Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 445-1 Filed 04/23/19 Page 1 of 5
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 445-1 Filed 04/23/19 Page 1of5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 1
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 445-1 Filed 04/23/19 Page 2 of 5
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`Transcript of Scott James Coonan
`Conducted on November 16, 2018
`
`1 (1 to 4)
`
`1
`
`3
`
` A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF FINJAN, INC.:
`
` MICHAEL H. LEE, ESQUIRE
`
` LINJUN XU, ESQUIRE
`
` KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP
`
` 990 Marsh Road
`
` Menlo Park, California 94025
`
` (650) 752-1700
`
`
`
`0
`
`ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.:
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` JONATHAN S. KAGAN, ESQUIRE
`
` IRELL & MANELLA LLP
`
` 1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900
`
` Los Angeles, California 90067
`
` (301) 277-1010
`
`
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
`
` John Torreano, Videographer
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
` NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
` SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
`
`- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
`
`FINJAN, INC., a Delaware : Case No.
`
`Corporation, : 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
` Plaintiff, :
`
`v. :
`
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC., a :
`
`0
`
`Delaware Corporation, :
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` Defendant. :
`
`- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
`
`
`
` HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`
` SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`
`
` VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF SCOTT JAMES COONAN
`
` Sunnyvale, California
`
` Friday, November 16, 2018
`
` 10:22 a.m.
`
`
`
`
`
`Job No.: 217111
`
`Pages: 1 - 271
`
`Reported By: Charlotte Lacey, RPR, CSR No. 14224
`
`2
`
`4
`
` I N D E X
`
` WITNESS PAGE
`
` SCOTT JAMES COONAN
`
` Examination by Mr. Lee 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` I N D E X O F E X H I B I T S
`
` EXHIBITS DESCRIPTION PAGE
`
`0
`
`Exhibit 1 E-mail chain, Bates number 82
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` JNPR-FNJN_29012_00962373 through
`
` 2374
`
`Exhibit 2 U.S. Patent Number 6,965,968, Bates 88
`
` number FINJAN-JN 402807 through
`
` 402817
`
`Exhibit 3 U.S. Patent Number 8,677,494, Bates 92
`
` number FINJAN-JN 003821 through
`
` 003848
`
`Exhibit 4 U.S. Patent Number 6,154,844, Bates 92
`
` number FINJAN-JN 0000001 through 020
`
`Exhibit 5 E-mail chain, Bates number 98
`
` FINJAN-JN 192865
`
`Exhibit 6 E-mail chain, Bates number 124
`
` JNPR-FNJN_29012_00961875 through
`
` 1877
`
` VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF SCOTT JAMES COONAN, held
`
`at the offices of Juniper Networks, 1133 Innovation Way,
`
`Building A, Sunnyvale, California
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Pursuant to notice, before Charlotte Lacey,
`
`Certified Shorthand Reporter, in and for the State of
`
`California.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 445-1 Filed 04/23/19 Page 3 of 5
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`Transcript of Scott James Coonan
`Conducted on November 16, 2018
`173
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A Okay.
` Q You mention that there's an incredibly unified
`defense group that has formed?
` A Yes.
` Q Can you explain what do you mean by incredibly
`unified defense group that's formed?
` A I was just aware of -- partly in -- in them as
`a result with other -- as a result of conversations with
`others in the industry, that there was a defense group
`and that there had been parties that had already been
`sued.
` I was aware that Palo Alto Networks had been
`sued. At one point I did actually speak to the attorney
`over there.
` And I can't recall -- I think that it was kind
`of left out, you know, if Juniper is sued at some point
`in the future, you know, we'd be, you know, welcome into
`the group.
` But they were a lot further along. And
`hearing him describe what I just was picking up on, the
`vibe I got from him, that they were very well organized.
` Q What is a defense group?
` A Well --
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
` A In that instance, it was I believe a number of
`
`44 (173 to 176)
`
`175
`
`incredibly unified defense group when you say --
` A I learned of the existence of it in the
`context of the fact that there was other litigation that
`Finjan was involved in. Finjan sued Juniper alone. You
`know, we were -- we were lagging quite a bit behind the
`earlier litigation. So we -- we never participated in
`this -- in this joint defense group the way the others
`had.
` Q Just to be clear, you're using two different
`terminologies. That's -- that's why I'm asking.
` You said joint defense group now, but here you
`used the term incredibly unified defense group. Are
`those two different things?
` A Unified is an adjective. It's a joint defense
`group that happens to be unified. I just didn't use the
`word "joint."
` Q When you say there's an incredibly unified
`defense group, that's referring to a joint defense
`group?
` A Yes, and by "unified," I meant well organized.
` Q Can you elaborate --
` MR. KAGAN: Sorry. Can we take a break now?
` MR. LEE: If we could just finish this line of
`questioning for this group.
