net charge that was immaterial to its consolidated statement of operations In 2023, a putative shareholder class action suit was filed in Delaware against former officers and directors of Graf Acquisition LLC (Velodyne was not named as a defendant). The parties agreed to a settlement without any admission or concession of wrongdoing or liability. As of June 30, 2025, the Company accrued the expected settlement expenses associated with this action. An insurance receivable allowed the Company to recover the majority of the expected settlement expenses, resulting in a net charge that was immaterial to its consolidated statement of operations. The court approved the settlement and entered final judgment on October 8, 2025. Ouster Litigation On April 11, 2023, the Company filed a complaint in the District of Delaware alleging patent infringement of certain claims of the Company’s U.S. Patent Nos. 11,175,405, 11,178,381, 11,190,750, 11,287,515, and/or 11,422,236 against Hesai Group and Hesai Technology Co., Ltd. Subject to the terms of a confidential decision in the arbitration described below, the Company dismissed without prejudice this case on April 11, 2025. On May 17, 2023, Hesai Photonics Technology Co. Ltd. and Hesai Group (collectively “Hesai Photonics”) filed a request for arbitration with JAMS against the Company, Velodyne Lidar, Inc., Velodyne, LLC, and Oban Merger Sub II LLC. Hesai Photonics alleges that the Company is bound as a result of the Company’s 2023 merger with Velodyne Lidar, Inc. by the terms and conditions, including an obligation to arbitrate disputes, of a long-term, global cross-licensing settlement agreement signed in 2020 between Hesai Photonics and Velodyne Lidar, Inc. (“Velodyne-Hesai Settlement Agreement”). On June 13, 2023, the Company responded to the arbitration demand and denied all allegations. On March 28, 2025, the tribunal issued a confidential interim decision, finding that the Company was subject to the Velodyne-Hesai Photonics Settlement Agreement. On September 15, 2025, the tribunal issued a confidential final decision, affirming the earlier finding of a global licensing settlement agreement that requires Hesai Photonics to pay royalties and deciding on fees in the amount of approximately $6.4 million, which the Company paid in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025. On September 14, September 25, and September 26, 2023, Hesai filed Petitions for Inter Partes Review with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) challenging the validity of the Company’s patents asserted in the ITC and Delaware patent actions. The Company provided preliminary responses to those petitions in late December 2023 and early January 2024. On March 19, 2024, March 28, 2024, and April 1, 2024, the PTAB issued decisions to institute inter partes review for four patents: IPR2023-01421 (Patent No. 11,175,405), hearing date of December 17, 2024; IPR2023-01422 (Patent No. 11,287,515), hearing date of December 17, 2024; IPR2023-01456 (Patent No. 11,178,381), hearing date of January 13, 2025; and IPR2023-01457 (Patent No. 11,190,750), hearing date of January 13, 2025. On March 13, 2025, the PTAB issued final written decisions upholding the patentability of all challenged claims in IPR2023-01422, and finding unpatentable all challenged claims in IPR2023-01421 and IPR2023-01457. On March 17, 2025, the PTAB issued a final written decision finding unpatentable all challenged claims of IPR2023-01456. On June 2 and 3, 2025, the Company filed notices of appeal for IPR2023-01421, IPR 2023-01426, and IPR 2023-01457, but the parties dismissed all but IPR2023-01421, which is awaiting hearing. Regarding the fifth patent (Patent No. 11,422,236), the PTAB declined to institute on March 28, 2024, (see IPR2023-01458). Hesai requested review to the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“Director Review”), who remanded to the PTAB for further review of its decision not to institute. On January 21, 2025, the PTAB again denied institution, to which Hesai again requested Director Review, and the Company objected. On March 20, 2025, the Director again denied review. Indemnification From time to time, the Company enters into agreements in the ordinary course of business that include indemnification provisions. Generally, in these provisions the Company agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the indemnified parties for claims and losses suffered or incurred by such indemnified parties for which the Company is responsible under the applicable indemnification provisions. The terms of the indemnification provisions vary depending upon negotiations between the Company and its counterpart; however, typically, these indemnification obligations survive the term of the contract and the maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make pursuant to these provisions are uncapped. The Company has also entered into indemnity agreements pursuant to which it has indemnified its directors and officers, to the extent legally permissible, against all liabilities reasonably incurred in connection with any action in which such individual may be involved by reason of such individual being or having been a director or executive officer, other than liabilities arising from willful misconduct of the individual. To date, the Company is indemnifying and has incurred costs to defend lawsuits or settle claims described above under the heading “Litigation” pursuant to the indemnity agreements of former directors and officers.

In connection with certain office leasehold interests in real property located in San Francisco (350 Treat Ave. and 2741 16th Street), the Company obtained letters of credit from certain banks as required by the lease agreements. If the Company defaults under the terms of the applicable lease, the lessor will be entitled to draw upon the letters of credit in the amount necessary to cure the default. The amounts covered by the letters of credit are collateralized by certificates of deposit, which are included in restricted cash on the condensed consolidated balance sheets as of March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025. The amount collateralizing the 2741 16th Street lease letter of credit following the purchase of the property and the termination of the 2741 16th Street lease was released during the first fiscal quarter of 2026. The outstanding amount of the letters of credit was $0.3 million and $1.4 million as of March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025, respectively.

