`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 113-7 Filed 06/22/18 Page 1of5
`
`EXHIBIT F
`EXHIBIT F
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 113-7 Filed 06/22/18 Page 2 of 5
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 113-7 Filed 06/22/18 Page 2 of 5
`
`Pages 1 - 11
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`Before The Honorable William H. Alsup, Judge
`
`Finjan, Inc.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`NO. 17-CV-5659
`
`Juniper Network, Inc.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Official Reporter
`
`TRELL & MANELLA LLP
`840 Newport Center Drive, Suite 400
`Newport Beach, CA
`92660
`
`San Francisco, California
`Thursday, February 22, 2018
`
`TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
`
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP
`990 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA
`
`94025
`
`Mr. Paul Andre
`Mr. Kristopher Kastens
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`For Plaintiff:
`
`For Defendant:
`
`Ms. Rebecca Carson
`
`Reported By:
`
`Vicki Eastvold, RMR, CRR
`
`
`
`cleanly instead of you all treating me like your early neutral
`
`evaluation judge and two years later I'm still trying to figure
`
`out which end is up.
`
`All right.
`
`I had one other question for you. What is the
`
`PTAB situation?
`
`In other words, of these 16 claims are any of
`
`them in the PTAB right now?
`
`MS. CARSON: Your Honor,
`
`they haven't yet told us the
`
`16 claims, so I'll leave that to Mr. Andre.
`
`THE COURT: Oh, really? That was a nice little slight
`
`of hand.
`
`How come you haven't told them?
`
`MR. ANDRE: We agree it would be 16 claims. We put
`
`that in the schedule that we proposed to the Court. But we can
`
`do that obviously earlier.
`
`THE COURT: Well, I think you should do it.
`
`I thought
`
`you should do that today.
`
`Can you do that today?
`
`MR. ANDRE:
`
`I can't do it off the top of my head, Your
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 113-7 Filed 06/22/18 Page 3 of 5
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 113-7 Filed 06/22/18 Page 3 of 5
`
`to withdraw any of
`
`THE COURT: Will you do it by tomorrow at noon?
`
`MR. ANDRE: Sixteen claims, we can do it by tomorrow
`
`THE COURT: Okay. 16 claims tomorrow at noon.
`
`MR. ANDRE:
`
`It was baked into the schedule.
`
`16
`
`THE COURT: Those will be the 16.
`
`Then I'm still
`
`giving you two weeks from today,
`
`I guess,
`
`
`
`10
`
`MR. ANDRE: Okay.
`
`THE COURT:
`
`Now you can't go -- once you limit it to
`
`16, and you withdraw one, you can't substitute some other one.
`
`You don't get to do that.
`
`So if you withdraw one,
`
`then you're
`
`down to 15.
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 113-7 Filed 06/22/18 Page 4 of5
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 113-7 Filed 06/22/18 Page 4 of 5
`
`How many of these patents are still
`
`MR. ANDRE: Your Honor, as far as the PTAB situation
`
`goes,
`
`the patents that are involved in this case I think
`
`they've been subject to about 25 or 30 IPR petitions.
`
`Nothing's in the PTAB except for one. One of the patents --
`
`the patents have all survived multiple PTAB challenges. And so
`
`the claims that we'll select,
`
`there's a chance that one of the
`
`patents has been instituted but has not been final. And so
`
`that's the only patent that has anything that would be
`
`implicated in the shootout.
`
`THE COURT: Well, my thought is that that won't affect
`
`us. We'll just push ahead.
`
`If you pick one that's going to be
`
`at the PTAB or you pick one that's at the PTAB,
`
`I'm just going
`
`to ignore the PTAB and make my own decision.
`
`So unless you two
`
`could stipulate to something I might figure out a -- but the
`
`PTAB will not resolve any of these by August. Right?
`
`MS. CARSON: That's correct. There's also a number of
`
`recent proceedings that have been filed but not yet reached the
`
`institution decision phase by other defendants.
`
`THE COURT:
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER
`
`I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript
`
`from the record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter.
`
`DATE:
`
`Thursday, February 27, 2018.
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 113-7 Filed 06/22/18 Page 5of5
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 113-7 Filed 06/22/18 Page 5 of 5
`
`Vicki Eastvold, RMR, CRR, U.S. Court Reporter
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
