Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

FOR ANNUAL AND TRANSITION REPORTS

PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 13 OR 15(d) OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003

OR

For the transition period from ______________ to ______________

Commission File Number: 000-50460

Tessera Technologies, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:    None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:    Common stock, par value $0.001 per share

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 if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2).  Yes  ¨  No  x

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant, based upon the closing sale price of common stock as reported on the Nasdaq National Market, on March 1, 2004 was $416,838,577.

As of March 1, 2004, 38,477,776 shares of the registrant’s common stock were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

Portions of the Proxy Statement for registrant’s 2004 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held May 20, 2004 will be filed with the Commission within 120 days after the close of the registrant’s fiscal year and are incorporated by reference in Part III.

Table of Contents

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

Table of Contents

PART I

Item 1.     Business

Corporate Information

Tessera, Inc. was incorporated in Delaware in May 1990. In January 2003, pursuant to a corporate restructuring, Tessera Technologies, Inc., a newly formed Delaware corporation, became the parent holding company of Tessera, Inc. The primary purpose of the restructuring was to terminate certain rights of first refusal previously held by some of Tessera, Inc.’s stockholders with respect to sales of Tessera, Inc. stock. Tessera Technologies, Inc. has no material assets other than its shares of Tessera, Inc., and conducts all of its business and operations through Tessera, Inc. We do not intend to cause or permit shares of the capital stock of Tessera, Inc. to be issued or sold to any other person. However, this holding company structure could result in our stockholders having subordinate rights, as compared to any future stockholders of Tessera, Inc., in a liquidation, dissolution or reorganization of Tessera, Inc.

Our principal executive offices are located at 3099 Orchard Drive, San Jose, California 95134. Our telephone number is (408) 894-0700. We maintain a website at www.tessera.com. The reference to our website address does not constitute incorporation by reference of the information contained on this website.

We own or have rights to trademarks and trade names that we use in conjunction with the operation of our business, including Tessera and Tessera Technologies. This annual report also includes trademarks and trade names of other parties.

In this annual report, the “Company,” “Tessera,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Tessera Technologies, Inc. and, for periods prior to our corporate restructuring in January 2003 or if the context otherwise requires, Tessera, Inc., which is our wholly-owned subsidiary.

Overview

We develop semiconductor packaging technology that meets the demand for miniaturization and increased performance of electronic products. We license our technology to our customers, enabling them to produce semiconductors that are smaller and faster, and incorporate more features. These semiconductors are utilized in a broad range of electronics products including digital cameras, MP3 players, personal computers, personal digital assistants, video game consoles and wireless phones. In addition, by using our technology, we believe that our customers are also able to reduce the time-to-market and development costs of their semiconductors.

Our patented technology enables our customers to assemble semiconductor chips into chip-scale packages, or CSPs, that are almost as small as the chip itself. Our technology also enables multiple chips to be stacked vertically in a single three-dimensional multi-chip package that occupies almost the same circuit board area as a CSP. By reducing the size of the semiconductor package and shortening electrical connections between the chip and the circuit board, our technology allows further miniaturization and increased performance and functionality of electronic products. We achieve these benefits without sacrificing reliability by allowing movement within the package, thus addressing critical problems associated with thermally-induced stress which can occur when packages decrease in size.

We derive license fees and royalties based upon our intellectual property and generate fees for related services. Our technology has been widely adopted and is currently licensed to more than 45 companies, including Intel, Renesas, Sharp Corporation, Texas Instruments and Toshiba. We believe that more than 100 companies across the semiconductor supply chain have invested in the materials, equipment and assembly infrastructure needed to manufacture products that incorporate our technology. As a result, our technology has been incorporated into more than three billion semiconductors worldwide, including more than one billion semiconductors shipped in 2003. According to Gartner Dataquest, the market for chip-scale packaging is expected to grow from 6.2 billion units in 2003 to 18.9 billion in 2006, representing a compound annual growth rate of 45%. We believe that we are well-positioned to take advantage of this significant expected growth in CSPs.

3

Table of Contents

Industry Background

Packaged semiconductor chips, which we refer to as semiconductors, are essential components in a broad range of communications, computing, and consumer electronic products. According to the Semiconductor Industry Association, worldwide semiconductor sales totaled $166.4 billion in 2003 and are expected to grow to $219.6 billion in 2006. Many electronic products require increasingly complex semiconductors that are smaller and higher-performing, integrate more features and functions, and are less expensive to produce than previous generations of semiconductors. Satisfying the demand for these complex semiconductors requires advances in semiconductor design, manufacturing and packaging technologies.

The disaggregation of the semiconductor industry and the emergence of intellectual property companies

Historically, most semiconductor companies were vertically integrated. They designed, fabricated, packaged and tested their semiconductors using internally developed software design tools and manufacturing processes and equipment. As the cost and skills required for designing and manufacturing complex semiconductors have increased, the semiconductor industry has become disaggregated, with companies concentrating on one or more individual stages of the semiconductor development and production process. This disaggregation has fueled the growth of fabless semiconductor companies, design tool vendors, semiconductor equipment manufacturers, third-party semiconductor manufacturers, or foundries, semiconductor assembly, package and test companies and intellectual property companies that develop and license technology to others.

While specialization has enabled greater development and manufacturing efficiency, it has also created an opportunity for intellectual property companies that develop and license technology to meet fundamental, industry-wide challenges. These intellectual property companies gain broad adoption of their technology throughout the industry by working with companies within the semiconductor supply chain to invest in the infrastructure needed to support their technology. This collaboration and investment benefits semiconductor companies by enabling them to bring new technology to market faster and more cost-effectively, without having to make the investment themselves.

Demand for system-level miniaturization and increased performance

Miniaturization of electronic products, or system-level miniaturization, is a significant challenge for manufacturers of electronic products and their suppliers, including semiconductor companies. Digital cameras, MP3 players, personal computers, personal digital assistants, video game consoles, wireless phones and other electronic products are being made smaller with improved performance and an increasing number of advanced features. Semiconductor companies have traditionally responded to these challenges by shrinking the size of the basic semiconductor building block, or transistor, allowing for more transistors to be integrated on a single chip. For decades, the consistent reduction in transistor size has resulted in higher-performance, lower-cost chips that require less silicon area. In addition, transistors have become small enough to make it economical to combine multiple functions, such as logic, memory and analog functions, on a single chip, in what is commonly referred to as a system-on-a-chip.