` Q Can you elaborate what's meant by "incredibly
`
`174
`parties that had been sued by Finjan, whether in the
`unified," when you say "incredibly unified defense
`same action or different action, but around the same
`group"?
` A Just in talking to my colleague at Palo Alto,
`time on around the same subject matter who, you know,
`I was just aware that, you know, the -- the group had
`get together and -- under a common interest and attempt
`been in place for a while, that they were working well
`to share information and work --
`together, that they had divided up responsibilities, and
` Q Who are the members --
`that was -- that was going well. And, I mean, I'm
` A -- and like prior art.
`probably just using his terminology, because I had no
` Q Who are the members of this incredibly unified
`insight into it myself, that they were well organized or
`defense group?
`unified.
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
`0
` A The only other one I know of was -- I think
` Q Who at Palo Alto Networks are you referring
`11
`one of the first lawsuits was for Blue Coat in addition
`to?
`12
` A Chief patent counsel. His name is Michael
`to Palo Alto. But I know there are others.
`13
`Ritter.
` Q What others are you aware of other than Palo
`14
` Q What did you discuss with Michael Ritter
`Alto Networks?
`15
` A I don't know, sitting here right now.
`regarding this unified defense group?
`16
` A What I mentioned, that -- the fact that they
` Q I'm sorry. You said the members that you are
`17
`existed, the fact that they had regular meetings, they
`aware of for this incredibly unified defense group are
`18
`had divided up responsibilities, they were working well
`Palo Alto Networks and Blue Coat?
`19
`together, and if we became involved in litigation,
` A Right.
`20
`because I did share with him at the time that there
` Q There are other members, but you can't name
`21
`was -- you know, we had been approached by Finjan. But
`any?
`22
`if there was litigation involving Juniper that -- you
` A That's right. We never participated in -- in
`23
`know, we'd be welcome into their group.
`the joint defense group.
`24
` Q Did Mr. Ritter invite you to join the group?
` Q Sorry. Is this something different from this
`25
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`1234567891
`
`176
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 445-1 Filed 04/23/19 Page 4 of 5
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`Transcript of Scott James Coonan
`Conducted on November 16, 2018
`209
`
`that.
` Q Can you answer yes or no to whether the
`unified defense group has a common interest against
`Finjan?
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
` A No, I cannot.
` Q And why is that?
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
` A I don't know all of the factors affecting each
`defendant and vis-à-vis the plaintiff. So I don't --
`the -- the parties would have to decide what their own
`common interest was and how best to define that. I'm
`not privy to that information.
` Q In a typical unified defense group, is the
`common interest against the plaintiff that's suing the
`defendants?
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
` A Where I have seen common interest agreements
`involving Juniper, I recall them saying something about
`that being a common interest of the parties.
` Q What common interest agreements are you aware
`of for Juniper?
` A I can't -- I can't remember the last time I
`saw one. It's been a long time.
` Q Can you name any common interest agreements
`
`210
`
`involving Juniper?
` A No.
` Q Can you describe, generally, the subject
`matter of these common interest agreements involving
`Juniper?
` A The general tenor of the agreement is that,
`you know, the signatories to the agreement will share
`certain information and responsibilities as set forth.
`And then there's also, typically, a provision that
`allows or establishes the procedure for withdrawing from
`the defense group if a particular party settles the
`case.
` Q How did you first become aware of the unified
`defense group against Finjan?
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
` A I believe it was my conversation with
`Mr. Ritter.
` Q When you say the conversation with Mr. Ritter,
`do you mean the phone conversations?
` A Uh-huh.
` Q You've said you had two phone conversations?
` A I believe it was two.
` Q Did you ever have any written communication
`with Mr. Ritter?
` A I don't recall.
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`53 (209 to 212)
`
`211
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1234567891
`
` Q Did you ever receive any e-mails from
`Mr. Ritter?
` A I think I did correspond with him once about
`getting together for a drink after work. But other than
`that, I don't recall any.
` Q So you never had any e-mail from Mr. Ritter
`regarding the unified defense group?
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
` A I don't recall any communication by e-mail
`about the defense group.
` Q Have you ever received any e-mail from
`Mr. Ritter related to the unified defense group?
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
` A I don't remember any e-mail communication from
`Mr. Ritter related to the defense group.
` Q Regarding your conversations with Mr. Ritter,
`you said it was a -- through a phone call, correct?
` A Yes.
` Q Did you call him, or did Mr. Ritter call you?
` A I'm not sure.
` Q You said that you became aware --
` A Because -- because at the time that -- at the
`time that I recall the general -- the general time frame
`I recall there being communication, the fact that
`Juniper had a dispute with Finjan would not have been
`212
`public. It had not yet been filed as a complaint. So
`my guess is that I probably reached out to Michael and
`contacted him, but I'm not a hundred percent sure.
` Q Why -- why do you think that you probably
`reached out to Michael Ritter?
