`
`
`
`PAUL ANDRE (State Bar No. 196585)
`pandre@kramerlevin.com
`LISA KOBIALKA (State Bar No. 191404)
`lkobialka@kramerlevin.com
`JAMES HANNAH (State Bar No. 237978)
`jhannah@kramerlevin.com
`KRISTOPHER KASTENS (State Bar No. 254797)
`kkastens@kramerlevin.com
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP
`990 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`Telephone: (650) 752-1700
`Facsimile: (650) 752-1800
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`FINJAN, INC.
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
`
`
`Case No.: 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
`PLAINTIFF’S FINJAN INC.’S NOTICE
`OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
`
`
`
`FINJAN, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC., a Delaware
`Corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`FINJAN’S NOTICE OF SUPP. AUTHORITY
`
`CASE NO.: 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 235 Filed 11/16/18 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`We write to provide relevant supplemental authority and request additional briefing regarding
`
`the issues of patent eligibility of Claim 10 of the ‘494 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Federal
`
`Circuit issued a precedential opinion this morning that is relevant to the issue of patentability under 35
`
`U.S.C. § 101 that may impact the upcoming trial on December 10, 2018. In Ancora Technologies, Inc.
`
`v. HTC America, Inc., No. 18-1404, Dkt. 39 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 16, 2018) (attached hereto), the Court
`
`again recognized the patent eligibility of Finjan’s inventive approach to malware detection:
`
`
`In Finjan, we held that claims to a “behavior-based virus scan” were a specific
`improvement in computer functionality and hence not directed to an abstract
`idea. 879 F.3d at 1304. The claimed technique of scanning enabled “more
`flexible and nuanced virus filtering” and detection of potentially dangerous
`code. Id. The claims thus were directed to “a non-abstract improvement in
`computer functionality” having the benefit of achieving greater computer
`security. Id. at 1305.
`
`Ancora Technologies, Inc., slip op. at 9 (citing Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat System, Inc., 879 F.3d
`
`1299, 1304-05)(Fed. Cir. 2018)).
`
`
`Improving security—here, against a computer’s unauthorized use of a
`program—can be a non-abstract computer-functionality improvement if done by
`a specific technique that departs from earlier approaches to solve a specific
`computer problem. See Finjan, 879 F.3d at 1304–05.
`Id., slip op. at 10.
`
`Moreover, the Court augmented its precedent regarding the “overlaps between some step one
`
`and step two considerations, Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353 (Fed.
`
`Cir. 2016), that [its] conclusion that the specific improvement in this case passes muster at step one is
`
`indirectly reinforced by some of [its] holdings under step two.” Id., slip op. at 11-12.
`
`We submit that Ancora is relevant to this case because, in accordance with the Court’s Order
`
`Granting in Part Early Motion for Summary Judgment on ‘494 Patent, dated August 24, 2018, the
`
`parties are preparing to go to trial on Alice step two issues.
`
`
`
`
`
`FINJAN’S NOTICE OF SUPP. AUTHORITY
`
`1
`
`CASE NO.: 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 235 Filed 11/16/18 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DATED: November 16, 2018
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /s/ Paul J. Andre
`
`
`Paul J. Andre (State Bar No. 196585)
`Lisa Kobialka (State Bar No. 191404)
`James Hannah (State Bar No. 237978)
`Kristopher Kastens (State Bar No. 254797)
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS
` & FRANKEL LLP
`990 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`Telephone: (650) 752-1700
`pandre@kramerlevin.com
`lkobialka@kramerlevin.com
`jhannah@kramerlevin.com
`kkastens@kramerlevin.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`FINJAN, INC.
`
`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
`
`FINJAN’S NOTICE OF SUPP. AUTHORITY
`
`2
`
`CASE NO.: 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
`