Importance of semiconductor packaging

While the integration of increased functionality on a chip is critical to the miniaturization of electronic products, its impact has been limited by packaging technology, which has not kept pace with the advancements achieved by chip integration. Semiconductor chips are typically assembled in packages that act as the physical and electrical interface between the chip and the printed circuit board. The package protects the chip from breakage, contamination and stress. In addition, the package enables a chip to be easily tested prior to its incorporation into a system, enabling high system yields lowering the total system cost. Traditional semiconductor packages are much larger than the chip itself and occupy significant circuit board and system area. Also, traditional packaging technologies are less capable of accommodating faster semiconductor speeds due to the package’s longer electrical connections. Due to these limitations, traditional semiconductor packages are not well suited to meet the increasing demand for product miniaturization, functionality and performance. As a result, in addition to continuing advancements in chip integration, advanced packaging technology is required to achieve further miniaturization and higher performance cost-effectively.

4

Table of Contents

Our Solution

We are a leading provider of intellectual property for chip-scale and multi-chip packaging that meets the increasing demand for miniaturization and performance of electronic products. We license a substantial portion of our intellectual property under our Tessera Compliant Chip, or TCC, license. This license primarily covers our core chip-scale and multi-chip packaging patents. In addition, we support the adoption of our technology by providing our customers with engineering services focused on addressing key issues related to the miniaturization and performance of electronics products. Our packaging technology provides the following benefits which are not provided by traditional packaging technologies:

Miniaturization.    Our CSP technology enables fully-packaged chips to be almost as small as the chip itself, which permits increased product miniaturization and functionality. Our multi-chip packaging technology extends this benefit by enabling multiple semiconductors to be stacked vertically, while occupying about the same circuit board area as a CSP. For example, our technology is broadly used to produce Flash memory and static random access memory, or SRAM, devices stacked in a multi-chip package utilized in wireless phones. As a result, we believe our multi-chip technology will enable electronic products to achieve new levels of miniaturization.

High performance.    Our technology offers shorter electrical connections between the chip and circuit board and between adjacent chips. Shorter connections allow information to be more rapidly transferred between the semiconductors and the system, yielding better system performance. Our technology has been widely adopted for use in high-speed memory applications, such as high-performance personal computers, network switches and routers, set-top boxes, workstations and video game consoles, such as the Sony PlayStation^®2.

High reliability.    The miniaturization of semiconductors often presents reliability problems because the shorter connections are more vulnerable to breakage due to thermally-induced stress and mechanical shock. Overcoming these problems has been one of the most significant technical challenges in shrinking semiconductor packages to the size of the chip itself. Our technology alleviates these problems by allowing movement within the package. As a result, our technology provides high reliability without the increased package size or cost of competing technologies for a broad range of applications that require miniaturization.

Cost effectiveness.    The significant investment made by semiconductor chip makers, assemblers, and material and equipment providers in the manufacturing infrastructure that supports our technology enables high-volume production and broad availability of semiconductors that incorporate our technology. This in turn has reduced the cost of manufacturing products that incorporate our technology, allowing it to be used in cost-sensitive semiconductor applications such as dynamic random access memory, or DRAM, Flash memory or SRAM. We believe that this broad adoption and high volume production of our technology will further increase its cost-effectiveness.

Our Strategy

Our objective is to be the leading developer and licensor of chip-scale and multi-chip packaging technologies that meet the increasing demand for miniaturization and performance in a broad range of communication, computing and consumer electronic products. The following are key elements of our strategy:

Expand the market penetration of our CSP technology.    Our patented CSP technology has been incorporated in over three billion semiconductors worldwide. As a result of the broad adoption of our technology and existing infrastructure that supports our technology, we believe that we are well positioned to benefit from the substantial growth projected for the CSP market. We intend to further increase our share of the CSP market by:

5

Table of Contents

Accelerate the market acceptance of our three-dimensional multi-chip packaging technology.    Our three-dimensional multi-chip packaging technology extends our CSP technology by enabling multiple chips to be stacked vertically, while occupying about the same circuit board area as a CSP. This technology is designed for products in which miniaturization and feature integration are critical, including digital cameras, MP3 players, personal digital assistants and wireless phones. We intend to accelerate the adoption of our three-dimensional multi-chip packaging technology by:

Provide engineering services to develop and promote the adoption of our technology.    We intend to continue to use our engineering services to accelerate the adoption of our technology, better understand our customers’ advanced packaging requirements, and develop and broaden our intellectual property portfolio. For example, we provide our customers with a broad range of services, such as package design, prototype manufacturing and reliability analysis, to help them develop products that incorporate our technology. This collaboration allows us to better understand our customers’ future product and packaging technology requirements. We have generated a substantial portion of our service revenues by providing our engineering services to various government agencies. These relationships contribute to the development of our advanced packaging technologies such as three-dimensional multi-chip packaging.

Utilize and enhance the infrastructure supporting our technology.    For more than a decade, we have collaborated with our infrastructure partners to help them develop and make widely available low-cost materials, equipment and assembly capacity to manufacture products that incorporate our technology. We design new technologies that are compatible with this existing infrastructure, which facilitates more rapid adoption of these new technologies. We plan to continue to work with our infrastructure partners to expand the adoption of our technology.

Broaden our intellectual property portfolio.    We intend to continue to broaden our patent portfolio through internal development, strategic relationships and acquisitions, to enhance the competitiveness and size of our current businesses and diversify into markets and technologies that complement our current businesses. For example, we intend to extend our intellectual property portfolio in the area of radio frequency, or RF, module packaging technology for a broad range of wireless applications. We also intend to continue to utilize our core competency in aggregating and licensing intellectual property to grow and expand our business.

Create demand by collaborating with system manufacturers and electronic manufacturing service providers.    We work with leading system manufacturers and electronic manufacturing service providers to increase demand for our chip-scale and multi-chip packaging technology. Through these relationships, we align our research and development efforts to better meet their needs. This helps us to develop technologies such as packaging for RF modules, which can be used in new, growing markets, such as Bluetooth, global positioning systems and Wi-Fi.

6

Table of Contents

Our Technology and Services

We derive the majority of our revenues from license fees and royalties associated with our TCC license. Our TCC license grants a worldwide right to develop, assemble, use and sell certain CSPs and multi-chip packages. The licensed technology primarily includes issued patents and pending patent applications during the term of the license. We also license components of our intellectual property portfolio outside of the TCC license, such as module and passive component technology suitable for RF products. In addition, we provide a broad range of engineering, assembly and infrastructure services to our customers.

