District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel agreed with the IT analyst’s argument that its Magic Quadrant reports and the positioning of ZL Technologies in the ‘niche’ quadrant constituted “non-actionable opinion”.

ZL had argued that its placement in the reports was derogatory “because they are understood by technology purchasers as a warning, by Gartner, that ZL and the ZL products are not good choices for enterprise email archive applications”.

The company claimed to have suffered damages of at least $132m “as a direct and proximate result of Gartner’s defamatory statements”.

However, Judge Fogel noted, “There is no allegation that Gartner actually said that ZL is not a good choice.”

In granting the research firm’s motion to dismiss, the judge left the door open for ZL to submit an amended complaint within 30 days – though leave to amend has been denied for claims made by ZL under California laws on unfair competition and false advertising.