Opinion
C 22-07611 WHA
08-23-2024
SPLUNK INC., Plaintiff, v. CRIBL, INC., Defendant.
JUDGMENT
WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Pursuant to the jury verdicts and the orders in this case (including the jury charges and memorandum opinion on fair use), and as to all claims and defenses not previously dismissed (see Dkt. No. 115; Mar. 7, 2024 Tr. 3:22-4:6), the Court's final judgment is as follows:
1. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of defendant/counter-plaintiff Cribl, Inc. and against plaintiff/counter-defendant Splunk Inc. on Count I of Splunk's complaint (Dkt. No. 1) with respect to infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,762,443;
2. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Cribl and against Splunk on Count II of Splunk's complaint with respect to infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,805,438;
3. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Cribl and against Splunk on Count III of Splunk's complaint with respect to infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,208,206;
4. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Cribl and against Splunk on Count IV of Splunk's complaint with respect to infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,838,467;
5. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Cribl and against Splunk on Count V of Splunk's complaint with respect to infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,255,312;
6. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in FAVOR of Cribl and against Splunk on Count VII of Splunk's complaint with respect to infringement of Splunk's copyright in Splunk Enterprise source code;
7. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Splunk and against Cribl on Count VIII of Splunk's complaint with respect to infringement of Splunk's copyright in past and present (as of the date of the second-phase jury verdict in this litigation) versions of Splunk Enterprise object code;
8. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Splunk and against Cribl that Cribl's copyright infringement under Count VIII of Splunk's complaint (supra ¶ 7) was willful;
9. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Cribl and against Splunk on Cribl's Second Affirmative Defense, raised in Cribl's answer (Dkt. No. 60), of fair use;
10. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Cribl and against Splunk on Count X of Splunk's complaint with respect to violation of the anticircumvention provisions of 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a);
11. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Cribl and against Splunk on Count XI of Splunk's complaint with respect to breach of the Technology Alliance Partner contract;
12. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Splunk and against Cribl on Count XII of Splunk's complaint with respect to breach of the Splunk General Terms (SGT) contract;
13. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Cribl and against Splunk on Count XIII of Splunk's complaint with respect to tortious interference with prospective business relations under California law;
14. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Cribl and against Splunk on Count XIV of Splunk's complaint with respect to violations of Section 17200 of California's Business and Professions Code;
15. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Cribl and against Splunk on Cribl's Sixth Affirmative Defense of statute of limitations precluding an award of damages for copyright infringement more than three years before this suit was filed and for breach of contract more than four years before this suit was filed;
16. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Splunk and against Cribl on Cribl's Twelfth Affirmative Defense of unclean hands;
17. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Splunk and against Cribl on Cribl's Thirteenth Affirmative Defense of equitable estoppel;
18. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in FAVOR of Splunk and against Cribl on Cribl's Fourteenth Affirmative Defense of waiver;
19. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Splunk and against Cribl on Count II of Cribl's counterclaims with respect to violations of Section 17200 of California's Business and Professions Code;
20. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Splunk and against Cribl on Count III of Cribl's counterclaims with respect to a declaration of unenforceability of the SGT contract as applied to Cribl on the facts of this case;
21. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Splunk and against Cribl awarding nominal damages of $1;
22. JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of Splunk and against Cribl awarding an injunction, the scope of which itself resolved all other issues in the case.
Pursuant to parties' stipulation (Dkt. No. 374), as amended, IT IS SO ORDERED.