Our Technology

Our packaging technology is incorporated into semiconductors for use in a broad range of communication, computing and consumer electronics applications. These semiconductors include:

Chip-Scale Package Technology Platforms

Although most of our licensees have developed their own proprietary packages incorporating our intellectual property, we have developed the following CSP platforms which are included in our TCC license:

Micro Ball Grid Array, or µBGA^®, Platform.    Our µBGA^® platform includes the lead-bonded µBGA^® package and the µBGA^®-W package, an alternative that uses wire-bonding as opposed to lead bonding as the package’s internal electrical interconnect. In the µBGA^® platform the chip is oriented face-down in the package with its contacts facing the circuit board. We believe this CSP platform offers the best combination of features to meet the requirements of high-performance DRAM semiconductors.

µBGA^®-F Platform.    The µBGA^®-F platform has the chip oriented face-up in the package, with its contacts facing away from the circuit board, and utilizes standard wire-bonding for the package’s internal electrical interconnect. The technology underlying this platform has been broadly adopted and incorporated into a large number of customer-developed proprietary packages for DSP semiconductors, Flash memory, SRAM and ASIC semiconductors used in wireless communication and consumer electronics products.

Multi-Chip Package Technology Platforms

Our technology is incorporated into a number of three-dimensional multi-chip packages used in wireless communication and digital consumer applications, such as digital cameras, MP3 players, personal digital assistants and wireless phones. These packages include various combinations of ASIC, DSP, Flash memory and SRAM semiconductors. In addition, we have developed a family of three-dimensional multi-chip platforms, which are collectively referred to as the µZ^TM Stacked Package family, to extend this innovative technology into new applications to meet the growing demand for higher levels of integration in computing, communications and consumer electronics.

7

Table of Contents

We also offer our Pyxis^TM RF Module platform, which incorporates RF technology in a three-dimensional platform for wireless applications. In addition to wireless phones, which typically incorporate multiple RF sections or modules, several initiatives such as Bluetooth and Wi-Fi are aimed at incorporating additional RF capability into a broad range of handheld, computing and consumer electronic products.

We expect these platforms to build upon the existing CSP infrastructure and to enable further miniaturization and increased performance and functionality for a broad range of cost-sensitive, high volume applications. Each platform was developed to resolve complex, technical and business challenges inherent in the miniaturization of electronic products.

We offer the following multi-chip platforms:

µZ^TM Chip Stack Platform.    The µZ^TM chip stack platform consists of two or more semiconductors, stacked vertically on top of each other and wire-bonded to the package substrate. This is a cost-effective, versatile platform that can be used in a broad range of semiconductors and product applications. The technology underlying this platform has been broadly adopted and incorporated into a large number of customer-developed proprietary stacked multi-chip packages for Flash memory, SRAM, and ASIC semiconductors, that are used in wireless communication and consumer electronics products.

µZ^TM Fold-Over Stacked Platform.    We have recently introduced our µZ^TM Fold-Over Stacked platform to solve an industry-wide problem associated with the integration of different types of functional blocks, such as processor, memory and various analog blocks, onto a single system-on-a-chip. For example, this package enables DSP, ASIC and different memory semiconductors to be fully packaged, tested and then integrated, resulting in a high-yielding system-in-a-package. The µZ^TM Fold-Over Stacked platform provides a cost-effective solution that meets wireless phone package height requirements and saves valuable circuit board space, enabling wireless products that are smaller and lighter with more functionality.

µZ^TM Ball Stacked Platform.    We have also recently introduced our µZ^TM Ball Stacked platform as a multi-chip solution that enables the integration of high-performance DRAM while occupying 25% less circuit board area with 60% of the height of a traditional DRAM package. Because each semiconductor can be individually tested prior to being assembled in the multi-chip package, common yield problems associated with competing technologies can be overcome. Our µZ^TM Ball Stacked platform can be used for cost-sensitive, high-volume applications, including DRAM modules for high-performance personal computers, workstations and network switches and routers.

Pyxis^TM RF Module Platform.    With the proliferation of wireless technology, new industry standards are emerging, including Bluetooth and Wi-Fi, that require additional RF modules in a full range of wireless communication and digital consumer products. Our newly developed Pyxis^TM RF Module platform uses CSP technology to enable highly-integrated RF modules. This versatile package platform provides an integration and miniaturization path for radio-in-a-package, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and other complex RF modules. The Pyxis^TM module platform enables integration of chips and other components in a single, low-cost package solution. This platform is targeted at cost-sensitive, high-volume wireless, handheld and digital consumer products.

8

Table of Contents

The following table provides a summary of the key features and semiconductor and system applications for each of our package technologies and the related platforms, all of which, except the Pyxis^TM RF platform, are included in our standard TCC license:

Our Services

We provide our customers and partners with engineering, assembly and infrastructure services that we believe accelerate the adoption of our technology for a broad range of cost-sensitive, high-volume applications. We provide engineering services to semiconductor makers and assemblers, system manufacturers, electronic manufacturing service companies and government agencies and their contractors to enable the development of new packaging technologies. Most of our service revenues are derived from government-related engineering services.

Engineering services.    Our engineering services include customized package design and prototyping, modeling, simulation, failure analysis and reliability testing and related training services. We provide these services to semiconductor makers and assemblers, system manufacturers, electronic manufacturing service

9

Table of Contents

companies and government agencies and their contractors. We believe that offering these services accelerates the incorporation of our intellectual property into our customers’ products and aids in our understanding of their future packaging requirements.

Assembly services.    We provide training and consulting services to assist semiconductor assemblers in designing, implementing, upgrading and maintaining their CSP assembly lines. We also offer services to help customers address process, equipment, materials and other manufacturing-related issues. This allows our assembly customers to bring their manufacturing lines incorporating our technology into production more rapidly and cost-effectively.

Infrastructure services.    We offer evaluation, qualification, cost reduction and cost analysis services to companies that develop and manufacture equipment and materials to support the infrastructure needed to manufacture semiconductors that incorporate our technology. These services enable infrastructure customers to evaluate the impact of their specific materials and equipment on the manufacturability and reliability of our technology.

Customers

Our technology is currently licensed to more than 45 companies. For the year ended December 31, 2003, Texas Instruments accounted for 28.4% of total revenue.

We have a TCC license with Texas Instruments, dated January 1, 2002, that covers the types of BGA packages that were the subject of our legal proceeding against Texas Instruments in the U.S. District Court. Under this license Texas Instruments paid an upfront license fee and agreed to pay ongoing royalties on a quarterly basis. The license has termination provisions for breach, change of control, and bankruptcy. In addition, Texas Instruments may unilaterally terminate the license by giving six months prior notice at any time. Unless earlier terminated, the license will terminate on December 31, 2013. If the license is not terminated prior to December 31, 2013, Texas Instruments will have a fully paid-up license under the Tessera patents subject to the license. Any termination of the agreement would result in a loss by Texas Instruments of its right to use our intellectual property.

