`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit A
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 2 of 14
`
`From: Petersen, Ingrid <ipetersen@irell.com>
`Sent: Friday, May 17, 2019 1:47 PM
`To: Caire, Yuridia <YCaire@KRAMERLEVIN.com>
`Cc: Andre, Paul <PAndre@KRAMERLEVIN.com>; Hannah, James <JHannah@KRAMERLEVIN.com>; Kobialka, Lisa
`<LKobialka@KRAMERLEVIN.com>; Manes, Austin <AManes@KRAMERLEVIN.com>; Kastens, Kris
`<KKastens@KRAMERLEVIN.com>; Carson, Rebecca <RCarson@irell.com>; Glucoft, Josh <JGlucoft@irell.com>; Heinrich,
`Alan <AHeinrich@irell.com>; Holland, Eileen <EHolland@irell.com>; Isaac, Shawana <SIsaac@irell.com>; Kagan,
`Jonathan <JKagan@irell.com>; Manzano, Jim <JManzano@irell.com>; Mittleman, Harry <HMittleman@irell.com>;
`Quarnstrom, Brian <BQuarnstrom@irell.com>; Theilacker, Leah <LTheilacker@irell.com>; Wang, Kevin
`<kwang@irell.com>
`Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`Dear Yuri:
`
`As you know, the parties have been focused on prioritizing issues that related to the second round of the Patent
`Showdown, as well as the issues that were previously set for trial in July. Now that the Court has decided the second
`round of summary judgement motions and vacated the July trial date, we are trying to work with you to address the
`remaining fact discovery issues in an efficient and reasonable manner. As such, your allegations that Juniper has
`unreasonably delayed addressing Finjan’s discovery requests are unwarranted.
`
`We expected that Finjan would narrow the patents and claims that it is asserting per the Court’s directive in its
`submission on Wednesday, but we note that Finjan did not do so. Before we conduct any additional discovery, we think
`it makes sense for Finjan to identify the particular patents and claims it intends to pursue at the October trial. This is
`important because it will ensure that the parties are not wasting time on claims that Finjan has no intention of
`pursuing. When does Finjan intend to narrow its claims?
`
`With regard to depositions, we recently checked the deposition record and noticed that Finjan has already used 10 days
`of fact depositions: (1) Yuly Tenorio on 5/9/18, (2) Rakesh Manocha on 5/16/18, (3) Raju Manthena on 5/30/19, (4)
`Chandra Nagarajan on 5/31/18, (5) Meredith McKenzie on 11/14/18, (6) Michael Bushong on 11/15/18, (7) Scott Coonan
`on 11/16/18, (8) Shelly Gupta on 11/16/18, (9) Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of Juniper (Alex Icasiano on 11/30/18 for
`approximately 3 1/2 hours + Shelly Gupta on 12/7/18 for approximately 3 hours), and (10) Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of
`Juniper (Khurram Isla on 2/7/19 approximately 4 hours)). Thus, based on our understanding of Federal Rule of Civil
`Procedure 30(a)(2), Finjan cannot take any additional depositions unless it obtains leave from the Court. Could you
`please let us know the basis for Finjan’s belief that it can take additional depositions (i.e., Jas, Touboul, and the
`additional Rule 30(b)(6)?
`
`With regard to Juniper’s supplemental discovery, Juniper intends to supplement several interrogatory responses next
`week. In addition, Juniper plans to produce updated financial data that (1) adds data from the months since Juniper’s
`last production, and (2) formats the data in a manner that may be easier to interpret. We are hoping to produce this
`updated financial data by the end of next week, but there is a chance that it may not be ready to produce until the
`following week.
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 3 of 14
`
`
`As for the remainder of Finjan’s outstanding requests, I can confirm the following:
`
`
` With regard to Finjan’s request for documents sufficient to show the number of files submitted to and
`processed by Sky ATP since October 2015 (RFP Nos. 119‐121), based on our current investigation it does not
`appear that such documents exist. However, we are investigating whether we can provide some information for
`a more limited time period.
