`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`FINJAN, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
` v.
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.,
`Defendant.
` /
`
`No. C 17-05659 WHA
`
`QUESTIONS RE ORAL
`ARGUMENT
`
`United States Patent No. 6,804,780
`1.
`As of the time of the patent application, if you hashed two components
`separately, would then the combination of those hash values be necessarily the same as if you
`hashed the combined components together?
`2.
`Do the accused products ever run a hash function against the final executable
`form (as would be run by the client computer)?
`United States Patent No. 8,677,494
`2.
`Do the accused products derive a list of all operations in the Downloadable code
`that could ever be deemed potentially hostile? What specifically in the summary judgment
`record proves this one way or another?
`3.
`Regarding “list of suspicious computer operations,” the sentence relied upon by
`the PTAB for its claim construction comes from United States Patent No. 6,092,194 at 5:50–53,
`which appears in the preferred embodiment. Is there any other reference to the “list” in any
`other embodiment in the ’194, ’780 and/or ’494 patent?
`
`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
`
`For the Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 166 Filed 07/25/18 Page 2 of 2
`
`Please do not offer any thick hand-outs during oral arguments. All hand-outs shall be
`limited to twelve pages per side. Please have a set for the judge and another for the law clerk.
`
`Dated: July 25, 2018.
`
`
`WILLIAM ALSUP
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`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
`
`For the Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`2
`
`
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
