Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03264/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03264-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ZYNGA GAME NETWORK INC., a

Delaware Corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

NADIR ERKAN, an individual, and

YUSUF DINCER, an individual,

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 09-3264 SC

ORDER GRANTING

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION

FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

I. INTRODUCTION

Before the Court is the Motion for Default Judgment

("Motion") submitted by Plaintiff Zynga Game Network Inc.

("Plaintiff" or "Zynga"). Docket No. 44. Defendants Nadir Erkan

and Yusuf Dincer ("Defendants") did not answer or otherwise

respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint ("FAC") and the

Clerk entered default on April 23, 2010. Docket No. 42. For the

reasons stated herein, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion. 

II. BACKGROUND

1. Procedural Background

Zynga filed its original complaint in this action on July 16,

2009, and its FAC on February 10, 2010. Docket Nos. 1, 29. On

Case 3:09-cv-03264-SC Document 46 Filed 07/01/10 Page 1 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

1 Christopher Varas ("Varas"), attorney with the law firm of

Keats McFarland & Wilson LLP, filed a Declaration in Support of the

Motion for Default Judgment. Docket No. 45. 

2

March 4, 2010, the Court authorized Zynga to serve Defendants with

process by email. Docket No. 33. On March 22, 2010, Zynga served

Defendants with process in both English and Turkish. Docket No.

39. Defendants did not answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's

FAC and the Clerk entered default on April 23, 2010. Docket No.

42.

2. Factual Background

Zynga, a social gaming company, owns United States Federal

Trademark Registration No. 3,685,749 for the mark ZYNGA in

International Class 009 for downloadable computer game software

for use on wireless devices and computers, and International Class

041 for entertainment services, namely providing on-line computer

games. Docket No. 29 ("FAC") ¶¶ 9, 14, Ex. 1. Zynga developed

Zynga Poker ("the Game"), a computerized version of poker. Id. ¶

15. 

Defendants created and operate web sites, including

BUYFACEBOOKCHIPS.NET, ZEROCHIPS.COM, CHIPSOVER.COM, CHIPSOVER.NET, 

REALCHIPS.NET, and CHIPSBOX.COM, through which they sell Zynga

"chips" for use in the Game. Id. ¶¶ 28-29; Varas Decl. Exs. 3-9.1

They advertise and sell these "chips" using the ZYNGA mark and/or

misspellings of the ZYNGA mark. Id. ¶ 30. Defendants transfer

the "chips" they sell during game play in violation of the Game's

terms of service and security measures, and in violation of the

license they received from Zynga to participate in the Game or to

Case 3:09-cv-03264-SC Document 46 Filed 07/01/10 Page 2 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 3

access Zynga's servers. Id. ¶ 32. 

Plaintiff asserts the following causes of action against

Defendants: (1) Federal Trademark Infringement, 15 U.S.C. §

1114(1); (2) False Designation of Origin, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); (3)

Violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030;

(4) Violation of California's Business & Professions Code § 17200;

(5) Violation of California Penal Code § 502; (6) California

common law trademark infringement; (7) California common law

passing off and unfair competition; (8) breach of contract; (9)

intentional interference with contractual relations; and (10)

trespass to chattels. FAC ¶¶ 35-94.

III. LEGAL STANDARD

After entry of default, the Court may enter a default

judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2). The Court's decision whether

to enter a default judgment, while "discretionary," Aldabe v.

Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089, 1092 (9th Cir. 1980), is guided by several

factors. If the court determines service of process was

sufficient, the court may consider:

(1) the possibility of prejudice to the

plaintiff, (2) the merits of plaintiff's

substantive claim, (3) the sufficiency of the

complaint, (4) the sum of money at stake in the

action, (5) the possibility of a dispute

concerning material facts, (6) whether the

default was due to excusable neglect, and (7)

the strong policy underlying the Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure favoring decisions on the

merits.

Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986). "The

general rule of law is that upon default the factual allegations

Case 3:09-cv-03264-SC Document 46 Filed 07/01/10 Page 3 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 4

of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages,

will be taken as true." Geddes v. United Fin. Group, 559 F.2d

557, 560 (9th Cir. 1977).

IV. DISCUSSION

Accepting the allegations in the FAC, the Court finds that

the Eitel factors favor default judgment. If the Court does not

enter Default Judgment, Zynga will suffer prejudice in the form of

impairment of its trademark rights and interference with its

relationships with its customers. Having reviewed the FAC and the

contentions in Plaintiff's Motion, the Court finds that the

allegations in the FAC are sufficient to support Plaintiff's

causes of action.

There is no evidence that Defendants' failure to appear was

the result of excusable neglect. The Court authorized Zynga to

issue subpoenas to specific entities in an effort to identify and

locate Defendants. Docket Nos. 15, 23, 27. Based on the

information obtained, Zynga identified approximately twenty-seven

email addresses used by Defendants, and Zynga requested the Court

for leave to serve Defendants by electronic mail. Docket No. 30. 

Based on the circumstances of this case, and finding that the

request was not prohibited by any international agreement, and

that it satisfied the requirements of due process, the Court

granted the request on March 4, 2010. Docket No. 33. On March

22, 2010, Zynga sent the summons, FAC, and other relevant

documents by email to the identified email addresses in both

Case 3:09-cv-03264-SC Document 46 Filed 07/01/10 Page 4 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2 Darrell V. Orme Mann ("Orme Mann"), of Keats McFarland &

Wilson LLP, filed a Declaration in connection with Plaintiff's

Proof of Service. Docket No. 39.

5

English and Turkish. Decl. of Orme Mann ¶ 2.2 The transmittal

email was successfully relayed to twenty-one of the recipients,

and read on March 22, 2010. Id. ¶ 4. Despite being served with

process, Defendants have not responded to this lawsuit. 

While it is preferable to decide cases on the merits whenever

possible, this preference is not dispositive. Where a party fails

to defend against a complaint, Rule 55 authorizes the Court to

enter default judgment. Kloepping v. Fireman's Fund, No. 94-2684,

1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1786, at *10 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 1996). 

V. CONCLUSION

As set forth in the Default Judgment issued concurrently with

this Order, the Court GRANTS the Motion for Default Judgment filed

by Plaintiff Zynga Game Network Inc.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 1, 2010 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-03264-SC Document 46 Filed 07/01/10 Page 5 of 5