` With regard to Finjan’s RFP No. 31 (regarding documents that show products or services that were bundled and
`sold with the Accused Instrumentalities), it appears based on our current investigation that Juniper does not
`track this information in the normal course of business. As such, there does not appear to be any responsive
`documents to produce. We agree to continue to investigate this issue, and will let you know if we are able to
`locate any responsive documents.
` With regard to licenses, Juniper has already produced all licenses involving comparable technology and/or
`economic circumstances. The specific licenses that Finjan has requested (Carbon Black, Palo Alto, and Cisco) are
`not relevant as they do not involve comparable technology or economic circumstances. However, as a
`compromise Juniper agrees to produce the license between Cisco and Juniper.
` With regard to deposition transcripts, Juniper continues to believe that Finjan’s requests (RFP Nos. 114‐116) are
`overly broad and unduly burdensome. However, as a compromise Juniper will agree to investigate whether
`there are any deposition transcripts for Juniper employees or representatives who were deposed in any prior
`patent litigations involving Sky ATP or ATP Appliance, and produce them if they exist.
` With regard to Finjan’s request for documents sufficient to identify all servers that interact with Sky ATP and SRX
`devices (RFP Nos. 126 and 127), we have repeatedly told you that it is not possible for us to respond to these
`requests as they would encompass every single server that any Juniper customer has ever contacted. Juniper
`does not have documents sufficient to show this information, nor is it relevant. If Finjan is willing to
`appropriately narrow its request, Juniper would be happy to consider it. However, Finjan has thus far refused to
`narrow its request in any way.
`
`
`As always, we would be happy to schedule another call to discuss these issues with you if you believe that would be
`helpful.
`
`Best wishes,
`
`Ingrid
`
`
`From: Caire, Yuridia <YCaire@KRAMERLEVIN.com>
`Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 12:25 PM
`To: Petersen, Ingrid <ipetersen@irell.com>
`Cc: ~Andre, Paul <pandre@kramerlevin.com>; ~Hannah, James <jhannah@kramerlevin.com>; ~Kobialka, Lisa
`<lkobialka@kramerlevin.com>; ~Manes, Austin <amanes@kramerlevin.com>; ~Kastens, Kristopher
`<kkastens@kramerlevin.com>; Carson, Rebecca <RCarson@irell.com>; Glucoft, Josh <JGlucoft@irell.com>; Heinrich,
`Alan <AHeinrich@irell.com>; Holland, Eileen <EHolland@irell.com>; Isaac, Shawana <SIsaac@irell.com>; Kagan,
`Jonathan <JKagan@irell.com>; Manzano, Jim <JManzano@irell.com>; Mittleman, Harry <HMittleman@irell.com>;
`Quarnstrom, Brian <BQuarnstrom@irell.com>; Theilacker, Leah <LTheilacker@irell.com>; Wang, Kevin
`<kwang@irell.com>
`Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`Ingrid,
`
`We met and conferred on this six weeks ago and at that time Juniper stated it would be producing information and
`supplemental responses within a couple of weeks. Juniper’s continued delay is unacceptable. Please identify what
`specifically you are producing and confirm that you will produce it at the latest with the discovery responses next
`2
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 4 of 14
`
`week. For Mr. Jas, please provide availability on May 23 or 24th. For the outstanding 30(b)(6), it will depend on when
`Juniper provides the updated information but please provide where the witness is located and who it is.
`
`Yuri
`
`
`
`Yuridia Caire
`Associate
`
`
`Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
`990 Marsh Road, Menlo Park, California 94025
`T 650.752.1717 F 650.752.1817
`
`This communication (including any attachments) is intended solely for the recipient(s) named above and may contain information that is
`confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
`this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
`Thank you for your cooperation.
`
`
`
`From: Petersen, Ingrid [mailto:ipetersen@irell.com]
`Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 12:07 PM
`To: Caire, Yuridia
`Cc: Andre, Paul; Hannah, James; Kobialka, Lisa; Manes, Austin; Kastens, Kris; Carson, Rebecca; Glucoft, Josh; Heinrich,
`Alan; Holland, Eileen; Isaac, Shawana; Kagan, Jonathan; Manzano, Jim; Mittleman, Harry; Quarnstrom, Brian; Theilacker,
`Leah; Wang, Kevin
`Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`Dear Yuri,
`
`Juniper intends to serve supplemental discovery responses by the end of next week, with updated financial data
`produced shortly thereafter. In view of this, we think it makes sense for the parties to postpone meeting and conferring
`on these issues until after Juniper serves its supplemental responses, as those responses may resolve many of the
`outstanding issues. We also note that many of these issues may be impacted by Finjan’s selection of claims that it
`intends to pursue at the October trial.
`
`Additionally, we are looking into deposition dates in June for Mr. Jas and the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition that Finjan
`requested, and should be able to provide those shortly. If you have a preferred range of dates for these depositions,
`please let us know and we can do our best to accommodate that request.
`
`Best Wishes,
`
`Ingrid
`
`
`From: Caire, Yuridia <YCaire@KRAMERLEVIN.com>
`Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 7:37 AM
`To: Petersen, Ingrid <ipetersen@irell.com>
`Cc: ~Andre, Paul <pandre@kramerlevin.com>; ~Hannah, James <jhannah@kramerlevin.com>; ~Kobialka, Lisa
`<lkobialka@kramerlevin.com>; ~Manes, Austin <amanes@kramerlevin.com>; ~Kastens, Kristopher
`<kkastens@kramerlevin.com>; Carson, Rebecca <RCarson@irell.com>; Glucoft, Josh <JGlucoft@irell.com>; Heinrich,
`Alan <AHeinrich@irell.com>; Holland, Eileen <EHolland@irell.com>; Isaac, Shawana <SIsaac@irell.com>; Kagan,
`Jonathan <JKagan@irell.com>; Manzano, Jim <JManzano@irell.com>; Mittleman, Harry <HMittleman@irell.com>;
`Quarnstrom, Brian <BQuarnstrom@irell.com>; Theilacker, Leah <LTheilacker@irell.com>; Wang, Kevin
`3
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 5 of 14
`
`<kwang@irell.com>
`Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`Ingrid,
`
`
`Juniper previously agreed to produce updated information and its continued delay to produce such information and
`provide deposition dates is not warranted. Please provide lead counsel availability for a meet and confer for this week or
`early next week.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Yuridia Caire
`Associate
`
`
`Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
`990 Marsh Road, Menlo Park, California 94025
`T 650.752.1717 F 650.752.1817
`
`This communication (including any attachments) is intended solely for the recipient(s) named above and may contain information that is
`confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
`this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail message and delete all copies of the original communication.
`Thank you for your cooperation.
`
`
`
`On May 10, 2019, at 4:14 PM, Petersen, Ingrid <ipetersen@irell.com> wrote:
`
`Dear Yuri:
`
`
`Because of the Court’s recent summary judgment orders and the resetting of trial, it makes the most
`sense for the parties to touch base after Finjan informs the Court which patents/claims it intends to
`pursue at the October trial. These recent events impact Finjan’s outstanding requests, such as the
`relevant damages period and which licenses (if any) are relevant.
`
`
`Best wishes,
`
`Ingrid
`
`
`
`From: Caire, Yuridia <YCaire@KRAMERLEVIN.com>
`Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2019 10:56 AM
`To: Petersen, Ingrid <ipetersen@irell.com>; Glucoft, Josh <JGlucoft@irell.com>; Carson, Rebecca
`<RCarson@irell.com>; Heinrich, Alan <AHeinrich@irell.com>; Holland, Eileen <EHolland@irell.com>;
`Isaac, Shawana <SIsaac@irell.com>; Kagan, Jonathan <JKagan@irell.com>; Manzano, Jim
`<JManzano@irell.com>; Quarnstrom, Brian <BQuarnstrom@irell.com>; Theilacker, Leah
`<LTheilacker@irell.com>; Wang, Kevin <kwang@irell.com>
`Cc: ~Andre, Paul <pandre@kramerlevin.com>; ~Hannah, James <jhannah@kramerlevin.com>;
`~Kobialka, Lisa <lkobialka@kramerlevin.com>; ~Manes, Austin <amanes@kramerlevin.com>; ~Kastens,
`Kristopher <kkastens@kramerlevin.com>
`Subject: RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 6 of 14
`
`Ingrid,
`
`
`We are at an impasse on the issues below, as we discussed on the meet and confer, in our follow‐up
`emails. Please provide a time for lead counsel to meet and confer on these issues. In addition, Juniper
`agreed to produce updated financial information and expected to do so in a couple weeks but nothing
`has been produced. Please confirm that you will produce the supplemental information by the end of
`this week.
`
`
`Finally, please provide availability for the depositions of Finjan’s outstanding 30(b)(6) topic and Jas.
`
`
`Thanks,
`
`
`Yuri
`
`
`
`Yuridia Caire
`Associate
`
`
`Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
`990 Marsh Road, Menlo Park, California 94025
`T 650.752.1717 F 650.752.1817
`
`This communication (including any attachments) is intended solely for the recipient(s) named above and may contain
`information that is confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this communication is
`strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail
`message and delete all copies of the original communication. Thank you for your cooperation.
`
`
`
`From: Petersen, Ingrid [mailto:ipetersen@irell.com]
`Sent: Friday, April 05, 2019 5:59 PM
`To: Caire, Yuridia; Glucoft, Josh; Carson, Rebecca; Heinrich, Alan; Holland, Eileen; Isaac, Shawana;
`Kagan, Jonathan; Manzano, Jim; Quarnstrom, Brian; Theilacker, Leah; Wang, Kevin
`Cc: Andre, Paul; Hannah, James; Kobialka, Lisa; Manes, Austin; Kastens, Kris
`Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`
`Dear Yuri:
`
`
`Thank you for your email. I do not agree with your summary of the call, and refer you to my original
`email. Nevertheless, I am writing to follow up on a few of the items in your email in the hopes that we
`can resolve some of the outstanding issues.
`
`
`As an initial matter, I note that your email did not provide a response as to whether Finjan intends to call
`Mr. Touboul as a witness at the July trial. Unless Finjan either (1) confirms that it will not call Mr.
`Touboul as a witness (either in person or via deposition), or (2) provides a date for Mr. Touboul’s
`deposition in the United States, we will need to raise this issue with the Court.
`
`
`With regard to the financial data responsive to Interrogatory No. 16, we think it make sense for you to
`review supplemental data once we produce it, and then we can further discuss if you believe it is
`insufficient to answer the interrogatory. As I noted during our call, Finjan’s requests concerning
`Juniper’s financial data are overly broad and in many instances irrelevant. While Juniper maintains its
`objections, it is willing to work with Finjan to appropriately narrow the requests so that Finjan can get
`the information it needs without imposing an undue burden on Juniper.
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 7 of 14
`
`With regard to bundled products and customer‐support licenses, we are unable to find any references
`to these on Page 15 of your damages contentions. Could you please provide a more specific reference
`so that we can evaluate your request?
`
`
`For documents related to Carbon Black, Cisco, and Palo Alto Networks, we are not aware of any licenses
`with these entities that involve comparable technology and/or economic circumstances, and thus we do
`not see how they would be relevant to the damage inquiry. Indeed, I note that neither Juniper, nor
`Finjan, has identified any of these licenses in their damages contentions. Please explain why you believe
`that these licenses are comparable, such that they would be relevant to damages.
`
`
`With regard to deposition transcripts, we have repeatedly asked you to explain the relevance of your
`request and you have yet to do so. Sky ATP and ATP Appliance have not been the subject of any prior
`patent lawsuit and Finjan is not accusing any SRX devices from before the time Sky ATP was released, so
`it is not clear that there would even be any transcripts responsive to the portion of your request
`concerning the accused instrumentalities. As to any prior transcripts from Juniper witnesses in matters
`concerning unrelated products, we do not see how this would be relevant. Please explain the relevance,
`and we will consider your request.
`
`
`For your request regarding documents sufficient to identify all servers that interact with Sky ATP and
`SRX, we have already provided information about the servers that are relevant to the accused features
`(e.g., Amazon and iWeb). But as we have repeatedly told you, your request as‐written essentially
`encompasses all servers that end users/customers communicate with, which is incredibly broad. We are
`trying to work with you on this request, but we obviously cannot agree to produce documents we
`cannot identify based on your request.
`
`
`Best wishes,
`
`Ingrid
`
`
`
`From: Caire, Yuridia <YCaire@KRAMERLEVIN.com>
`Sent: Friday, April 5, 2019 5:27 PM
`To: Petersen, Ingrid <ipetersen@irell.com>; Glucoft, Josh <JGlucoft@irell.com>; Carson, Rebecca
`<RCarson@irell.com>; Heinrich, Alan <AHeinrich@irell.com>; Holland, Eileen <EHolland@irell.com>;
`Isaac, Shawana <SIsaac@irell.com>; Kagan, Jonathan <JKagan@irell.com>; Manzano, Jim
`<JManzano@irell.com>; Quarnstrom, Brian <BQuarnstrom@irell.com>; Theilacker, Leah
`<LTheilacker@irell.com>; Wang, Kevin <kwang@irell.com>
`Cc: ~Andre, Paul <pandre@kramerlevin.com>; ~Hannah, James <jhannah@kramerlevin.com>;
`~Kobialka, Lisa <lkobialka@kramerlevin.com>; ~Manes, Austin <amanes@kramerlevin.com>; ~Kastens,
`Kristopher <kkastens@kramerlevin.com>
`Subject: RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`Ingrid,
`
`
`Please provide a response regarding the issues raised below.
`
`
`Thanks,
`
`
`Yuri
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 8 of 14
`
`Yuridia Caire
`Associate
`
`
`Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
`990 Marsh Road, Menlo Park, California 94025
`T 650.752.1717 F 650.752.1817
`
`This communication (including any attachments) is intended solely for the recipient(s) named above and may contain
`information that is confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this communication is
`strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail
`message and delete all copies of the original communication. Thank you for your cooperation.
`
`
`
`From: Caire, Yuridia
`Sent: Monday, April 01, 2019 12:56 PM
`To: Petersen, Ingrid; Glucoft, Josh; Carson, Rebecca; Heinrich, Alan; Holland, Eileen; Isaac, Shawana;
`Kagan, Jonathan; Manzano, Jim; Quarnstrom, Brian; Theilacker, Leah; Wang, Kevin
`Cc: Andre, Paul; Hannah, James; Kobialka, Lisa; Manes, Austin; Kastens, Kris
`Subject: RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`
`Thanks for your email, Ingrid. I write to correct a few statements in your email and clarify our
`understanding of the call.
`
`
`We confirm our understanding that Juniper will serve supplemental sales and financial information. As
`we discussed on the call, we also request that Juniper provide information to identify the SKU’s related
`to all accused instrumentalities so that Juniper’s 33(d) response to Interrogatory No. 16 complies with
`the requested information. Please confirm you will produce this information with the supplemental
`information and update your interrogatory response appropriately.
`
`In addition, with respect to products and services sold with the Accused Instrumentalities, Juniper
`represented that it would notify Finjan within 2‐3 weeks whether or not it tracks this information, and
`would produce this information to the extent it is tracked. Your representation below changes that
`understanding and Juniper’s statement regarding the damages contentions is not accurate as I gave you
`a specific citation to at least page 15 of Finjan’s Damages Contentions that sets forth damages related to
`convoy sales and the Georgia‐Pacific factors. Please confirm that you will produce this information.
`
`
`Similarly, Finjan outlined that the requests related to Juniper’s licenses with third parties, including at
`least Cisco, Carbon Black and Palo Alto Networks, regarding the accused instrumentalities and
`technology that is comparable to the technology disclosed in the Patents‐in‐Suit, is relevant to a
`damages analyses, as disclosed in Finjan’s damages contentions. At no point on the call did Juniper
`disagree with the citations that Finjan provided and there is no basis to withhold these
`documents. While Juniper pointed to the public exhibit of the agreement with Palo Alto Networks,
`Juniper was unable to confirm that the public version was the full version of the agreement and that no
`additional documents accompanied that agreement. Nor did Juniper explain its basis for withholding the
`actual executed agreement between the parties. In addition, Finjan’s requests for productions also seek
`all communications related to the agreements that Juniper has entered into with third‐parties and
`instances where Juniper has communicated with others regarding Finjan. Juniper was unable to confirm
`that it had searched for hard copies of those communications, as it was required to do. In addition,
`Juniper was unable to confirm that it will produce the joint defense group agreement that it claims
`affords Juniper the right to assert a common interest privilege. Please confirm that you have searched
`for hard copies of the communications and that you will produce the responsive agreements and the
`joint defense group agreement.
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 9 of 14
`
`With respect to prior deposition transcripts, as we explained on the call it is not appropriate to request
`that Finjan identify the witnesses that have testified regarding the accused instrumentalities as that
`information that is in Juniper’s possession and less burdensome for Juniper to identify. On the call,
`Juniper provided no basis for withholding this information and Finjan provided information regarding
`the transcripts it seeks, mainly that the requests are narrowly tailored to individuals that provided
`testimony regarding the accused instrumentalities or that Juniper disclosed as being relevant to this
`litigation. Please confirm that Juniper will produce these transcripts.
`
`
`Finally with respect to the identification of the servers that interact with Sky ATP and SRX devices,
`Juniper did not take the position that this information was relevant but instead claimed that this
`information could be found on the source code that Juniper made available. Finjan disagrees that the
`source code provides this information. As Juniper knows, this information is relevant to infringement
`and damages. Please confirm you will produce this information without delay.
`
`
`By Friday, 4/5/19, please confirm whether Juniper will produce the items outlined above and as further
`detailed in my March 22nd email, all of which we discussed on Friday. If Juniper refuses to produce any
`of the requested information, please provide the specific basis for doing so.
`
`
`Best regards,
`
`
`Yuri
`
`
`
`
`Yuridia Caire
`Associate
`
`
`Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
`990 Marsh Road, Menlo Park, California 94025
`T 650.752.1717 F 650.752.1817
`
`This communication (including any attachments) is intended solely for the recipient(s) named above and may contain
`information that is confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this communication is
`strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail
`message and delete all copies of the original communication. Thank you for your cooperation.
`
`
`
`From: Petersen, Ingrid [mailto:ipetersen@irell.com]
`Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 8:14 PM
`To: Caire, Yuridia; Glucoft, Josh; Carson, Rebecca; Heinrich, Alan; Holland, Eileen; Isaac, Shawana;
`Kagan, Jonathan; Manzano, Jim; Quarnstrom, Brian; Theilacker, Leah; Wang, Kevin
`Cc: Andre, Paul; Hannah, James; Kobialka, Lisa; Manes, Austin; Kastens, Kris
`Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`
`Dear Yuri:
`
`
`Thank you for taking the time to speak with me yesterday; I appreciate that we were able to
`collaboratively address these discovery concerns. This email summarizes the discussion that we had.
`
`It is our understanding that we will follow up regarding whether Juniper maintains information about
`the number of files submitted to and processed by Sky ATP. Additionally, we will submit updated
`spreadsheets regarding sales and revenues in about 2 to 3 weeks.
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 10 of 14
`
`Also, we understand that you are seeking documents related to bundled products and customer‐support
`licenses. During our call, you said that this request was related to convoyed damages, but you could not
`identify whether your damages contentions specifically rely on bundled products and customer support
`licenses. Please identify these theories in your contentions, and we will consider your request.
`
`
`We additionally understand you are seeking documents related to Carbon Black and Cisco. During our
`call, you were unable to explain the relevance of the broad categories of documents you requested
`related to Carbon Black or Cisco. Please describe why Finjan believes this information is necessary and
`exactly which categories of documents Finjan requires, and we will consider your request.
`
`
`We also understand that you are seeking all deposition transcripts of Juniper employees in all actions
`regarding the accused products. When we requested you to identify specific individuals that you want
`deposition transcripts for, you did not have a response. Please let us know the names of these
`individuals or if Finjan is seeking additional searches pursuant to the ESI order, and we can address the
`request.
`
`
`Additionally, Finjan has asked for all communications and agreements between Juniper and Palo Alto
`Networks. During the call, we informed you that the agreement between Juniper and Palo Alto
`Networks is public information filed with the SEC. Please let us know how this information does not
`address all of Finjan’s request, and we can consider the issue.
`
`It is our understanding that you are also requesting all communications between Juniper and third
`parties that mention Finjan. We asked you to identify specific third parties during the meet and confer,
`but you did not give us any names at the time. If you can provide these names, we can consider this
`request.
`
`
`You are also seeking the identification of all servers that interact with Sky ATP and SRX. However, given
`the breadth of your requests, we do not have documents sufficient to show what you are asking for—
`which essentially encompasses all servers that end users/customers communicate with. Moreover, we
`cannot see how such information would be relevant. If you are willing to reasonably narrow the
`request, we would be happy to consider it.
`
`
`Lastly, it is our understanding at this time that you do not know whether Mr. Touboul will be a witness
`during the July trial. Unless you confirm that you are not bringing Mr. Touboul to trial, you need to give
`us a date where we can take his deposition in the United States.
`
`If your understanding of our conversation is different, please let me know.
`
`I hope you have a wonderful weekend.
`
`
`Best wishes,
`
`Ingrid
`
`
`
`From: Petersen, Ingrid
`Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 9:59 AM
`To: Caire, Yuridia <YCaire@KRAMERLEVIN.com>; Glucoft, Josh <JGlucoft@irell.com>; Carson, Rebecca
`<RCarson@irell.com>; Heinrich, Alan <AHeinrich@irell.com>; Holland, Eileen <EHolland@irell.com>;
`Isaac, Shawana <SIsaac@irell.com>; Kagan, Jonathan <JKagan@irell.com>; Manzano, Jim
`<JManzano@irell.com>; Quarnstrom, Brian <BQuarnstrom@irell.com>; Theilacker, Leah
`<LTheilacker@irell.com>; Wang, Kevin <KWang@irell.com>
`9
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 11 of 14
`
`Cc: ~Andre, Paul <pandre@kramerlevin.com>; ~Hannah, James <jhannah@kramerlevin.com>;
`~Kobialka, Lisa <lkobialka@kramerlevin.com>; ~Manes, Austin <amanes@kramerlevin.com>; ~Kastens,
`Kristopher <kkastens@kramerlevin.com>
`Subject: RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`
`Dear Yuri:
`
`
`Yes, please call my office.
