Case 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 1 of 29
`Case 4:18-cv-07229—YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 1 of 29
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT E
`
`EXHIBIT E
`
`

`

`Case 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 2 of 29
`
`
`
`PAUL 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
`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
`
`FINJAN, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`Case No.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`PLAINTIFF FINJAN, INC.’S AMENDED
`PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS AND EVIDENTIARY
`SUPPORT PURSUANT TO PATENT
`LOCAL RULE 4-2
`
`
`
`
`
`QUALYS INC., a Delaware Corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 3 of 29
`
`
`
`TO DEFENDANTS AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
`Pursuant to Patent L.R. 4-2 and the parties’ agreed modifications regarding exchanging
`evidence and support, Plaintiff Finjan, Inc. (“Finjan”) sets forth below its amended preliminary claim
`constructions and supporting evidence to Defendant Qualys, Inc. (“Qualys” or “Defendant”) for U.S.
`Patent No. 6,154,844 (“the ‘844 Patent”), U.S. Patent No. 6,965,968 (“the ‘968 Patent”), U.S. Patent
`No. 7,418,731 (“the ‘731 Patent”), U.S. Patent No. 7,975,305 (“the ‘305 Patent”), U.S. Patent No.
`8,141,154 (“the ‘154 Patent”), U.S. Patent No. 8,225,408 (“the ‘408 Patent”); and U.S. Patent No.
`8,677,494 (“the ‘494 Patent”) (collectively the “Finjan Patents”). Finjan reserves its right to add,
`remove or modify any of its proposed claim terms or constructions based on any constructions
`proposed by Qualys and/or the parties’ meet and confer sessions(s) pursuant to Patent L.R. 4-2. Finjan
`provides constructions below for all terms that either party identified for construction, and according to
`Qualys’ recently narrowed list of disputed terms, but Finjan reserves the right to argue its position that
`most of these terms do not need construction and their plain and ordinary meaning should apply
`because they are easily understandable to a person of ordinary skill in the art. Finjan reserves its right
`to rely on any intrinsic or extrinsic evidence cited by Qualys or needed to rebut Qualys’ proposed
`constructions or evidence.
`Pursuant to Patent Local Rule 4-2(b), Finjan intends to rely upon the testimony of Dr. Michael
`Goodrich in support of its claim construction positions. Finjan expects Dr. Goodrich to testify
`regarding the scope of the asserted patents and the relevant technology. Finjan also expects Dr.
`Goodrich to testify regarding the proper construction and/or plain and ordinary meaning of the terms
`identified below and any terms for which Qualys may offer expert testimony. Finjan additionally
`expects Dr. Goodrich to testify regarding the understanding of one of skill in the art at the time of the
`filing of the asserted patents.
`
`
`
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`1
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 4 of 29
`
`
`
`Patent
`
`Term
`
`6,154,844
`8,677,494
`
`“downloadable”
`
`AGREED CONSTRUCTIONS
`Proposed Construction
`an executable application program, which is downloaded
`from a source computer and run on the destination
`computer
`
`6,154,844 “means for receiving a
`Downloadable”
`
`Function: receiving a Downloadable
`Structure: Downloadable file interceptor
`
`7,975,305
`8,677,494
`
`“database”
`
`8,225,408 “parse tree”
`
`a collection of interrelated data organized according to a
`database schema to serve one or more applications
`a hierarchical structure of interconnected nodes built from
`scanned content
`
`
`Finjan proposes the following preliminary constructions for the remaining terms identified by the
`parties as disputed:
`
`‘844 Terms For
`Construction
`“means for generating a
`first Downloadable
`security profile that
`identifies suspicious
`code in the received
`Downloadable”
`
`PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPORT
`Citations to Intrinsic Record and
`Proposed Constructions
`Extrinsic Evidence
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1-8;
`Claims 10, 13, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 28, 36, 37,
`43;
`Col. 2, ll. 3-60;
`Col. 4, ll. 4-7; 35-58; 59-64;
`Col. 5, ll. 48-58;
`Col. 7, ll. 10-24; 41-67;
`Col. 8, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 9, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 10, ll. 1-24; 66-67; and
`Col. 11, ll. 1-11.
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,092,194 at
`Figs. 1-5;
`Col. 1, ll. 60-67;
`Col. 2, ll. 1-36; 65-67;
`Col. 3, ll. 1-22; 25-67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1-61;
`Col. 5, ll. 15-67;
`
`Governed by 35 U.S.C. §
`112(6):
`
`Function: generating a first
`Downloadable security
`profile that identifies
`suspicious code in the
`received Downloadable
`
`Structure: content inspection
`engine programmed to
`perform the algorithm
`disclosed at Col. 8, lines 51-
`60 of the ‘844 Patent
`
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 5 of 29
`
`
`
`‘844 Terms For
`Construction
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Citations to Intrinsic Record and
`Extrinsic Evidence
`Col. 6, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 7, ll. 1-6;
`Col. 9, ll. 57-67;
`Col. 10, ll. 1-6.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`October 14, 2014, Joint Claim Construction
`and Pre-Hearing Statement Pursuant to
`Patent Local Rule 4-3, Finjan, Inc. v.
