`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 412-22 Filed 03/29/19 Page 1 of 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 20
`EXHIBIT 20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 412-22 Filed 03/29/19 Page 2 of 4
`
` Pages 1 - 137
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`BEFORE THE HONORABLE WILLIAM H. ALSUP, JUDGE
`
`FINJAN, INC., )
` )
` Plaintiff, )
` )
` VS. ) NO. C 17-5659 WHA
` )
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC., )
` ) San Francisco, California
` Defendant. )
` )
`___________________________________)
`
` Tuesday, December 4, 2018
`
`TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`For Plaintiff:
` KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL, LLP
` 990 Marsh Road
` Menlo Park, California 94025
` BY: PAUL ANDRE, ESQ.
` LISA KOBIALKA, ESQ.
` AUSTIN MANES, ESQ.
` YURIDIA CAIRE, ESQ.
` KRISTOPHER B. KASTENS, ESQ.
`
`For Defendant:
`
` IRELL & MANELLA, LLP
` 840 Newport Center Drive
` Suite 400
` Newport Beach, California 92660
` BY: REBECCA L. CARSON, ESQ.
` KEVIN X. WANG, ESQ.
`
`Reported By: BELLE BALL, CSR 8785, CRR, RDR
` Official Reporter, U.S. District Court
`
`(Appearances continued, next page)
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 412-22 Filed 03/29/19 Page 3 of 4
`
` 16
`
` 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
`
`cross-examine him so skillfully that the jury will award
`
`$70 million.
`
`MR. KAGAN: Your Honor, given that they're stuck with
`
`a $1.8 million base, I think that's unlikely.
`
`THE COURT: Yeah, I think so, too. But I'm -- that's
`
`why I enjoy this. Because he's going to get maybe a shot,
`
`shot to try.
`
`MR. KAGAN: Your Honor --
`
`THE COURT: No, I'm not going to be talked out of
`
`this. You're not going to just get to the end of the case
`
`because I exclude their expert. There's other ways to prove
`
`damages. And I'm not prepared to say he doesn't have a
`
`damages case at all.
`
`MR. KAGAN: I wasn't going to argue that. What I was
`
`going to ask, though, is if we could get a formal offer of
`
`proof --
`
`THE COURT: He has. He went through each section
`
`that he wants to prove.
`
`That's the offer of proof, right?
`
`MR. ANDRE: Your Honor, it is for Mr. Arst. That's
`
`what he will testify to. And Your Honor is absolutely
`
`correct. We will put on a fact-based case.
`
`I've tried several cases the last two days without a
`
`damages expert.
`
`THE COURT: That's good. Actually, it heartens me to
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 412-22 Filed 03/29/19 Page 4 of 4
`
` 76
`
` 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
`
`THE COURT: All right, look. Here's the problem. I
`
`don't -- I'm not going to rule on this right now. But if you
`
`want to take another deposition on the 17,000 between now and
`
`the day of trial, I will let you did do that. At their
`
`expense. They will would have to pay for it. And -- but I'm
`
`not going to decide this just yet, because it does trouble me
`
`that this was produced so late.
`
`But on the other hand, the theory that your expert came up
`
`with was swinging for the fences on a different theory,
`
`altogether. And I don't see how this information would have
`
`helped or hurt him. So I am troubled by that, too.
`
`And so I'm not going to rule on this yet. But I -- if you
`
`-- if you want to even use this at all in your defense case, if
`
`Mr. Andre by the end of today asks for a deposition this week
`
`or over the weekend, you had better, at your expense, let him
`
`have that.
`
`MS. CURRAN: Understood.
`
`THE COURT: All right. The court reporter is going
`
`to need a break. She's been going an hour and a half.
`
`Let me just see where we are on this list.
`
`Non-infringing alternative, Dr. Rubin's report. Is that
`
`moot now?
`
`MS. CURRAN: The non-infringing alternatives point is
`
`moot now. I believe Dr. Rubin's report and demonstratives is
`
`still in play.
`
`