The following is a list of our current licensees and, where indicated, our current sublicensees:

10

Table of Contents

In addition to the licensees and sublicensees mentioned above, we license our Pyxis^™ RF Module technology to Paratek Microwave, Inc.

Most semiconductor material suppliers are licensed under our TCMT license, which requires these licensees to pay us a license fee but not royalties.

The license agreement we entered into with Samsung on May 17, 1997 is currently the subject of litigation. The matter is described in more detail in “—Legal Proceedings” below.

Sales and Marketing

Our sales activities focus primarily on developing strong, direct relationships at the technical, marketing and executive management levels with leading companies in the semiconductor industry to license our technologies and sell our services. We also sell our engineering services to system manufacturers and government agencies and their contractors. Marketing activities include identifying and promoting application-based technologies for specific, vertical market needs, such as wireless communications or computing, and identifying major business opportunities for current and future product development. Product marketing focuses on identifying the needs and product requirements of our customers. Product marketing also manages the development of all of our technology throughout the development cycle and creates the required marketing materials to assist with the adoption of the technology. Marketing communications focuses on advertising and communications that promote the adoption of our technology.

Research and Development

We believe that our success depends in part on our ability to achieve the following in a cost-effective and timely manner:

Our research and development employees work closely with our sales and marketing employees, as well as our customers and partners, to bring new products incorporating our technology to market in a timely, high quality and cost-efficient manner. We also work closely with material and equipment infrastructure providers to identify new technologies and improve existing technologies for use in the assembly and manufacture of semiconductor packages that incorporate our technology.

Our service contracts involve research and development for commercial entities and government agencies. For example, some of our development activities for the µZ^™ Fold-Over Stack package technology were partially funded through service contracts with one of our semiconductor company licensees.

Our research and development efforts currently focus on two major areas:

Chip-scale packaging.    Our CSP efforts focus on developing specific technologies for incorporation of our CSP technology into new applications, developing prototypes and supporting customers or infrastructure providers with improvements to products for existing applications.

Multi-chip packaging.    Our multi-chip packaging efforts focus on working with customers to incorporate our technology into their products and applications, developing prototypes and developing new, custom technologies to meet the needs of future applications.

We have additional research and development efforts underway in a number of areas related to the miniaturization of electronic products, including areas relating to materials, equipment, packaging, interconnect, assembly and testing of semiconductors and three-dimensional modules.

11

Table of Contents

Intellectual Property

Our future success and competitive advantage depend upon our continued ability to develop and protect our intellectual property. To protect our intellectual property, we rely on a combination of patents, trade secrets and trademarks. We also attempt to protect our trade secrets and other proprietary information through confidentiality agreements with licensees, customers and potential customers and partners, and through proprietary information agreements with employees and consultants.

Our patents address advanced single and multi-chip packaging, related processes, and complementary technologies. We have made and continue to make considerable investments in expanding and defending our patent portfolio. See “—Legal Proceedings” for a description of material legal proceedings in which we have recently been involved.

As of December 31, 2003, our intellectual property portfolio included 270 issued U.S. patents, 38 issued international patents, 112 additional pending U.S. patent applications and 40 additional pending international patent applications. Our patents have expiration dates ranging from January 25, 2009 to September 19, 2021. We continually file new patent applications for new developments in our technology. There are many countries in which we currently have no issued patents; however, products incorporating our technology that are sold in jurisdictions where patents have issued must be licensed in order to avoid infringing our intellectual property.

As of December 31, 2003, we had 15 U.S. trademark registrations and 35 international trademarks and had five domestic and international trademark applications pending.

Competition

As a developer and licensor of semiconductor packaging technology, we compete with other technologies, as opposed to other companies selling products. These competing technologies come principally from the internal design groups of a number of semiconductor and package assembly companies. Many of these companies are licensees, or potential licensees, of ours. In fact, many of our licensees consider packaging research and development to be one of their core competencies.

Semiconductor companies that have their own package design and manufacturing capabilities include Texas Instruments Incorporated, Micron Technology, Inc., and the semiconductor divisions of Fujitsu Microelectronics, Inc., IBM Instruments, Inc., Motorola, Inc., Sharp Corporation and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. Among the advanced packaging technologies developed by such companies are flip-chip and chip-on-board technologies that compete with our CSP and multi-chip technologies. Our technologies also compete with technologies developed by the internal design groups of package assembly companies such as Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc., Amkor Technology, Inc. and ChipPAC, Inc.

We believe the principal competitive factors in the selection of semiconductor package technology by potential customers are:

We believe that our CSP and multi-chip technologies compete favorably in each of these factors with other advanced packaging technology solutions.

12

Table of Contents

Employees

As of December 31, 2003, we had 86 employees, with 16 in sales, marketing and licensing, 53 in research and development (including employees who perform engineering, assembly and infrastructure services under our service agreements with third parties) and 17 in finance and administration. We have never had a work stoppage among our employees and no personnel are represented under collective bargaining agreements. We consider our relations with our employees to be good.

Item 2.    Properties

Our principal administrative, sales, marketing and research and development facilities occupy approximately 51,000 square feet in one building in San Jose, California, under a lease that expires on March 31, 2005. We believe our existing facilities are adequate for our current needs.

Item 3.    Legal Proceedings

As described below, we are currently involved in a material legal proceeding relating to our intellectual property and have been involved in others in the recent past. Given the importance of our intellectual property to our future success and competitive advantage, we expect to be involved in material legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property on a regular basis in the future.

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. v. Tessera, Inc., Civ. No. 02-05837 CW (N.D. Cal.)

On December 16, 2002, Samsung initiated a declaratory judgment action against us in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California seeking a declaratory judgment, alleging that: (1) it has not breached the license agreement it entered into with us in 1997 allegedly because its MWBGA, TBGA, FBGA, MCP and laminate PCB-based semiconductor chip packages are not covered by the license agreement and, therefore, it owes us no royalties for such packages; (2) the license agreement remains in effect because Samsung was not in breach for failing to pay royalties for such packages and, therefore, our termination of the license agreement was not effective; (3) its MWBGA, TBGA, FBGA, MCP and laminate PCB-based semiconductor chip packages do not infringe our U.S. Patents Nos. 5,852,326, 5,679,977, 6,433,419 and 6,465,893; (4) and these four Tessera patents are invalid and unenforceable. Samsung also seeks to recover its costs and attorney’s fees incurred in the action. Regarding the unenforceability claim, Samsung has asserted that we are precluded from enforcing our patents on the grounds that: (1) we had a duty to disclose certain of our patents to JEDEC (a standards body); (2) we breached our duty of disclosure to JEDEC; and (3) as a result of our failure to disclose these patents, we may not allege in this lawsuit that they cover Samsung’s products.