`Sophos Inc., Civ. No. 14-cv-01197-WHO.
`
`February 29, 2012 Claim Construction
`Order-Finjan Software, Inc., v. McAfee, Inc.
`et al, C.A. No. 10-cv-593.
`
`
`October 20, 2014 Claim Construction
`Order, Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems,
`Inc., Civ. No. 13-cv-03999-BLF.
`
`December 3, 2015 Claim Construction
`Order – Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint, Inc., et
`al., Case No. 13-CV-05808-HSG.
`
`July 23, 2018, Claim Construction Order –
`Finjan, Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc., Civ. No.
`17-cv-00072-BLF.
`
`March 02, 2015 Claim Construction Order –
`Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos Inc., Civ. No. 14-cv-
`01197-WHO.
`
`February 10, 2017 Claim Construction
`Order – Finjan, Inc. v. Symantec Inc., Civ.
`No. 3:14-cv-02998-HSG.
`
`March 26, 2019 Claim Construction Order –
`Finjan, Inc. v. SonicWall Inc., Civ. No. 17-
`cv-04467-BLF.
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`3
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 6 of 29
`
`
`
`‘844 Terms For
`Construction
`“means for linking the
`first Downloadable
`security profile to the
`Downloadable before a
`web server makes the
`Downloadable available
`to web clients”
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Governed by 35 U.S.C. §
`112(6):
`
`Function: linking the first
`Downloadable security
`profile to the Downloadable
`before a web server makes
`the Downloadable available
`to web clients
`
`Structure: content inspection
`engine programmed to
`perform the algorithm of
`step 630 disclosed at FIG. 6,
`Col. 8, lines 65-67 and Col.
`6, lines 13-24 of the ‘844
`Patent
`
`Citations to Intrinsic Record and
`Extrinsic Evidence
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1-8;
`Claims 10, 13, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 28, 36, 37,
`43;
`Col. 2, ll. 3-60;
`Col. 3, ll. 21-23;
`Col. 4, ll. 1-4; 59-64;
`Col. 5, ll. 3-5; 48-58;
`Col. 6, ll. 20-21;
`Col. 7, ll. 10-24; 41-67;
`Col. 8, ll. 1-35;
`Col. 9, ll. 19-67;
`Col. 10, ll. 1-24, 66-67; and
`Col. 11, ll. 1-11.
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,092,194 at
`Figs. 1-5;
`Col. 1, ll. 60-67;
`Col. 2, ll. 1-36; 65-67;
`Col. 3, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1-13; 29-67;
`Col. 5, ll. 1-3; 15-67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 7, ll. 1-6;
`Col. 9, ll. 57-67;
`Col. 10, ll. 1-6.
`
`April 21, 2016 Decision Denying
`Institution of Inter Partes Review – Palo
`Alto Networks, Inc. v. Finjan, Inc.,
`IPR2016-00165, Paper No. 7.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`October 14, 2014, Joint Claim Construction
`and Pre-Hearing Statement Pursuant to
`Patent Local Rule 4-3, Finjan, Inc. v.
`Sophos Inc., Civ. No. 14-cv-01197-WHO.
`
`July 23, 2018, Claim Construction Order –
`Finjan, Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc., Civ. No.
`17-cv-00072-BLF.
`
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`4
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 7 of 29
`
`
`
`‘844 Terms For
`Construction
`
`“means for comparing
`the first downloadable
`security profile against
`the security policy if the
`first downloadable
`security profile is
`trustworthy”
`
`“means for determining
`whether to trust the first
`Downloadable security
`profile”
`
`“security context”
`
`“web client”
`
`Citations to Intrinsic Record and
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`March 26, 2019 Claim Construction Order –
`Finjan, Inc. v. SonicWall Inc., Civ. No. 17-
`cv-04467-BLF.
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`‘844 patent at Abstract; Claim 44; FIGS. 1-
`8; 2:20-2:60; 3:33-4:58; 5:14-5:47; 7:41-
`7:48; 8:17-8:36; 10:66-11:11; U.S. Pat. No.
`6,092,194, FIGS. 1-5; 1:60-2:36; 2:65-5:3;
`5:15-7:6; 9:57-10:6.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`‘844 patent at Abstract; Claim 44; FIGS. 1-
`8; 2:20-2:60; 3:33-4:58; 5:14-5:47; 7:41-
`7:48; 8:17-8:36; 10:66-11:11; U.S. Pat. No.
