Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 1 of 38
`
`Exhibit 1
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 2 of 38
`
`DR. ERIC B. COLE
`DR. ERIC B. COLE
`FINJAN, INC. V JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC
`FINJAN, INC. V JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC
`Page 1
`
`·1· · · · · · ·THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`·1· ·A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`June 21, 2018
`June 21, 2018
`1–4
`Page 3
`
`·2· · · · · · ·NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`·2
`
`·3· · · · · · · · ·SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
`
`·3· ·ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF AND THE WITNESS:
`
`·4· ·---------------------------X
`
`·4· · · · KRISTOPHER KASTENS, ESQ.
`
`·5· ·FINJAN, INC., a Delaware
`
`·5· · · · Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
`
`·6· ·Corporation,
`
`·7· · · · · · · Plaintiff,
`
`·6· · · · 990 Marsh Road
`
`·7· · · · Menlo Park, CA 94025
`
`·8· ·V.· · · · · · · · · · · · Case No. 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
`·8· · · · kkastens@kramerlevin.com
`
`·9· ·JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC., a
`
`·9· · · · 650.752.1715
`
`10· ·Delaware Corporation,
`
`11· · · · · · · Defendant.
`
`10
`
`11· ·ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT:
`
`12· ·---------------------------X
`
`12· · · · REBECCA CARSON, ESQ.
`
`13· · · · · · · · Videotaped Deposition of
`
`13· · · · Irell & Manella LLP
`
`14· · · · · · · · · · ·DR. ERIC B. COLE
`
`14· · · · 840 Newport Center Drive, Suite 400
`
`15
`
`15· · · · Newport Beach, CA 92660-6324
`
`16· · · · · · · · ·Herndon, Virginia 20171
`
`16· · · · rcarson@irell.com
`
`17· · · · · · · · ·Thursday, June 21, 2018
`
`17· · · · 949.760.0991
`
`18· · · · · · · · · · · · 8:00 a.m.
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`19· ·Also Present:
`
`20· · · · DANIEL HOLMSTOCK, Videographer
`
`21· ·Denise Dobner Vickery, RMR, CRR
`
`22· ·JOB NO. J2328299
`
`21
`
`22
`
`·1
`
`·2
`
`·3
`
`·4
`
`·5
`
`·6
`
`Page 2
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · ·C O N T E N T S
`
`Page 4
`
`·2
`
`·3· ·EXAMINATION OF DR. ERIC B. COLE· · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`·4· ·BY MS. CARSON· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·6, 271
`
`·5· ·AFTERNOON SESSION· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 187
`
`·6· ·BY MR. KASTENS· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·269
`
`·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·Thursday, June 21, 2018
`
`·7
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·8:00 a.m.
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · ·E X H I B I T S
`
`·9
`
`·9· · · · · · · · ·(Attached to Transcript)
`
`10· · · · Videotaped deposition of DR. ERIC B. COLE, held
`
`10· ·DEPOSITION EXHIBITS· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`11· ·at the conference rooms of:
`
`11· ·Exhibit 1033· Declaration of Dr. Eric Cole in· · ·18
`
`12
`
`12· · · · Support of Plaintiff Finjan, Inc.'s Notice of
`
`13· · · · · · ·THE WESTIN WASHINGTON DULLES AIRPORT
`
`13· · · · Motion and Motion for Summary Judgment of
`
`14· · · · · · ·2520 Wasser Terrace
`
`14· · · · Infringement of Claim 10 of U.S. Patent No.
`
`15· · · · · · ·Herndon, VA 20171
`
`15· · · · 8,677,494
`
`16
`
`17
`
`16· ·Exhibit 1034· Sky ATP Analysis Pipeline· · · · · 151
`
`17· · · · JNPR-FNJN_29017_00552908
`
`18· · · · Pursuant to notice, before Denise Dobner
`
`18· ·Exhibit 1035· Exhibit 16:· Sky Advanced Threat· ·151
`
`19· ·Vickery, Certified Realtime Reporter, Registered
`
`19· · · · Prevention Architecture FINJAN-JN 044838
`
`20· ·Merit Reporter, and Notary Public in and for the
`
`20· ·Exhibit 1036· Exhibit 11:· Sky Advanced Threat· ·152
`
`21· ·Commonwealth of Virginia.