`
`
`Best wishes,
`
`Ingrid
`
`
`Ingrid Petersen | Irell & Manella LLP | 949.760.0991 | ipetersen@irell.com
`
`
`
`From: Caire, Yuridia <YCaire@KRAMERLEVIN.com>
`Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2019 4:32 PM
`To: Petersen, Ingrid <ipetersen@irell.com>; Glucoft, Josh <JGlucoft@irell.com>; Carson, Rebecca
`<RCarson@irell.com>; Heinrich, Alan <AHeinrich@irell.com>; Holland, Eileen <EHolland@irell.com>;
`Isaac, Shawana <SIsaac@irell.com>; Kagan, Jonathan <JKagan@irell.com>; Manzano, Jim
`<JManzano@irell.com>; Quarnstrom, Brian <BQuarnstrom@irell.com>; Theilacker, Leah
`<LTheilacker@irell.com>; Wang, Kevin <kwang@irell.com>
`Cc: ~Andre, Paul <pandre@kramerlevin.com>; ~Hannah, James <jhannah@kramerlevin.com>;
`~Kobialka, Lisa <lkobialka@kramerlevin.com>; ~Manes, Austin <amanes@kramerlevin.com>; ~Kastens,
`Kristopher <kkastens@kramerlevin.com>
`Subject: RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`Ingrid,
`
`
`That works. Should I call your office?
`
`
`Thanks,
`
`Yuri
`
`
`
`
`Yuridia Caire
`Associate
`
`
`Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
`990 Marsh Road, Menlo Park, California 94025
`T 650.752.1717 F 650.752.1817
`
`This communication (including any attachments) is intended solely for the recipient(s) named above and may contain
`information that is confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this communication is
`strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail
`message and delete all copies of the original communication. Thank you for your cooperation.
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 560-1 Filed 06/25/19 Page 12 of 14
`
`From: Petersen, Ingrid [mailto:ipetersen@irell.com]
`Sent: Monday, March 25, 2019 3:24 PM
`To: Caire, Yuridia; Glucoft, Josh; Carson, Rebecca; Heinrich, Alan; Holland, Eileen; Isaac, Shawana;
`Kagan, Jonathan; Manzano, Jim; Quarnstrom, Brian; Theilacker, Leah; Wang, Kevin
`Cc: Andre, Paul; Hannah, James; Kobialka, Lisa; Manes, Austin; Kastens, Kris
`Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`
`Dear Yuri:
`
`I can discuss Juniper’s responses to Finjan’s requests for production and interrogatories on March 29 at
`2pm.
`
`
`At that time, we can also meet and confer regarding Juniper’s deposition of Mr. Touboul.
`
`
`Please let me know if this date and time work for you.
`
`
`Best wishes,
`
`Ingrid
`
`
`Ingrid Petersen | Irell & Manella LLP | 949.760.0991 | ipetersen@irell.com
`
`
`
`
`From: Caire, Yuridia <YCaire@KRAMERLEVIN.com>
`Sent: Friday, March 22, 2019 4:50 PM
`To: Glucoft, Josh <JGlucoft@irell.com>; Carson, Rebecca <RCarson@irell.com>; Heinrich, Alan
`<AHeinrich@irell.com>; Holland, Eileen <EHolland@irell.com>; Isaac, Shawana <SIsaac@irell.com>;
`Kagan, Jonathan <JKagan@irell.com>; Manzano, Jim <JManzano@irell.com>; Petersen, Ingrid
`<ipetersen@irell.com>; Quarnstrom, Brian <BQuarnstrom@irell.com>; Theilacker, Leah
`<LTheilacker@irell.com>; Wang, Kevin <kwang@irell.com>
`Cc: ~Andre, Paul <pandre@kramerlevin.com>; ~Hannah, James <jhannah@kramerlevin.com>;
`~Kobialka, Lisa <lkobialka@kramerlevin.com>; ~Manes, Austin <amanes@kramerlevin.com>; ~Kastens,
`Kristopher <kkastens@kramerlevin.com>
`Subject: Finjan v. Juniper
`
`
`Counsel,
`
`
`Let us know a day and time next week when you are able to meet and confer regarding Juniper’s
`responses to Finjan’s requests for production and interrogatories.
`
`
`Specifically, please be prepared to discuss the following:
`
`
`ꞏ Juniper’s refusal to produce documents or informati