On February 18, 2003, we filed an answer in which we deny Samsung’s allegations, including its allegations that any of our patents are invalid or unenforceable. We also filed a counterclaim in which we allege that: (1) Samsung has breached the license agreement by, among other things, failing to pay us royalties for the use of our U.S. Patents 5,852,326, 5,679,977, 6,433,419, 6,465,893, 5,950,304 and 6,133,627; (2) our termination of the 1997 license agreement was effective and the 1997 license agreement is terminated; and (3) Samsung and its U.S. subsidiaries Samsung Electronics America and Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. have infringed these six Tessera patents. We have denied Samsung’s unenforceability allegations on several grounds, including that (1) we have satisfied the duty of disclosure to JEDEC as that duty has been defined by the courts in other cases; and (2) Samsung expressly agreed in its 1997 License Agreement with us to pay royalties for any of its products that are covered by our patents, which expressly precludes Samsung from arguing that it believed our patents are unenforceable against Samsung’s products. We further seek to recover damages, up to treble the amount of actual damages, together with attorney’s fees and costs. We also seek to enjoin Samsung and its U.S. subsidiaries from continuing to infringe these patents in the future. Samsung has continued to make payments under our license agreement and has responded by moving to dismiss our patent infringement counterclaims on the grounds that they are barred by existence of the 1997 license agreement. On August 11, 2003, the court granted Samsung’s motion to dismiss our patent infringement counterclaims on the grounds that, pending the outcome of the current litigation, Samsung does not infringe because its activities are covered by the 1997 license agreement. On

13

Table of Contents

November 12, 2003, the court held a patent claim construction hearing, and a claim construction order was entered on January 8, 2004. We are proceeding against Samsung with a breach of contract action with our infringement contentions being a central element of the action.

Discovery is ongoing and the trial is currently scheduled for November 1, 2004.

Tessera, Inc. v. Sharp Corporation and Sharp Electronics Corporation, Civ. No. 00-20337 JW (N.D. Cal.); In re Certain Semiconductor Chips with Minimized Chip Package Size and Products Containing Same, ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-432

On March 28, 2001, we filed two actions against Sharp Corporation for infringing our U.S. Patents 5,852,326 and 5,679,977, one in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Tessera, Inc. v. Sharp Corporation and Sharp Electronics Corporation, Civ. No. 00-20337 JW) and one in the International Trade Commission (In re Certain Semiconductor Chips with Minimized Chip Package Size and Products Containing Same, ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-432). The district court case was stayed pending a result in the ITC action. On September 25, 2001, an ITC administrative law judge found in a written decision that Sharp Corporation’s products infringed our patents and that our patents were not invalid and were enforceable. The full commission affirmed this decision on November 15, 2001. The parties settled both lawsuits on January 24, 2002, in connection with which Sharp Corporation and Sharp Electronics Corporation entered into a new license agreement with us.

Texas Instruments, Inc. v. Tessera, Inc., Civ. No. 00-2114 CW (N.D. Cal.)

On February 1, 2000, Texas Instruments initiated a declaratory judgment action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against us regarding our U.S. Patents Nos. 5,852,326, 5,679,977 and 5,347,159. On March 13, 2000, we responded by denying the allegations and filing a counterclaim alleging infringement of our U.S. Patents 5,852,326 and 5,679,977 and breach of contract for failing to pay royalties on products Texas Instruments made that were covered by these patents and by a license agreement between us. On June 2, 2000, the lawsuit was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Texas Instruments, Inc. v. Tessera, Inc., Civ. No. 00-2114CW) and the dispute was narrowed to the 5,852,326 and 5,679,977 patents. On December 31, 2001, after the court had issued orders regarding claim construction and the parties’ summary judgment motions, the parties settled with Texas Instruments entering into a new license agreement with us.

From time to time, we may be involved in other litigation involving claims arising out of our operations in the normal course of business.

Item 4.    Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

None.

PART II

Item 5.    Market for Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters

Our common stock began trading publicly on the Nasdaq National Market on November 13, 2003 and is traded under the symbol “TSRA.” Prior to that date, there was no public market for our common stock. The following table sets forth the high and low closing sales prices of the common stock during 2003.

As of December 31, 2003, there were outstanding 38,474,443 shares of common stock held by 271 stockholders of record, options to purchase 8,386,651 shares of common stock under our stock option plans and

14

Table of Contents

warrants to purchase 280,240 shares of common stock. We have not paid cash dividends on our common stock since our inception and we do not anticipate paying any in the foreseeable future.

Since March 1, 2001, we have issued and sold the following unregistered securities. In each sale of shares of common stock and preferred stock shown below, the share numbers and dollar amounts shown reflect the reverse stock split effected September 1, 2000.

Options Grants and Option Exercises

Since March 1, 2001, we have granted options to purchase 6,119,239 shares of common stock to employees, officers, directors and consultants under our 1999 Stock Plan and Amended and Restated 2003 Equity Incentive Plan at exercise prices ranging from $2.10 to $9.00 per share. During the same period, we issued and sold 564,257 shares of common stock pursuant to option exercises at prices ranging from $1.50 to $5.50 per share. These transactions were effected under Rule 701 and, in the case of certain consultants, Section 4(2) of the Securities Act.

Common Stock

On September 8, 2003, we issued and sold 6,698 shares of our common stock to Lerner, David, Littenberg, Krumholz & Mentlik, an accredited investor, upon exercise of a warrant at an exercise price of $0.15 for an aggregate consideration of $1,004.70. This transaction was effected in reliance on Rule 506 of Regulation D under the Securities Act.

Preferred Stock

On December 28, 2001, we issued and sold 40,833 shares of our Series C Preferred Stock to Venture Lending & Leasing, Inc., an accredited investor, upon exercise of a warrant at an exercise price of $7.50 for an aggregate consideration of $306,247.50. This transaction was effected in reliance on Rule 506 of Regulation D under the Securities Act.

On April 24, 2003, we issued and sold 27,472 shares of our Series B Preferred Stock to Sanford Garrett, an accredited investor, upon the cashless net exercise of a warrant. This transaction was effected in reliance on Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act and Rule 506 of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act.

