Diane M. Walters
Senior Counsel
Diane Walters is senior counsel in Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati's Palo Alto office. Diane specializes in securities and other complex business-related litigation and has defended numerous companies and their officers and directors in class actions, derivative lawsuits, contested mergers and acquisitions, regulatory investigations, and other complex matters. She has represented clients in a wide variety of industries, including:
- Aerospace
- Airlines
- Apparel
- Biotechnology
- Computer systems
- Consumer services
- Entertainment
- Gaming
- Internet content & information
- Medical equipment
- Networking and communication devices
- Scientific instruments
- Semiconductors
- Software
- Telecommunications
Experience
Diane Walters is senior counsel in Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati's Palo Alto office. Diane specializes in securities and other complex business-related litigation and has defended numerous companies and their officers and directors in class actions, derivative lawsuits, contested mergers and acquisitions, regulatory investigations, and other complex matters. She has represented clients in a wide variety of industries, including:
- Aerospace
- Airlines
- Apparel
- Biotechnology
- Computer systems
- Consumer services
- Entertainment
- Gaming
- Internet content & information
- Medical equipment
- Networking and communication devices
- Scientific instruments
- Semiconductors
- Software
- Telecommunications
Education
- J.D., University of Texas School of Law, 1990
- A.B., Stanford University, 1986With Distinction, Departmental Honors
Admissions
- State Bar of California
- U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Credentials
Education
- J.D., University of Texas School of Law, 1990
- A.B., Stanford University, 1986With Distinction, Departmental Honors
Admissions
- State Bar of California
- U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Select Current and Past Matters
- Represented Fluidigm and two of its officers in a securities class action in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed with prejudice. The dismissal was recently affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.
- Represents Netflix and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Northern District of California; represents Netflix and its directors in shareholder derivative actions in the Northern District of California and in Santa Clara County Superior Court.
- Represents former officers of Forescout in a securities class action in the Northern District of California.
- Represented Inogen and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Central District of California. The action was dismissed.
- Represented Microchip Technology and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the District of Arizona; represented Microchip and its directors in shareholder derivative actions in Arizona state court. The actions settled.
- Represented SunPower and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed with prejudice.
- Represented Wheaton Precious Metals and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Central District of California. The action settled.
- Represented Aruba Networks and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed with prejudice. The dismissal was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.
- Represented TrueCar and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Central District of California. The action was dismissed with prejudice.
- Represented Logitech and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed with prejudice.
- Represented Google and its directors in a shareholder derivative action alleging wrongful refusal in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed.
- Represented Mindspeed and its directors in a shareholder derivative action in the District of Delaware. The action was dismissed.
- Represented International Game Technology and certain of its officers and/or directors in a securities class action, derivative action, and ERISA class action. The District of Nevada’s dismissal of the derivative action was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit. The class actions settled.
- Represented Accuray and certain of its officers and directors in shareholder class and derivative actions in the Northern District of California. The actions were dismissed and later settled.
- Represented Juniper and its directors in a shareholder action in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed, and the dismissal was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.
- Represented Guidant and certain of its officers in a shareholder class action in the Southern District of Indiana. The action was dismissed, and the dismissal was affirmed by the Seventh Circuit.
Matters
Select Current and Past Matters
- Represented Fluidigm and two of its officers in a securities class action in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed with prejudice. The dismissal was recently affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.
- Represents Netflix and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Northern District of California; represents Netflix and its directors in shareholder derivative actions in the Northern District of California and in Santa Clara County Superior Court.
- Represents former officers of Forescout in a securities class action in the Northern District of California.
- Represented Inogen and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Central District of California. The action was dismissed.
- Represented Microchip Technology and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the District of Arizona; represented Microchip and its directors in shareholder derivative actions in Arizona state court. The actions settled.
- Represented SunPower and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed with prejudice.
- Represented Wheaton Precious Metals and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Central District of California. The action settled.
- Represented Aruba Networks and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed with prejudice. The dismissal was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.
- Represented TrueCar and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Central District of California. The action was dismissed with prejudice.
- Represented Logitech and certain of its officers in a securities class action in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed with prejudice.
- Represented Google and its directors in a shareholder derivative action alleging wrongful refusal in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed.
- Represented Mindspeed and its directors in a shareholder derivative action in the District of Delaware. The action was dismissed.
- Represented International Game Technology and certain of its officers and/or directors in a securities class action, derivative action, and ERISA class action. The District of Nevada’s dismissal of the derivative action was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit. The class actions settled.
- Represented Accuray and certain of its officers and directors in shareholder class and derivative actions in the Northern District of California. The actions were dismissed and later settled.
- Represented Juniper and its directors in a shareholder action in the Northern District of California. The action was dismissed, and the dismissal was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.
- Represented Guidant and certain of its officers in a shareholder class action in the Southern District of Indiana. The action was dismissed, and the dismissal was affirmed by the Seventh Circuit.
Recent Insights
Alerts
U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Ninth Circuit Expansion of Section 11 Standing
On June 1, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Slack Technologies, LLC v. Pirani1 vacating a Ninth Circuit decision2 that had extended the scope of Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, which provides a cause of action for material misstatements or misleading omissions in a registration statement. A divided panel of the Ninth Circuit had held that standing to bring a claim was not limited to those who could trace the shares they had purchased to those that had been registered as part of a direct listing. In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit’s decision, holding that Section 11 requires a plaintiff to plead and prove that the purchased securities are traceable to the challenged registration statement.
Learn More
Client Highlights
Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Securities Class Action Against Aruba Networks
On March 7, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a securities class action filed against WSGR clients Aruba Networks and three of its executives. The case arose from Aruba's previous announcement that it had missed its quarterly revenue guidance due to a number of factors, including competition from its largest competitor. The case was dismissed with prejudice by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California for failing to meet the pleading standards of the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal.
Learn More
- Privacy Policy
- Terms of Use
- Accessibility
Copyright © 2026 Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. All Rights Reserved.