V3I v. Western Digital





















Filed 9/29/10 V3I v. Western Digital CA4/3













>NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS



California
Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or
relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except
as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This
opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for
purposes of rule 8.1115.





IN
THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA



FOURTH
APPELLATE DISTRICT



DIVISION
THREE




>

V3I, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WESTERN DIGITAL CORPORATION et al., Defendants and Respondents.

G040832 (Super. Ct. No. 03CC00179) O P I N I O N

Appeal from a judgment
of the Superior Court
of Orange
County, Stephen J. Sundvold, Judge. Motion to consolidate. Judgment affirmed. Motion denied.

Mazda Butler, Mark N.
Mazda and Mark J. Butler for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Bird, Marella, Boxer,
Wolpert, Nessim, Drooks & Lincenberg, Terry W. Bird, Ekwan E. Rhow, Sharon
Ben-Shahar and Thomas R. Freeman for Defendants and Respondents.



* * *

Plaintiff V3I, Inc.
appeals from a judgment in favor of defendants Western Digital Corporation,
Keen Personal Media, Inc., Russell M. Krapf, and Frank Paulson on its complaint
for securities fraud under Corporations Code section 25401, fraud, and
breach of oral contract. It contends the
court erred in granting several motions for nonsuit and also asserts instructional error. Finding none of these arguments meritorious,
we affirm.

Plaintiff filed a second
appeal from the award of attorney fees and costs (G041836). We deny defendants' motion to consolidate the
two appeals.



FACTS
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY



Western was developing
technology for â€