Initial Public Offering

Our initial public offering of 7,500,000 shares of common stock was effected through a Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-108518) that was declared effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 12, 2003. On November 12, 2003, 3,000,000 shares of common stock were sold on our behalf, and 4,500,000 shares of common stock were sold by our selling stockholders at an initial public offering price of $13.00 per share, for an aggregate offering price of approximately $97.5 million, with Lehman Brothers, Inc. acting as the sole book-running manager, and Merrill Lynch & Co., Needham & Company, Inc., and SoundView Technology Corporation acting as managers of the offering. In connection with the offering, the underwriters were granted a 30-day option to purchase up to 1,125,000 additional shares of common stock at the public offering price, less the underwriting discount, to cover any over-allotments, which they exercised on November 14, 2003, resulting in the purchase of 1,125,000 shares (1,066,427 shares sold by the selling stockholders and 58,573 shares sold by Tessera). Following the sale of the 7,500,000 shares and the exercise of the underwriters’ over-allotment option, the offering terminated.

We paid to the underwriters underwriting discounts and commissions of approximately $2.8 million (with the over-allotment option) in connection with the offering. In addition, we estimate that we incurred additional expenses of approximately $2.4 million in connection with the offering, which when added to the underwriting discounts and commissions paid by us, amounts to total estimated expenses of approximately $5.2 million. Thus, the net offering proceeds to us, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses, were approximately $34.6 million. Other than approximately $21,525 paid to a director for consulting

15

Table of Contents

services rendered in connection with the offering, no offering expenses were paid directly or indirectly to any of our directors or officers (or their associates) or persons owning ten percent or more of any class of our equity securities or to any other affiliates or others.

All of the net proceeds from the initial public offering remain invested in short-term, money market funds pending application of the funds to general corporate purposes, as described in the Registration Statement on Form S-1.

Item 6.    Selected Financial Data

You should read the following selected consolidated financial data in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial statements and the related notes appearing elsewhere in this annual report.

The consolidated statement of operations data for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2001, December 31, 2002 and December 31, 2003 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2002 and December 31, 2003 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report. The consolidated statement of operations data for the fiscal years ended December 31, 1999 and December 31, 2000 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 1999, December 31, 2000 and December 31, 2001 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements that are not included in this annual report. The historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected in any future period.

16

Table of Contents

Item 7.     Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Overview

We develop semiconductor packaging technology that meets the demand for miniaturization and increased performance of electronic products. We license our technology to our customers, enabling them to produce semiconductors that are smaller and faster, and incorporate more features. These semiconductors are utilized in a broad range of communications, computing and consumer electronics products. In addition, by utilizing our technology, we believe that our customers are also able to reduce the time-to-market and development costs of their semiconductors.

From our inception in 1990 through 1995, we engaged principally in research and development activities related to chip-scale and multi-chip packaging technology. We began generating revenues from licenses of our intellectual property in 1994. We began manufacturing activities in 1997 to support market acceptance of our technology. We discontinued most of these manufacturing activities in 1999, after many suppliers had developed the manufacturing infrastructure to implement our technology. We continue to develop prototypes and manufacture limited volumes of select products.

We generate revenues from two primary sources:

Licensees pay a non-refundable license fee. Revenues from license fees are generally recognized once the license agreement has been executed by both parties. In some instances, we provide training to our licensees under the terms of the license agreement. The amount of training provided is limited and is incidental to the licensed technology. Accordingly, in instances where training is provided under the terms of a license agreement, a portion of the license fee is deferred until the training has been provided. The amount of revenue deferred is based on the price we charge for similar services when they are sold separately.

Semiconductor manufacturers and assemblers pay on-going royalties on their shipment of semiconductors incorporating our intellectual property. Royalty payments are primarily based upon the number of electrical connections to the semiconductor chip in a package covered by our technology, although we do have arrangements in which royalties are paid based upon a percent of the net sales price. Our licensees report

17

Table of Contents

royalties quarterly, and most also pay on a quarterly basis. As there is no reliable basis on which to estimate our royalty revenues prior to obtaining these reports from our licensees, we recognize royalty revenue when we receive a royalty report from our customer. We receive these reports the quarter after the semiconductors that incorporate our technology have been shipped.

From time to time, we receive payments through license negotiations or the resolution of patent disputes. These settlements generally include amounts for royalties related to previous periods based on historical production volumes. These amounts are reported as “other intellectual property revenues” in the statement of operations. Other intellectual property revenue will vary significantly on a quarterly basis.

Service revenues are primarily derived from engineering services, including related training services. Revenues from services related to training are recognized as the services are performed. Revenues from other services are recognized on a percentage-of-completion or completed contract method of accounting depending on the nature of the project. Under the percentage-of-completion method, revenues recognized are that portion of the total contract price equal to the ratio of costs expended to date to the anticipated final total costs based on current estimates of the costs to complete the projects. If the total estimated costs to complete a project were to exceed the total contract amount, indicating a loss, the entire anticipated loss would be recognized immediately. Revenues under the completed contract method are recognized upon acceptance by the customer or in accordance with the contract specifications.

We derive a significant portion of our revenues from licensees headquartered outside of the United States, principally in Asia, and these revenues accounted for 39.0% of our total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2003. We expect that these revenues will continue to account for a significant portion of revenues in future periods. All of our revenues are denominated in U.S. dollars. For the year ended December 31, 2002, Sharp Corporation and Texas Instruments each accounted for over 10% of total revenues. For the year ended December 31, 2003, Texas Instruments accounted for over 10% of total revenues.

We license most of our CSP and multi-chip packaging technology under a license that we refer to as a Tessera Compliant Chip, or TCC, license. The TCC license grants a worldwide right under the licensed patent claims to assemble, use and sell certain CSPs and multi-chip packages. We generally license semiconductor material suppliers under our Tessera Compliant Mounting Tape, or TCMT, license. The TCMT license calls for a one-time license fee and, unlike most of our other licenses, does not require ongoing royalty payments. We also have begun to license components of our intellectual property portfolio that are outside of the TCC license, such as module and passive component technology suitable for radio frequency, or RF products, which we call the Pyxis^™ platform.

Cost of revenues consists primarily of direct compensation, materials, supplies and equipment depreciation costs. Cost of revenues associated with services represent a significant portion of the associated revenues. Cost of revenues associated with our intellectual property revenues and other intellectual property revenues are de minimis. Consequently, cost of revenues as a percentage of total revenues will vary based on the percentage of our revenues that is attributable to service revenues.

Research and development expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for personnel as well as costs related to patent applications and examinations, materials, supplies and equipment depreciation. Our research and development is conducted primarily in-house and targets both CSP and multi-chip technology. All research and development costs are expensed as incurred. We believe that a significant level of research and development expenses will be required for us to remain competitive in the future. We have increased research and development personnel from 46 at December 31, 2002 to 53 at December 31, 2003, and expect to continue to increase research and development personnel in the future. We expect research and development costs to increase in absolute dollars, but to decline as a percentage of revenues.

