Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_12-cv-05826/USCOURTS-cand-5_12-cv-05826-33/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

1 

Case No. 5:12-cv-05826-PSG

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION

GOOD TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION AND 

GOOD TECHNOLOGY SOFTWARE, INC., 

 Plaintiffs,

 v. 

MOBILEIRON, INC.,

 Defendant.

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. 5:12-cv-05826-PSG

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

 

Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 1 of 12
2 

Case No. 5:12-cv-05826-PSG

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

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

For the Northern District of California

VERDICT FORM

When answering the following questions and filling out this verdict form, please follow the 

directions provided throughout the form. Your answer to each question must be unanimous. Some 

of the questions contain legal terms that are defined and explained in detail in the jury instructions. 

Please refer to the jury instructions if you are unsure about the meaning or usage of any legal term 

that appears in the questions below. 

Part A. GOOD TECHNOLOGY’S FALSE ADVERTISING CLAIM

1. Has Good Technology proven by a preponderance of the evidence that 

MobileIron made a false or misleading statement of fact in a commercial 

statement about the nature or quality of Good Technology’s products, services, or 

commercial activities?

 ___________ ___________ 

 Yes No

2. Has Good Technology proven by a preponderance of the evidence that 

MobileIron caused the false or misleading statement to enter interstate 

commerce?

 ___________ ___________ 

 Yes No

If your answer to both Questions 1 and 2 is “Yes,” then please proceed to Question 3. If your 

answer to either Question 1 or 2 is “No,” proceed directly to Part B. 

3. Has Good Technology proven by a preponderance of the evidence that any such 

statement was deliberately false? 

 ___________ ___________ 

 Yes No

If your answer to Question 3 is “Yes,” then please proceed to Question 4. If your answer to 

Question 3 is “No,” proceed directly to Question 5. 

4. Has MobileIron shown there is evidence that the false statement did not deceive 

a substantial segment of Good Technology’s customers and that there is evidence 

that the false statement did not likely influence the purchasing decisions of 

customers?

 ___________ ___________ 

 Yes No

If your answer to Question 4 is “Yes,” then please proceed to Question 5. If your answer to 

Question 4 is “No,” proceed directly to Question 7. 

Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 2 of 12
3 

Case No. 5:12-cv-05826-PSG

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

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

For the Northern District of California

5. Has Good Technology proven by a preponderance of the evidence both that the 

false or misleading statement actually deceived or had a tendency to deceive a 

substantial segment of Good Technology’s customers and that the false or 

misleading statement likely influenced the purchasing decisions of customers? 

 ___________ ___________ 

 Yes No

If your answer to Question 5 is “Yes,” then please proceed to Question 6. If your answer to 

Question 5 is “No,” proceed directly to Part B. 

6. Has Good Technology proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the false 

or misleading statement caused Good Technology to be damaged by a diversion 

of sales or loss of goodwill? 

 ___________ ___________ 

 Yes No

If your answer to Question 6 is “Yes,” then please proceed to Question 7. If your answer to 

Question 6 is “No,” proceed directly to Part B. 

7. Has MobileIron proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Good 

Technology made false or misleading representations related to the subject matter 

of its false advertising claim to an extent that it would be unfair to allow Good 

Technology to enforce its claim?

 ___________ ___________ 

 Yes No

If your answer to Question 7 is “Yes,” proceed directly to Part B. If your answer to Question 7 is 

“No,” proceed directly to Question 8. 

8. What amount of damages has Good Technology proven are attributable to 

MobileIron’s false or misleading statement?

Total Damages: $________________ 

Please proceed to Part B. 

Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 3 of 12
Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 4 of 12
Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 5 of 12
Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 6 of 12
Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 7 of 12
Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 8 of 12
Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 9 of 12
Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 10 of 12
Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 11 of 12
Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 522 Filed 07/28/15 Page 12 of 12