`
`21· · · · Prevention Guide FINJAN-JN 044759
`
`22
`
`22
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions.com
`EsquireSolutions.comYVer1f
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 3 of 38
`
`DR. ERIC B. COLE
`DR. ERIC B. COLE
`FINJAN, INC. V JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC
`FINJAN, INC. V JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC
`Page 113
`
`·1· ·back and check.
`·2· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·3· · · · · Q.· ·What is a relational database?
`·4· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`·5· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·Like a typical
`·6· ·example is like MySQL where there's a core
`·7· ·relationship between the different elements in the
`·8· ·database.
`·9· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`10· · · · · Q.· ·Does DynamoDB fit that characteristic
`11· ·that you just identified?
`12· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`13· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·DynamoDB does have
`14· ·a schema with regard to the primary key, but then
`15· ·other components of it might not.· So that's why
`16· ·it's more of a hybrid.
`17· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`18· · · · · Q.· ·You think it's a hybrid?
`19· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`20· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`21· · · · · Q.· ·What do you mean by "hybrid"?
`22· · · · · A.· ·Well, with DynamoDB, there is an
`
`June 21, 2018
`June 21, 2018
`113–116
`Page 115
`·1· · · · · Q.· ·So part of the construction that you've
`·2· ·applied for database is "organized according to a
`·3· ·database schema."
`·4· · · · · · · ·What does it mean to be "organized
`·5· ·according to a database schema"?
`·6· · · · · A.· ·That means there needs to be some set
`·7· ·fields or schema that's used for storing the
`·8· ·information.
`·9· · · · · Q.· ·Would you agree that a database schema
`10· ·is a description of a database to a database
`11· ·management system in the language provided by the
`12· ·database management system?
`13· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`14· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·Could you read that
`15· ·one more time?
`16· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`17· · · · · Q.· ·Would you agree that a database schema
`18· ·is a description of a database to a database
`19· ·management system in the language provided by the
`20· ·database management system?
`21· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`22· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·That would
`
`Page 114
`·1· ·initial schema with the primary key, which would fit
`·2· ·under our definition of a database, but then there
`·3· ·could be also other components that are not
`·4· ·necessarily tied to a schema.
`·5· · · · · Q.· ·Have you ever heard the term "schema
`·6· ·list database"?
`·7· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`·8· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·Yes, I have.
`·9· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`10· · · · · Q.· ·What does that mean to you?
`11· · · · · A.· ·A schema list database basically means
`12· ·that the data is more unstructured and there's not a
`13· ·set schema in which the information is stored.
`14· · · · · Q.· ·Would a schema list database satisfy
`15· ·the construction of database in this case?
`16· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`17· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·If it was a hundred
`18· ·percent true schema list database, then it would
`19· ·not, but most databases that are called "schema
`20· ·list" does have an underlying schema for looking up
`21· ·information and using the primary key.
`22· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`
`Page 116
`
`·1· ·generally fit my understanding.
`·2· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·3· · · · · Q.· ·For purposes of doing your infringement
`·4· ·analysis on Claim 10 of the '494 patent, did it
`·5· ·matter to your analysis what computer language the
`·6· ·database schema was written in?
`·7· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`·8· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·(Reviews document).
`·9· · · · · · · · · · ·There is nothing in Claim 10 that
`10· ·specifies a certain language be used.· So no, it was
`11· ·not restricted to a certain language, as long as it
`12· ·met all the claim elements.
`13· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`14· · · · · Q.· ·For purposes of doing your infringement
`15· ·analysis on Claim 10 of the '494 patent, did it
`16· ·matter to your analysis whether the database schema
`17· ·was written in the same language as the database
`18· ·itself?
`19· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`20· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·Once again, when I
`21· ·do my infringement analysis, I'm driven by the claim
`22· ·elements, and I don't see anything in the claim
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions.com
`EsquireSolutions.comYVer1f
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 4 of 38
`
`June 21, 2018
`June 21, 2018
`117–120
`Page 119
`
`DR. ERIC B. COLE
`DR. ERIC B. COLE
`FINJAN, INC. V JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC
`FINJAN, INC. V JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC
`Page 117
`·1· ·language that would restrict or limit the languages
`·2· ·or how it's written.
`·3· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·4· · · · · Q.· ·So the database schema could be written
`·5· ·in a language that's different than the database
`·6· ·under your analysis; correct?
`·7· · · · · A.· ·According --
`·8· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`·9· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·According to claim
`10· ·10(c) "a database manager coupled with said
`11· ·Downloadable scanner, for storing the Downloadable
`12· ·security profile in a database."
`13· · · · · · · · · · ·So I don't see anything limiting
`14· ·to be database language.
`15· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`16· · · · · Q.· ·Based on the plain meaning of database
`17· ·within the '494 patent, does the data in the
`18· ·database have to be in the form of a table?
`19· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`20· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·I do not see
`21· ·anything in the claim language or in the plain and
`22· ·ordinary meaning of the word "database" that
`
`·1· ·video that I created on it, that wouldn't
`·2· ·necessarily be a database.
`·3· · · · · Q.· ·Can you think of any other data storage
`·4· ·options that are not databases?
`·5· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`·6· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·I guess I could
`·7· ·store a file on a USB file.· That's not a database.
`·8· ·So you can have files and information.· Databases,
`·9· ·typically when you have a collection of interrelated
`10· ·data is stored in a database, but there's a lot of
`11· ·ways you can store information on a computer that's
`12· ·not a database.
`13· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`14· · · · · Q.· ·Have you ever heard the term "file
`15· ·store" or "datastore"?
`16· · · · · A.· ·Yes.
`17· · · · · Q.· ·Is a datastore a database?
`18· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`19· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·I would have to
`20· ·look at the specifics.· It could be, but not
`21· ·necessarily, depending on how it's set up and
`22· ·structured.
`
`Page 118
`
`·1· ·requires or limits it to a table.
`·2· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·3· · · · · Q.· ·Are there ways that one can store files
`·4· ·or data besides a database?
`·5· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`·6· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·Can you repeat the
`·7· ·question?
`·8· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·9· · · · · Q.· ·Are there ways that one can store files
`10· ·or data besides a database?
`11· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`12· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·You could store
`13· ·files on your computer.· That wouldn't necessarily
`14· ·be a database.· So you could store files or
`15· ·information outside of a database.
`16· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`17· · · · · Q.· ·Can you think of any sort of examples
`18· ·of such storage mechanisms --
`19· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`20· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`21· · · · · Q.· ·-- wouldn't be considered a database?
`22· · · · · A.· ·I guess if I have a USB drive with one
`
`Page 120
`
`·1· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·2· · · · · Q.· ·So it's your opinion that a datastore
`·3· ·could be considered a database, depending on how
`·4· ·it's set up?
`·5· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`·6· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·I'm always careful
`·7· ·with terms.· So if you give me specific details, I
`·8· ·could give a more conclusive statement, but -- but
`·9· ·it always depends on the specifics of how a term is
`10· ·defined and how it's used to give a conclusive
`11· ·answer.
`12· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`13· · · · · Q.· ·If you were teaching someone in one of
`14· ·your classes or writing your book and you wanted to
`15· ·identify ways to store data that don't involve using
`16· ·a database, what concepts would you identify?
`17· · · · · · · · · · ·MR. KASTENS:· Objection.· Form.
`18· · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· ·Probably similar to
`19· ·the examples.· If you just created a video and you
`20· ·just put it on a USB, that wouldn't be considered a
`21· ·database.· Or if you just captured information and
`22· ·stored it in a file, that wouldn't necessarily be a
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions.com
`EsquireSolutions.comYVer1f
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 5 of 38
`
`DR. ERIC B. COLE
`DR. ERIC B. COLE
`FINJAN, INC. V JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC
`FINJAN, INC. V JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC
`Page 273
`
`·1· · · · · · · · ·CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER
`
`·1· · · · · · ·DEPOSITION ERRATA SHEET
`
`June 21, 2018
`June 21, 2018
`273–276
`Page 275
`
`·2· ·COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
`
`·2· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`·3· · · · · · ·I, DENISE DOBNER VICKERY, CRR/RMR and
`
`·4· ·Notary Public, hereby certify the witness, DR. ERIC
`
`·5· ·B. COLE, was by me first duly sworn to testify to
`
`·6· ·the truth; that the said deposition was recorded by
`
`·7· ·me and thereafter reduced to printing under my
`
`·8· ·direction; and that said deposition is a true
`
`·9· ·transcript of my original stenographic notes.
`
`10· · · · · · ·I certify the inspection, reading and
`
`11· ·signing of said deposition were NOT waived by
`
`·3· ·__________________________________________________
`
`·4· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`·5· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`·6· ·__________________________________________________
`
`·7· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`·8· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`·9· ·__________________________________________________
`
`10· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`12· ·counsel for the respective parties and by the
`
`11· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`13· ·witness; and that I am not a relative or employee of
`
`12· ·__________________________________________________
`
`14· ·any of the parties, or a relative or employee of
`
`13· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`15· ·either counsel, and I am in no way interested
`
`14· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`16· ·directly or indirectly in this action.
`
`17· ·CERTIFIED TO THIS 22nd DAY OF JUNE, 2018.
`
`18
`
`19
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · Denise Dobner Vickery, CRR/RMR
`
`20· · · · · · · · · · Notary Public in and for the
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · Commonwealth of Virginia
`
`21· · · · · · · · · · Notary Registration No. 126014
`
`15· ·__________________________________________________
`
`16· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`17· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`18· ·__________________________________________________
`
`19· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`20
`
`21· ·SIGNATURE:_______________________DATE:___________
`
`22· ·My Commission expires:· March 31, 2022
`
`22· · · · · · ·DR. ERIC B. COLE
`
`·1· · · · · · · · ·DEPOSITION ERRATA SHEET
`
`Page 274
`
`·1· · · · · · · · ·DEPOSITION ERRATA SHEET
`
`Page 276
`
`·2
`
`·2· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`·3· ·Our Assignment No. J2328299
`
`·3· ·__________________________________________________
`
`·4· ·Case Caption:
`
`·4· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`·5· ·FINJAN, INC. vs. JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.
`
`·5· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`·6
`
`·6· ·__________________________________________________
`
`·7· · · · · · DECLARATION UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY
`
`·7· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`·8· · · · · · ·I declare under penalty of perjury
`
`·8· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`·9· ·that I have read the entire transcript of
`
`·9· ·__________________________________________________
`
`10· ·my Deposition taken in the captioned matter
`
`10· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`11· ·or the same has been read to me, and
`
`11· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`12· ·the same is true and accurate, save and
`
`12· ·__________________________________________________
`
`13· ·except for changes and/or corrections, if
`
`13· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`14· ·any, as indicated by me on the DEPOSITION
`
`14· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`15· ·ERRATA SHEET hereof, with the understanding
`
`15· ·__________________________________________________
`
`16· ·that I offer these changes as if still under
`
`16· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`17· ·oath.
`
`17· ·Page No._____Line No._____Change to:______________
`
`18· · · · · · ·Signed on the ______ day of
`
`18· ·__________________________________________________
`
`19· ·____________, 2018.
`
`19· ·Reason for change:________________________________
`
`20
`
`20
`
`21· ·___________________________________
`
`21· ·SIGNATURE:_______________________DATE:___________
`
`22· · · · · · ·DR. ERIC B. COLE
`
`22· · · · · · ·DR. ERIC B. COLE
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions.com
`EsquireSolutions.com
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 6 of 38
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 6 of 38
`
`EXHIBIT 2
`EXHIBIT 2
`
`REDACTED VERSION OF
`REDACTED VERSION OF
`DOCUMENT SOUGHT TO BE
`DOCUMENT SOUGHT TO BE
`SEALED
`SEALED
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 7 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 8 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 9 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 10 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 11 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 12 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 13 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 14 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 15 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 16 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 17 of 38
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 18 of 38
`
`Exhibit 3
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 19 of 38
`
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`KEVIN M. ARST - 11/09/2018
`KEVIN M. ARST - 11/09/2018
`
`·
`
`·1· · · · · ·IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`·2· · · · ·FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`·3
`
`·4· ·FINJAN, INC., a Delaware
`· · ·Corporation,
`·5
`· · · · · · · ·Plaintiff,· · · · · · · ·Case No.
`·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`· · · · ·vs.
`·7
`· · ·JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC., a
`·8· ·Delaware Corporation,
`
`·9
`· · · · · · · ·Defendant.
`10· ·_________________________________
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13· · · · HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`
`14
`
`15· · · · · · VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF KEVIN M. ARST
`
`16· · · · · · · · ·Friday, November 9, 2018
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23· ·Reported by:
`· · ·Cynthia Manning, CSR No. 7645, CLR, CCRR
`24
`
`25· ·Job No. LA-196238
`
`Epiq Court Reporting Solutions - Woodland Hills
`Epiq Court Reporting Solutions - Woodland Hills
`1-800-826-0277
`www.deposition.com
`1-800-826-0277
`www.deposition.com
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 20 of 38
`
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`KEVIN M. ARST - 11/09/2018
`KEVIN M. ARST - 11/09/2018
`Page 94
`·1· · · · A.· Okay.· But he is also a businessperson, was
`·2· ·my understanding from the testimony.
`·3· · · · Q.· Okay.· You didn't rely on any testimony
`·4· ·from a Juniper sales witness; correct?
`·5· · · · A.· Well, my --
`·6· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`·7· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· -- understanding is that
`·8· ·discovery is ongoing.· I don't think that those
`·9· ·depositions had transpired by the time this report
`10· ·was prepared.
`11· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`12· · · · Q.· Did you ask Finjan's counsel if there was
`13· ·any testimony from a Juniper financial person or
`14· ·marketing person or a businessperson?
`15· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`16· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· My understanding is that
`17· ·there is a financial deposition that's scheduled in
`18· ·the coming weeks.
`19· · · · · · And I asked for the complete record of
`20· ·information that was available at the time I
`21· ·prepared my report, including deposition transcripts
`22· ·and business records.
`23· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`24· · · · Q.· Okay.· So insofar as putting together your
`25· ·report, the information that you had at the time you
`
`Pages 94..97
`Page 96
`·1· ·has been evidence maintained by Juniper wherein we
`·2· ·know how many free licenses were offered
`·3· ·historically.
`·4· · · · · · My understanding from the discovery record
`·5· ·is that that information just simply hasn't been
`·6· ·maintained.
`·7· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·8· · · · Q.· That's the assumption that you made?
`·9· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`10· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't think it's an
`11· ·assumption.· My recollection is that Juniper has --
`12· ·contends in this case that it has not maintained
`13· ·that information.
`14· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Counsel, when you get to a good
`15· ·stopping point, can we take a quick break?
`16· · · · · · MS. CARSON:· Sure.· Let me finish my line,
`17· ·please.
`18· · · · · · We can actually just take a break now.
`19· · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We are off the record at
`20· ·11:35 a.m.
`21· · · · · · (Recess taken)
`22· · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We are back on the
`23· ·record at 11:41 a.m.
`24· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`25· · · · Q.· Would you agree with me that the cost
`
`Page 95
`·1· ·did your report about the importance to -- that Sky
`·2· ·ATP had to Juniper's business, that was based
`·3· ·primarily on Dr. Cole's opinion and publicly
`·4· ·available press releases; correct?
`·5· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`·6· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Well, no.· I mean, I have
`·7· ·other information referenced in my report.· It
`·8· ·includes Dr. Cole's report and my discussions with
`·9· ·Dr. Cole, but also I reviewed the deposition
`10· ·testimony of available witnesses and the documents
`11· ·that are cited in my report and appendix.
`12· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`13· · · · Q.· Did you see any evidence in everything that
`14· ·you reviewed that Juniper's customers would have
`15· ·been willing to pay more for Sky ATP?
`16· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`17· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Well, Sky ATP was offered
`18· ·available for free, and there were customers who
`19· ·took basic or premium licenses beyond the free
`20· ·license that was offered.
`21· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`22· · · · Q.· Less than 1 percent of the customers;
`23· ·right?
`24· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`25· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't think, again, there
`
`Page 97
`·1· ·approach assumes that a noninfringing alternative to
`·2· ·the patented technology exists?
`·3· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`·4· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Can you please repeat the
`·5· ·question?
`·6· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·7· · · · Q.· Would you agree with me that the cost
`·8· ·approach assumes that a noninfringing alternative to
`·9· ·the patented technology exists?
`10· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Same objection.
`11· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· (Reviewing document.)
`12· · · · · · The way that I characterize the cost
`13· ·approach in my report is on page 30, which is that
`14· ·rational and willing negotiators for patent rights
`15· ·would appropriately consider the alleged infringer's
`16· ·cost savings attributable to the infringement.
`17· · · · · · And I think that there is an assumption, in
`18· ·part, that the -- the cost savings analysis that's
`19· ·being referenced is to avoid the infringed claims of
`20· ·a patent.
`21· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`22· · · · Q.· Is it your understanding that the cost
`23· ·approach compares the cost associated with the
`24· ·infringing product to the cost of the next best
`25· ·noninfringing alternative for the accused infringer?
`
`Epiq Court Reporting Solutions - Woodland Hills
`Epiq Court Reporting Solutions - Woodland Hills
`1-800-826-0277
`www.deposition.com
`1-800-826-0277
`www.deposition.comYVer1f
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 21 of 38
`
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`KEVIN M. ARST - 11/09/2018
`KEVIN M. ARST - 11/09/2018
`Pages 98..101
`Page 98
`Page 100
`
`·1· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`·2· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· It's not necessarily
`·3· ·product-based, but it's based on understanding the
`·4· ·cost savings that were enjoyed by the alleged
`·5· ·infringer through the alleged infringement.
`·6· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·7· · · · Q.· Would you agree that the cost approach
`·8· ·compares the cost associated with infringing to the
`·9· ·cost of the next best alternative for the accused
`10· ·infringer?
`11· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`12· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Well, that is -- could be a
`13· ·consideration.· I mean, you could look at a number
`14· ·of different analyses that could all be cost
`15· ·approaches; some may or may not be the next best
`16· ·alternative available to the alleged infringer.
`17· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`18· · · · Q.· Is it your understanding that, when you do
`19· ·a proper cost-based analysis, that you don't have to
`20· ·consider the next best alternative, that it just has
`21· ·to be any alternative?
`22· · · · A.· Well -- so --
`23· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`24· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· -- there is an assumption I
`25· ·think built into your question that we would need to
`
`·1· · · · A.· Yes.
`·2· · · · Q.· And you have a section here, 7.3.1, which
`·3· ·is labeled "The Cost Approach," and then you have a
`·4· ·quote here from a Federal Circuit decision.
`·5· · · · · · Do you see that?
`·6· · · · A.· Yes.
`·7· · · · Q.· And then I just want to direct you to the
`·8· ·last sentence here that says:
`·9· · · · · · "A price for a hypothetical license may
`10· · · · · · appropriately be based on consideration of
`11· · · · · · the 'costs and availability of
`12· · · · · · noninfringing alternatives' and the
`13· · · · · · potential infringer's 'cost savings.'"
`14· · · · · · What is your understanding of what that
`15· ·means in the context of a reasonable royalty
`16· ·analysis?
`17· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Sorry, Counsel, but what page
`18· ·are we on?
`19· · · · · · MS. CARSON:· 30.
`20· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· The cost approach is one of
`21· ·the commonly accepted valuation methodologies that
`22· ·are available to people who practice my trade of
`23· ·valuing intellectual property and determining
`24· ·reasonable royalties in the context of intellectual
`25· ·property litigation.· And my understanding of the
`
`Page 99
`·1· ·iron out:· Am I trying to do a cost analysis, or am
`·2· ·I trying to determine a reasonable royalty?
`·3· · · · · · And your questions were related to a cost
`·4· ·analysis, and that's maybe a separate consideration.
`·5· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·6· · · · Q.· Okay.· So in calculating a reasonable
`·7· ·royalty using the cost savings approach, is it your
`·8· ·understanding that one needs to consider the cost
`·9· ·associated with the next best alternative?
`10· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`11· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· So I think that the --
`12· ·generally I agree with that characterization, which
`13· ·is that, when you're determining a reasonable
`14· ·royalty, if you have got different cost indicators
`15· ·and they are both available and noninfringing, then
`16· ·the lower cost would be a consideration.
`17· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`18· · · · Q.· What is your understanding of what a
`19· ·noninfringing alternative is?
`20· · · · A.· My understanding that -- is that it's an
`21· ·alternative available to the alleged infringer that
`22· ·would allow it to commercialize a product or service
`23· ·without infringing a patent.
`24· · · · Q.· If you could turn to page 30 of your
`25· ·report.
`
`Page 101
`
`·1· ·law is that it's an accepted methodology.
`·2· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`·3· · · · Q.· Is it your understanding that in order to
`·4· ·perform a reliable cost-based reasonable royalty
`·5· ·analysis that one must identify a commercially
`·6· ·viable noninfringing alternative?
`·7· · · · · · MS. CAIRE:· Objection; form.
`·8· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· This is a reasonable royalty
`·9· ·analysis where really what I am envisioning is that
`10· ·Finjan on the one hand and Juniper on the other hand
`11· ·come together and negotiate a royalty for a license
`12· ·of the '494 patent.
`13· · · · · · It's my opinion that the royalty can be
`14· ·derived by reference to the costs that were avoided
`15· ·by Juniper through the infringement.
`16· · · · · · But ultimately, I'm opining -- or my
`17· ·understanding of the law is that it's a license
`18· ·agreement that we're valuing here, not necessarily
`19· ·envisioning that the alternative is going to be
`20· ·enacted.
`21· ·BY MS. CARSON:
`22· · · · Q.· So could you base a reasonable royalty
`23· ·analysis on the costs associated with a
`24· ·noninfringing alternative that's not commercially
`25· ·viable?