Selling expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for sales and marketing personnel, marketing programs, public relations, promotional materials, travel and related trade show expenses. General and

18

Table of Contents

administrative expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for: general management, information technology, finance and accounting personnel; litigation expenses and related fees; facilities costs; and professional services. Our general and administrative expenses are not allocated to other expense line items. We anticipate that our selling, general and administrative expenses will increase as we hire additional personnel and incur the additional costs of being a public company. Excluding litigation expenses, we expect that as a percentage of revenues, these expenses will decrease over time. However, we expect that litigation expenses will continue to be a material portion of our general and administrative expenses in future periods, and may increase significantly in some periods, because of our ongoing litigation with Samsung and because we expect that we will become involved in other litigation from time to time in the future in order to enforce and protect our intellectual property rights.

In connection with the grant of stock options from 1996 through 2003, we recorded an aggregate of $29.9 million in deferred stock-based compensation within stockholders’ equity, due to the difference between the exercise price and the estimated fair value of common stock on the date of grant. The compensation expense is amortized over the vesting period of generally four years. As of December 31, 2003, we had an aggregate of $153,000 of deferred stock-based compensation remaining to be amortized.

Results of Operations

The following table presents our historical operating results for the periods indicated as a percentage of revenues:

Fiscal Year 2003 and 2002

Revenues.    Revenues for the year ended December 31, 2003 were $37.3 million compared with $28.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, an increase of $9.1 million, or 32.0%. The $9.1 million increase was primarily due to a $7.5 million increase in intellectual property revenues and a $4.1 million increase in service revenues, partially offset by a $2.5 million decrease in other intellectual property revenues. The increase in intellectual property revenues was principally due to a $3.5 million increase in revenues from existing licensees and a $3.9 million increase in revenues from signing of new licensees. The increase in revenue from existing licensees was primarily due to increased sales by our licensees of semiconductors that incorporate our

19

Table of Contents

technology, resulting in increased royalty payments. The increase in revenue from new licensees is primarily due to royalty payments. The increase in service revenues is due to service contracts entered into with new customers in late 2002 and early 2003. Other intellectual property revenues declined by $2.5 million primarily because the amounts we received upon our litigation settlement with Sharp Corporation in 2002, totaling $4.0 million, and upon resolution of negotiations with Hitachi, Rohm, Samsung and Toshiba, totaling $1.7 million, were greater than the aggregate amounts we received upon resolution of negotiations with Intel, Mitsubishi, Sanyo, Seiko Epson and Shinko in 2003, which totaled $3.1 million.

Cost of Revenues.    Cost of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2003 increased to $6.7 million, or 18.0% of revenues, from $4.3 million, or 15.1% of revenues, for the year ended December 31, 2002 primarily due to increased costs associated with an increase in service revenues. Cost of revenues primarily relates to service revenue as the cost of revenues associated with intellectual property revenues is de minimis. Cost of revenue as a percentage of total revenue will vary based on the service revenue component of total revenue. The majority of this increase in the year of 2003 was attributable to the allocation of more personnel to service-related projects and an increase in the number of these projects. Increased materials and subcontractor costs related to service-related projects also accounted for part of the increase in cost of revenues.

Research and Development.    Research and development expenses for the year ended December 31, 2003 increased to $7.7 million, or 20.5% of revenues from $6.7 million, or 23.7% of revenues, for the year ended December 31, 2002. This increase in expenses was primarily due to the addition of personnel, which increased to 53 people as of December 31, 2003 as compared to 46 as of December 31, 2002 and personnel-related costs to accommodate our expanding research and development activities.

Selling, General and Administrative.    Selling, general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2003 increased to $11.0 million, or 29.6% of revenues, from $7.6 million, or 26.7% of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2002. The increase is attributable to our ongoing litigation with Samsung. Total litigation expenses were $2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 as compared to $25,000 for the year ended December 31, 2002. We expect to continue to incur litigation expenses related to the Samsung legal proceeding in upcoming quarters. The addition of personnel and personnel-related expenses for the expansion of sales and marketing efforts also contributed to the increase in selling, general and administrative expenses.

Stock-based Compensation.    Stock-based compensation decreased to $1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 as compared to $1.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. The decrease is due to lower amortization of deferred compensation related to issuance of stock options in 1998 through 2000.

Interest and Other Income, Net.    Interest and other income, net was $195,000 for the year ended December 31, 2003, compared to $45,000 for the year ended December 31, 2002. The increase was due to a one time charge for a foreign translation loss of $237,000 in 2002.

Provision for Income Taxes.    Provision for income taxes increased to $1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 from $1.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. For the year ended December 31, 2003, the provision consisted of $213,000 of federal alternative minimum tax, or AMT, and $1.4 million of foreign withholding taxes. For the year ended December 31, 2002, the total provision related to foreign withholding taxes. Foreign withholding taxes paid relate to statutory withholding taxes on license and royalty revenues earned in Japan and Korea. We paid no state income taxes for the year ended December 31, 2003 and no U.S. federal or state income taxes for the year ended December 31, 2002.

Fiscal Year 2002 and 2001

Revenues.    Revenues were $28.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, as compared to $27.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2001, an increase of 4.7%. Intellectual property revenues increased $5.7 million, due to a $2.7 million increase in revenues from existing licensees and a $3.0 million

20

Table of Contents

increase in revenues from signing of new licensees. The increase in revenues from existing licensees is primarily due to increased production by our licensees of semiconductors that incorporate our technology, resulting in increased royalty payments. The increase in revenue from new licensees primarily is due to royalty payments. Service revenues increased $3.2 million due to an increase in service contracts. Other intellectual property revenues declined by $7.6 million because the amount we received upon our litigation settlement with Texas Instruments in 2001 was greater than the amount we received upon our litigation settlement with Sharp Corporation in 2002.

Cost of Revenues.    Cost of revenues was $4.3 million, or 15.1% of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2002, as compared to $5.3 million or 19.6% of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2001. The decrease in cost of revenues was primarily due to personnel related cost reductions undertaken throughout 2001. These cost reductions included the closing of a manufacturing facility that was not strategic to our operations with related headcount reductions which resulted in savings of $2.1 million. This decrease was partially offset by incremental costs associated with the increase in our service revenues, including increased allocation of personnel, materials and subcontracting costs of $1.1 million.