From time to time, the Company may be involved in legal and administrative proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company records a liability in its consolidated financial statements for these matters when a loss is known or considered probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. Management reviews these estimates in each accounting period as additional information becomes known and adjusts the loss provision when appropriate. If the loss is not probable or cannot be reasonably estimated, a liability is not recorded in the consolidated financial statements. If a loss is probable but the amount of loss cannot be reasonably estimated, the Company discloses the loss contingency and an estimate of possible loss or range of loss (unless such an estimate cannot be made). Legal costs incurred in connection with loss contingencies are expensed as incurred.

In 2022, David and Marta Hall filed a lawsuit against current and former officers and directors of Velodyne, which proceeded through arbitration. In addition, in 2023, David and Marta Hall filed a separate complaint against Velodyne seeking indemnification for legal fees. The parties agreed to a confidential settlement, without any admission or concession of wrongdoing or liability, for both matters and executed the definitive agreement on April 16, 2025. As of December 31, 2024, the Company accrued the settlement expenses associated with these actions, and paid an immaterial amount in settlement expenses in the second quarter of fiscal 2025. An insurance receivable allowed the Company to recover the majority of the settlement expenses, resulting in a net charge that was immaterial to its consolidated statement of operations

In 2023, a putative shareholder class action suit was filed in Delaware against former officers and directors of Graf Acquisition LLC (Velodyne was not named as a defendant). The parties agreed to a settlement without any admission or concession of wrongdoing or liability. As of June 30, 2025, the Company accrued the expected settlement expenses associated with this action. An insurance receivable allowed the Company to recover the majority of the expected settlement expenses, resulting in a net charge that was immaterial to its consolidated statement of operations. The court approved the settlement and entered final judgment on October 8, 2025.

On April 11, 2023, the Company filed a complaint in the District of Delaware alleging patent infringement of certain claims of the Company’s U.S. Patent Nos. 11,175,405, 11,178,381, 11,190,750, 11,287,515, and/or 11,422,236 against Hesai Group and Hesai Technology Co., Ltd. Subject to the terms of a confidential decision in the arbitration described below, the Company dismissed without prejudice this case on April 11, 2025.

On May 17, 2023, Hesai Photonics Technology Co. Ltd. and Hesai Group (collectively “Hesai Photonics”) filed a request for arbitration with JAMS against the Company, Velodyne Lidar, Inc., Velodyne, LLC, and Oban Merger Sub II LLC. Hesai Photonics alleges that the Company is bound as a result of the Company’s 2023 merger with Velodyne Lidar, Inc. by the terms and conditions, including an obligation to arbitrate disputes, of a long-term, global cross-licensing settlement agreement signed in 2020 between Hesai Photonics and Velodyne Lidar, Inc. (“Velodyne-Hesai Settlement Agreement”). On June 13, 2023, the Company responded to the arbitration demand and denied all allegations. On March 28, 2025, the tribunal issued a confidential interim decision, finding that the Company was subject to the Velodyne-Hesai Photonics Settlement Agreement. On September 15, 2025, the tribunal issued a confidential final decision, affirming the earlier finding of a global licensing settlement agreement that requires Hesai Photonics to pay royalties and deciding on fees in the amount of approximately $6.4 million, which the Company paid in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025.

On September 14, September 25, and September 26, 2023, Hesai filed Petitions for Inter Partes Review with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) challenging the validity of the Company’s patents asserted in the ITC and Delaware patent actions. The Company provided preliminary responses to those petitions in late December 2023 and early January 2024. On March 19, 2024, March 28, 2024, and April 1, 2024, the PTAB issued decisions to institute inter partes review for four patents: IPR2023-01421 (Patent No. 11,175,405), hearing date of December 17, 2024; IPR2023-01422 (Patent No. 11,287,515), hearing date of December 17, 2024; IPR2023-01456 (Patent No. 11,178,381), hearing date of January 13, 2025; and IPR2023-01457 (Patent No. 11,190,750), hearing date of January 13, 2025. On March 13, 2025, the PTAB issued final written decisions upholding the patentability of all challenged claims in IPR2023-01422, and finding unpatentable all challenged claims in IPR2023-01421 and IPR2023-01457. On March 17, 2025, the PTAB issued a final written decision finding unpatentable all challenged claims of IPR2023-01456. On June 2 and 3, 2025, the Company filed notices of appeal for IPR2023-01421, IPR 2023-01426, and IPR 2023-01457, but the parties dismissed all but IPR2023-01421, which is awaiting hearing. Regarding the fifth patent (Patent No. 11,422,236), the PTAB declined to institute on March 28, 2024, (see IPR2023-01458). Hesai requested review to the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“Director Review”), who remanded to the PTAB for further review of its decision not to institute. On January 21, 2025, the PTAB again denied institution, to which Hesai again requested Director Review, and the Company objected. On March 20, 2025, the Director again denied review.

From time to time, the Company enters into agreements in the ordinary course of business that include indemnification provisions. Generally, in these provisions the Company agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the indemnified parties for claims and losses suffered or incurred by such indemnified parties for which the Company is responsible under the applicable indemnification provisions. The terms of the indemnification provisions vary depending upon negotiations between the Company and its counterpart; however, typically, these indemnification obligations survive the term of the contract and the maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make pursuant to these provisions are uncapped.

The Company has also entered into indemnity agreements pursuant to which it has indemnified its directors and officers, to the extent legally permissible, against all liabilities reasonably incurred in connection with any action in which such individual may be involved by reason of such individual being or having been a director or executive officer, other than liabilities arising from willful misconduct of the individual. To date, the Company is indemnifying and has incurred costs to defend lawsuits or settle claims described above under the heading “Litigation” pursuant to the indemnity agreements of former directors and officers.