` A Because I was interested in talking to him and
`just touching base about his experience with -- with
`Finjan and -- and -- and the litigation they were going
`through.
` Q Why were you interested in talking with
`0
`Mr. Ritter about his experience with Finjan in the
`11
`litigation?
`12
` A To learn whatever I could about Finjan and
`13
`whatever experiences he had had in the litigation.
`14
` Q What did Mr. Ritter communicate to you about
`15
`his experiences with Finjan other than the litigation?
`16
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
`17
` A Can you ask that again, please.
`18
` Q You mentioned that you wanted to know about
`19
`Finjan from Mr. Ritter. And my question is what did you
`20
`discuss with Mr. Ritter other than the litigation
`21
`between Finjan and Palo Alto Networks?
`22
` A I think that's -- that was the full extent of
`23
`our conversation.
`24
` Q Well, you did discuss the unified defense
`25
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 445-1 Filed 04/23/19 Page 5 of 5
`HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`Transcript of Scott James Coonan
`Conducted on November 16, 2018
`213
`
`54 (213 to 216)
`
`215
`
` Q Is it after Finjan filed the complaint against
`Juniper Networks in 2017?
` A Yes, it would have been after that.
` Q Can you go to the Bates ending in 582. Do you
`see under time code 16:46, John Garland states "So
`you've never made a license -- never licensed a patent
`before?"
` And then you reply "Oh, that's absolutely not
`true."
` A I see that.
` Q So Juniper has licensed a patent before?
` A Yes.
` Q In what cases?
` A What kind of license are you referring to?
`Just a -- a plain patent license or --
` Q Yeah. What's --
` A -- in the context of litigation settlement or
`what?
` Q Have you ever taken a license to a patent in
`the context of litigation?
` A Yes.
` Q In what litigation?
` A Well, any litigation that resolves with the
`parties entering into a settlement agreement and a
`dismissal of the case would have some way of dealing
`216
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`group, correct?
` A The existence of a -- of a good one.
` Q Did you and Mr. Ritter ever discuss IPRs?
` A No.
` Q Are you aware of whether Palo Alto Networks
`ever filed any IPRs against Finjan's patents?
` A I can't recall.
` Q Are you aware of whether any member of the
`unified defense group has ever filed any IPRs against
`Finjan's patents?
` A The only company that I'm -- the only company
`I'm fairly certain filed an IPR is Cisco.
` Q Are you aware of any other members of the
`unified defense group that filed IPRs against Finjan's
`patents other than Cisco?
` A No.
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: Sorry.
` Q Is RPX a member of the unified defense group?
` A I don't know.
` Q Is RPX a member of any group that you share
`information with?
` A No.
` Q Do you communicate with anyone at RPX?
` A Yes.
`
`1234567891
`
`214
`
` Q Who do you communicate with?
` A We have a member representative; his name is
`David Shaul. And he's responsible for communicating to
`us about any transactions that -- I think I'm losing my
`voice -- about any transactions that RPX has commenced.
` Q Can you spell his last name?
` A I believe it's S-h-a-u-l. That's consummated.
` Q You mentioned that you're certain that Cisco
`filed an IPR against Finjan. Can you be more specific
`which IPR you're referring to?
` MR. KAGAN: Objection; form.
` A I don't know which one.
` Q Do you know which patent -- Finjan patent the
`IPR is for?
` A By which one, I meant that. I don't know
`which one. I don't know which Finjan patent. I just
`knew in the context of discussions with counsel that --
`that Cisco had filed an IPR in one of the cases at
`least.
` Q When did you become aware that Cisco had filed
`an IPR against Finjan's patents?
` A Around the time when we were deciding what to
`do with respect to IPRs ourselves.
` Q Can you be more specific?
` A No.
`
`with the patents that were -- at a minimum, the patents
`that were asserted in that case. Now, that could take
`the form of a license. It could take the form of a
`covenant not to sue. But that would be a prerequisite
`to the settlement, itself.
` Q Can you identify --
` A If you were to identify a particular
`plaintiff, I wouldn't be able -- be able to tell you
`which mechanism we used, but it would be one of those
`two.
`0
` Q Can you identify any specific litigation in
`11
`which Juniper has licensed a patent in context of
`12
`litigation?
`13
` A I'm pretty sure our first litigation was --
`14
`involved a license to a number of patents which -- and
`15
`that was a case brought by Toshiba.
`16
` Q Can you name any other litigations in which
`17
`Juniper has licensed a patent in the context of a
`18
`litigation?
`19
` A Like I said, every single settlement agreement
`20
`whereby the case was dismissed includes either a license
`21
`or a covenant not to sue, and I'm not sure whether it's
`22
`covenant or a license in any particular -- particular
`23
`situation.
`24
` Q Do you see on Bates 591, Mr. Garland at time
`25
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`