Research and Development.    Research and development expenses were $6.7 million, or 23.7% of revenues, for the year ended December 31, 2002, as compared to $8.2 million or 30.4% for the year ended December 31, 2001. The decrease in research and development expenses was primarily due to a reduction in personnel, totaling 15 persons which occurred during 2001.

Selling, General and Administrative.    Selling, general and administrative expenses were $7.6 million, or 26.7% of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2002, as compared to $20.8 million, or 76.8% of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2001. The decrease in selling, general and administrative expenses in 2002 was primarily due to a decrease in total litigation expenses from $12.8 million in 2001 to $25,000 in 2002 resulting from the settlement of our litigation with Texas Instruments and Sharp Corporation which were settled in December 2001 and January 2002, respectively.

Stock-based Compensation.    Stock-based compensation increased to $1.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2002 as compared to $1.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2001. The increase was due primarily to the reversal of a portion of previously recorded expense related to options forfeited upon termination of employees in 2001.

Interest and Other Income, Net.    Interest and other income, net was $45,000 for the year ended December 31, 2002, as compared to $409,000 for the year ended December 31, 2001, due to lower investment income earned and a one time charge for a foreign translation loss of $237,000 in 2002.

Provision for Income Taxes.    Provision for income taxes was $1.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, as compared to $0 for the year ended December 31, 2001. This increase was due to statutory withholding taxes on increased license and royalty revenues earned in Japan and Korea. We paid no federal or state income taxes for either of these periods due to federal net loss carryforwards and state tax credits.

21

Table of Contents

Quarterly Results of Operations

The following table presents our unaudited quarterly results of operations for the eight quarters in the period ended December 31, 2003. You should read the following table in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes contained elsewhere in this annual report. We have prepared the unaudited information on the same basis as our audited consolidated financial statements. This table includes all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, that we consider necessary for fair presentation of our financial position and operating results for the quarters presented. Operating results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of results for any future quarters or for a full year.

The following table presents our historical results for the periods indicated as a percentage of revenues.

22

Table of Contents

Our intellectual property revenues grew sequentially in each quarter of 2002 and 2003, with the exception of the quarter ending June 2003, due to an increase in revenues from both existing licensees and the signing of new licensees. Our intellectual property revenues declined in the quarter ended June 2003 due to the timing of our signing of new licensees in the prior quarter. Other intellectual property revenues have been significantly impacted by revenues related to the resolution of license negotiations and patent disputes, particularly in the quarter ended March 31, 2002, due to our settlement with Sharp Corporation.

Cost of revenues has generally increased throughout 2002 and 2003 consistent with overall growth in service revenues. Our costs of revenues primarily relate to service revenues.

Operating expenses generally increased in the last three quarters of 2003 due to increased litigation expenses beginning in the quarter ended June 30, 2003. There were minimal litigation expenses in 2002. Litigation expenses steadily increased in 2003 as our involvement in the Samsung case increased. If litigation expenses are excluded, operating expenses have generally increased in 2002 and 2003 to support the growth in revenues.

Net Operating Losses and Tax Credit Carryforwards

At December 31, 2003, we had federal and state net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $56.1 million and $18.2 million, respectively. The net operating loss carryforwards began to expire on various dates beginning in 2003, and will continue to expire through 2021, if not utilized. Under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, substantial changes in our ownership may limit the amount of net operating loss carryforwards that can be utilized annually in the future to offset taxable income. A valuation allowance has been established to fully reserve the potential benefits of these carryforwards in our financial statements to reflect the uncertainty of future taxable income required to utilize available tax loss carryforwards and other deferred tax assets. We believe that, as a result of our initial public offering, it is likely that a change in our ownership has occurred. If such a change in our ownership occurs, our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards in any fiscal year may be significantly limited.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Since our inception, we have financed our operations primarily through sales of equity securities and, more recently, through cash generated from operations. We have received a total of $93.7 million from private offerings of our equity securities and we generated $34.6 million of net proceeds from our initial public offering in November 2003. At December 31, 2003 we had $64.4 million in cash and cash equivalents.

Net cash provided by operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2003 was $11.7 million compared to $18.8 million in the comparable period in 2002. Operating cash flows in 2003 were generated from net income adjusted for non-cash expenses of $2.1 million. Net cash generated by operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2002 was generated primarily from net income adjusted for non-cash expenses of $3.1 million and a decrease in accounts receivable of $18.8 million. This was partially offset by decreases in accrued liabilities of $7.1 million and deferred revenue of $1.8 million The decrease in accounts receivable was primarily due to the collection of a receivable related to a legal settlement with Texas Instruments late in 2001. The decrease in accrued liabilities was primarily due to payment of litigation costs.

Net cash provided by operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2002 was $18.8 million compared to net cash used in operating activities of $21.7 million for the comparable period in 2001. Operating cash flows in 2002 were generated from net income from operations adjusted for non-cash expenses of $3.1 million and a decrease in accounts receivable of $18.8 million. This was partially offset by decreases in accrued liabilities of $7.1 million and deferred revenue of $1.8 million. Net cash used in operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2001 was a result of a net loss from operations adjusted for non-cash expenses of $4.0 million and an increase in accounts receivable of $19.3 million. The changes in accounts receivable for both years were due to the legal settlement with Texas Instruments late in 2001. The decrease in accrued liabilities in 2002 was primarily due to payment of litigation costs.

23

Table of Contents

Net cash provided by investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2003 was $17.4 million, due to the sales of short-term marketable securities. Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2002 was $18.3 million, primarily due to net purchases of short-term marketable securities, and was primarily funded by cash from operations. Net cash provided by investing activities for the comparable period in 2001 was primarily attributable to the sale of short-term marketable securities.

Net cash provided by financing activities for year ended December 31, 2003 was $33.9 million comprised primarily of net proceeds of $34.6 million from the Company’s initial public offering. Net cash provided by financing activities for the comparable period in 2002 was $295,000 representing $567,000 in proceeds from the exercise of stock options offset partially by repayment of capital lease obligations.

Net cash used in financing activities for the comparable period in 2001 was $143,000 representing $338,000 in proceeds from the exercise of stock options and warrants offset partially by repayment of $481,000 in capital lease obligations.

We believe that based on current levels of operations and anticipated growth, our cash from operations, together with cash currently available, will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next twelve months. Poor financial results, unanticipated expenses, unanticipated acquisitions of technologies or businesses or unanticipated strategic investments could give rise to additional financing requirements sooner than we expect. There can be no assurance that equity or debt financing will be available when needed or, if available, that the financing will be on terms satisfactory to us and not dilutive to our then-current stockholders.