`
`Epiq Court Reporting Solutions - Woodland Hills
`Epiq Court Reporting Solutions - Woodland Hills
`1-800-826-0277
`www.deposition.com
`1-800-826-0277
`www.deposition.comYVer1f
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 22 of 38
`
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`KEVIN M. ARST - 11/09/2018
`KEVIN M. ARST - 11/09/2018
`Page 322
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
`
`·
`
`·2· · · · · ·I, CYNTHIA MANNING, a Certified Shorthand
`
`·3· ·Reporter of the State of California, do hereby
`
`·4· ·certify:
`
`·5· · · · · ·That the foregoing proceedings were taken
`
`·6· ·before me at the time and place herein set forth;
`
`·7· ·that any witnesses in the foregoing proceedings,
`
`·8· ·prior to testifying, were placed under oath; that a
`
`·9· ·verbatim record of the proceedings was made by me
`
`10· ·using machine shorthand which was thereafter
`
`11· ·transcribed under my direction; further, that the
`
`12· ·foregoing is an accurate transcription thereof.
`
`13· · · · · ·I further certify that I am neither
`
`14· ·financially interested in the action, nor a relative
`
`15· ·or employee of any attorney of any of the parties.
`
`16· · · · · ·Before completion of the deposition, review
`
`17· ·of the transcript [ ] was [X] was not requested.· If
`
`18· ·requested, any changes made by the deponent (and
`
`19· ·provided to the reporter) during the period allowed
`
`20· ·are appended hereto.
`
`21· · · · · · In witness whereof, I have subscribed my
`
`22· ·name this 12th day of November 2018.
`
`23
`
`24· · · · · · ________________________________________
`
`25· · · · · · CYNTHIA MANNING, CSR No. 7645, CCRR, CLR
`
`·1· ·Errata Sheet
`
`·2
`
`·3· ·NAME OF CASE: FINJAN, INC. vs. JUNIPER NETWORKS
`
`·4· ·DATE OF DEPOSITION: 11/09/2018
`
`·5· ·NAME OF WITNESS: Kevin M. Arst
`
`·6· ·Reason Codes:
`
`·7· · · · 1. To clarify the record.
`
`·8· · · · 2. To conform to the facts.
`
`·9· · · · 3. To correct transcription errors.
`
`10· ·Page _____ Line ______ Reason ______
`
`11· ·From ____________________ to ____________________
`
`12· ·Page _____ Line ______ Reason ______
`
`13· ·From ____________________ to ____________________
`
`14· ·Page _____ Line ______ Reason ______
`
`15· ·From ____________________ to ____________________
`
`16· ·Page _____ Line ______ Reason ______
`
`17· ·From ____________________ to ____________________
`
`18· ·Page _____ Line ______ Reason ______
`
`19· ·From ____________________ to ____________________
`
`20· ·Page _____ Line ______ Reason ______
`
`21· ·From ____________________ to ____________________
`
`22· ·Page _____ Line ______ Reason ______
`
`23· ·From ____________________ to ____________________
`
`24
`
`25· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·_______________________
`
`Epiq Court Reporting Solutions - Woodland Hills
`Epiq Court Reporting Solutions - Woodland Hills
`1-800-826-0277
`www.deposition.com
`1-800-826-0277
`www.deposition.com
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 23 of 38
`
`Exhibit 4
`
`

`

`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 24 of 38
`
`Dictionary of
`Electrical and
`
`Computer Engneering
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 25 of 38
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 274-1 Filed 11/27/18 Page 25 of 38
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The McGrawHill Companies
`
`in the dictionary was published previously in the McGRAW-HILL
`text
`All
`DICTIONARY OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL TERMS, Sixth Edition,
`copyright © 2003 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, inc. All rights reserved.
`
`McGRAW-HILL DICTIONARY OF ELECTRICAL AND COMPUTER ENGINEER-
`ING, copyright © 2004 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
`Printed in the United States of America. Except as pérmitted under the United
`States Copyright Act of 1976, no partof this publication may be reproduced or
`distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a databaseor retrieval
`system, without the prior written permission of the publisher.
`
`1234567890
`
`DOC/DOC
`
`0987654
`
`ISBN 0-07-144210-3
`
`This book is printed on recycled, acid-free paper containing a
`minimum of 50% recycled, de-inked fiber.
`
`
`PREFACE a