throbber
Case4:13-cv-05962-YGR Document459 Filed04/24/15 Page1 of 1
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.: 13-cv-5962 YGR
`
`JUDGMENT
`
`
`
`NETLIST, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`DIABLO TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`On March 25, 2015, the jury rendered its verdict in awarding Plaintiff Netlist, Inc. (“Netlist”)
`nominal damages on its claims against Defendant Diablo Technologies, Inc. (“Diablo”) under the
`Lanham Act for trademark infringement and false and misleading advertising. The jury found in
`favor of Diablo on all other claims submitted to it. On April 24, 2015, based on the verdict, the
`Court found in favor of Diablo on Netlist’s equitable claim for violation of California Business &
`Professions Code § 17200 et seq. (“UCL”). Therefore,
`IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Diablo shall pay to Netlist the sum of $2.00
`for liability under the Lanham Act for trademark infringement and false and misleading advertising.
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that judgment shall be entered in favor
`of Diablo and against Netlist, and that Netlist shall take nothing, on its claims for misappropriation of
`trade secrets, breach of contracts, violation of the UCL, and correction of inventorship of a patent.
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`Date: April 24, 2015
`
`____________________________________
`YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`United States District Court

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket