`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 504-8 Filed 06/03/19 Page 1 of 3
`
`EXHIBIT 8
`
`
`
`DoOoCONHNNHOWBPWYYP—
`
`1]
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 504-8 Filed 06/03/19 Page 2 of 3
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 504-8 Filed 06/03/19 Page 2 of 3
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 487 Filed 05/23/19 Page 1 of 2
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE NORTHERNDISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`FINJAN,INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vv.
`
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`No. C 17-05659 WHA
`
`ORDER RE REMAINING
`TRIABLE ISSUES
`
`The Court thanks both parties for their submissions regarding the identification of the
`
`remaining issues to be addressedat or before the Octobertrial (Dkt. Nos. 476-77).
`
`Plaintiff Finjan, Inc. shall identify in writing the specific patents and claimsit intends to
`
`assert against defendant Juniper Networks, Inc. by JUNE 6 ATNOON. Anyclaims notidentified
`
`by that time will be deemed waived for purposesofthe instant action. The parties should bear
`
`in mind that each side will be given 18 HOURSduringtrial. If Finjan later abandonsor fails to
`
`pursue anyofthe asserted claims identified by June6,its time attrial will be correspondingly
`
`reduced.
`
`With respect to motions for summary judgment, each side may bring up to Two
`
`motions, with each motion abiding by the 25-page limit. If Finjan chooses to bring a motion for
`
`summary judgmenton infringement, it is limited to move on one claim ofonepatentonly. If
`
`Juniper choosesto bring a motion for summary judgmentonthe issue of notice, that motion will
`
`count towards one of the two motionsit is currently entitled to bring.
`
`
`
`
`
`FortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrictCourt
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 504-8 Filed 06/03/19 Page 3 of 3
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 504-8 Filed 06/03/19 Page 3 of 3
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 487 Filed 05/23/19 Page 2 of 2
`
`Noo<—
`
`In preparing the damagesclaim,the parties must designate damageson a patent-by-
`patent basis. With respect to the damagesissue, the Court will use these numbers as a rule of
`thumb in determining whetherthis action is “exceptional”within the meaning of Section 285.
`That is, Finjan shall state the amount claimed, patent by patent, and Junipershall state the
`amount it concedes would be due as damagesin the eventliability is established, patent by
`patent. If aftertrial and after all Rule 50 motions, Finjan recovers less than halfof its claimed
`amount and recovers less than twice the amountof Juniper’s conceded amount, then the Court
`
`may presumethat the maintenance ofthe infringement action on that patent qualifies as
`“extraordinary.” In the event that Finjan recovers morethan half of its claimed damages and
`more than twice the conceded amount, then the Court may presume that Juniper must pay
`attorney’s fees associated with that patent. The foregoing will apply only to exceptional
`
`try to change thetrial date.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated: May 23, 2019.
`
`f A pin,
`
`[x bee
`
`WILLIAM ALSUP
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`
`
`
`
`FortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`conduct with respect to damages.
`Thestartoftrialwill remain on October21.Torepeat,Finjan’switness(es)withatrial,
`
`
`witness(es)areunavailableduetoanothertrial. All issues, including equitable claims, will be
`presented duringthis trial, subject to further order.
`Theparties shall jointly submit in writing a proposed case schedule by JUNE 14 AT
`NOONthatis fully consistent with the above. Donottry to enlarge the motion practice. Do not
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrictCourt
`
`
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
