`
`
`
`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
`
`FINJAN, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC., a Delaware
`Corporation,
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.: 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
`PLAINTIFF FINJAN, INC.’S NOTICE TO
`THE COURT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`FINJAN’S NOTICE TO THE COURT
`
`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 354 Filed 01/10/19 Page 2 of 2
`
`
`
`
`
`NOTICE TO THE COURT
`
`Pursuant to the Court’s January 2, 2019, Post-Trial Order (Dkt. No. 348), Finjan hereby advises
`
`the Court that Juniper’s equitable defenses and Section 101 defenses are not moot with respect to
`
`Claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 8,677,494 (“’494 Patent”), as this claim is still at issue for Juniper ATP
`
`Appliance product, which the Court specifically excluded from the first showdown procedure. See
`
`Dkt. No. 85 at 4-5 (“This order … further agrees that ATP Appliance cannot in fairness be included in
`
`early summary judgment procedure already well underway — although Finjan may of course include
`
`ATP Appliance in subsequent rounds of the early summary judgment procedure going forward.”)
`
`In regards to the status of the second showdown procedure, the second showdown should be
`
`stayed if the Court grants Finjan a Judgment as a Matter of Law (“JMOL”) on Juniper’s infringement
`
`of Claim 10 of the ‘494 Patent, as the issue of damages should first be properly held at trial. Similarly,
`
`the second showdown should be stayed if the Court grants Finjan’s request for a new trial on the ‘494
`
`Patent, so the issues from this case can first be resolved at trial before starting the second
`
`showdown. Finally, the entire case should be stayed pending appeal if the Court does not grant JMOL
`
`or a new trial for Finjan, but certifies issues from the first showdown procedure as final and ripe for
`
`interlocutory appeal.
`
`
`Dated: January 10, 2019
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Lisa Kobialka
`Paul J. Andre (SBN 196585)
`Lisa Kobialka (SBN 191404)
`James Hannah (SBN 237978)
`Kristopher Kastens (SBN 254797)
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS
` & FRANKEL LLP
`990 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`Telephone: (650) 752-1700
`Facsimile: (650) 752-1800
`pandre@kramerlevin.com
`lkobialka@kramerlevin.com
`jhannah@kramerlevin.com
`kkastens@kramerlevin.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`FINJAN, INC.
`
`FINJAN’S NOTICE TO THE COURT
`
`1
`
`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
`
`
`
`
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
