`
`
`
`PAUL J. 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
`AUSTIN MANES (State Bar No. 284065)
`amanes@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
`
`
`Case No.: 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
`[PROPOSED] ORDER ON ISSUES
`BEFORE THE COURT DURING APRIL 17,
`2018 HEARING
`
`FINJAN, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC., a Delaware
`Corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`[PROPOSED] ORDER
`
`
`
`CASE NO.: 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
`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 69 Filed 04/23/18 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Finjan, Inc.’s (“Finjan”) Letter Brief Regarding Motion to Compel Defendant Juniper
`
`Networks, Inc. (“Juniper”) (Dkt. No. 48), Finjan’s Letter Brief Regarding Dr. Eric Cole (Dkt. No. 49),
`
`and Juniper’s Administrative Motion to Defer Patent Local Rule 4 (Dkt. No. 52) were heard on April
`
`17, 2018.
`
`
`
`Because the parties reached an agreement that the production of technical documents related to
`
`Sky ATP will be completed substantially by April 30, 2018, the Court dismisses this request as
`
`MOOT (Dkt. No. 48).
`
`
`
`Having considered Finjan’s Letters, Juniper’s Administration Motion, the papers filed in
`
`support of and in opposition of the foregoing, and arguments by counsel, the Court:
`
`1.
`
`DENIES Finjan’s Motion regarding the production of documents related to the ATP
`
`Appliance (Dkt. No. 48) until Finjan files an amended complaint naming this product,
`
`or if Juniper moves to dismiss such amended complaint, the Court has ruled on
`
`Juniper’s motion to dismiss such amended complaint.
`
`2.
`
`GRANTS and MODIFIES Finjan’s Motion Regarding Dr. Eric Cole (Dkt. No. 49),
`
`permitting Dr. Cole to serve as an expert so long as Dr. Cole submits a declaration
`
`agreeing that he will not work for McAfee as an employee, consultant, or expert until at
`
`least five years after his last access of Juniper’s material marked as either “HIGHLY
`
`CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –
`
`SOURCE CODE.”
`
`3.
`
`DENIES-IN-PART Juniper’s Administrative Motion to defer claim construction under
`
`Patent Local Rule 4 (Dkt. No. 52) as to the ‘926, ‘844, ‘633, and ‘154 Patents, and any
`
`terms from the ‘494 and ‘780 Patent that are not at issue in the claims included in the
`
`parties’ earlier summary judgment, and GRANTS-IN-PART and MODIFIES
`
`Juniper’s Administrative Motion with respect only to terms that appear in claim 10 of
`
`
`
`the ‘494 Patent or claim 1 of the ‘780 Patent, which are at issue in the parties’ early
`
`
`[PROPOSED] ORDER
`
`1
`
`CASE NO.: 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
`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 69 Filed 04/23/18 Page 3 of 3
`
`summary judgment proceedings. To the extent necessary, the construction of these
`
`terms in these claims will be addressed during earlier summary judgment.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated: _____________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Hon. William Alsup
`United States District Court Judge
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[PROPOSED] ORDER
`
`2
`
`CASE NO.: 3:17-cv-05659-WHA
`
`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
`
`
`
`April 23, 2018.
`
`
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