`6,092,194, FIGS. 1-5; 1:60-2:36; 2:65-5:3;
`5:15-7:6; 9:57-10:6.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`This term is not in the asserted claims.
`
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Title;
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1-8 (Fig. 1 showing content inspection
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Governed by 35 U.S.C. §
`112(6):
`
`Function: comparing the
`first downloadable security
`profile against the security
`policy if the first
`downloadable security
`profile is trustworthy
`
`Structure: network
`protection engine or
`computer protection engine
`
`Governed by 35 U.S.C. §
`112(6):
`
`Function: determining
`whether to trust the first
`downloadable security
`profile
`
`Structure: network
`protection engine or
`computer protection engine
`
`n/a
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`5
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 8 of 29
`
`
`
`‘844 Terms For
`Construction
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Citations to Intrinsic Record and
`Extrinsic Evidence
`engine);
`Claims 1-21, 41, 43;
`Col. 1, ll. 37-59, 62-67;
`Col. 2, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 3, ll. 32-65;
`Col. 4, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 5, ll. 1-13, 48-67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1-24, 66-67;
`Col. 7, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 8, ll. 1-5, 36-67; and
`Col. 9, ll. 1-53;
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,092,194, including:
`Figs. 1-5;
`Col. 1, ll. 60-67;
`Col. 2, ll. 1-36; 65-67;
`Col. 3, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 5, ll. 1-3; 15-67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 7, ll. 1-6;
`Col. 9, ll. 24 – 28, 34 – 42, 57-67;
`Col. 10, ll. 1-6.
`
`‘844 Patent File History including:
`February 8, 2000 Non-Final Rejection;
`May 16, 2000 Response
`to Non-Final
`Action; and July 13, 2000 Notice of
`Allowance.
`
`April 21, 2016 Decision Denying
`Institution of Inter Partes Review – Palo Alto
`Networks, Inc. v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2016-00165,
`Paper No. 7.
`
`Symantec Corp. v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-
`01894, PTAB Decision Denying Institution
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`October 14, 2014, Joint Claim Construction
`and Pre-Hearing Statement Pursuant
`to
`Patent Local Rule 4-3, Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos
`Inc., Civ. No. 14-cv-01197-WHO.
`
`
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`6
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 9 of 29
`
`
`
`‘844 Terms For
`Construction
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Citations to Intrinsic Record and
`Extrinsic Evidence
`April 12, 2016 Summary Judgment Order -
`Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint, Inc. et al., Case
`No. 3:13-cv-05808-HSG (N.D. Cal.).
`
`May 24, 2016 Summary Judgment Order
`Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos, Inc., Case No. 14-cv-
`01197-WHO (N.D. Cal.).
`
`July 18, 2016 Post-Trial Order, Finjan, Inc.
`v. Blue Coat, Inc., Case No. 13-
`CV-03999-BLF (N.D. Cal.).
`
`February 10, 2017 Claim Construction Order
`– Finjan, Inc. v. Symantec Inc., Civ. No.
`3:14-cv-02998-HSG
`(adopting Finjan’s
`construction).
`
`March 02, 2015 Claim Construction Order –
`Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos Inc., Civ. No. 14-cv-
`01197-WHO.
`
`October 20, 2014 Claim Construction Order
`– Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat, Inc., Case No.
`5:13- cv-03999-BLF (N.D. Cal.).
`
`December 3, 2015 Claim Construction Order
`– Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint, Inc., et al., 3:13-
`cv-05808-HSG (N.D. Cal.).
`
`February 2, 2019 Order Construing
`Additional Claims – Finjan, Inc. v. Cisco
`Systems Inc., Civ. No. 17-cv-00072-BLF.
`
`July 23, 2018, Claim Construction Order –
`Finjan, Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc., Civ. No.
`17-cv-00072-BLF.
`
`Dictionary/Treatise Definitions
`Webster’s New World Dictionary of
`Computer Terms (1997) at 95.
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`7
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 10 of 29
`
`
`
`‘844 Terms For
`Construction
`
`
`‘968 Terms For
`Construction
`“receiver”
`
`
`“transmitter”
`
`
`Citations to Intrinsic Record and
`Extrinsic Evidence
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`
`
`
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Abstract;
`Fig. 2;
`Col. 1, ll. 10-23;
`Col. 2, ll. 28-67;
`Col. 3, ll. 30-45;
`Col. 4, ll. 1-8;
`Col. 7, ll. 35-55;
`Col. 8, ll. 17-45;
`Claims 1 – 38.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`
`Finjan will rely on expert testimony to rebut
`any expert opinion that Qualys offers to
`support its constructions. Here, Finjan will
`rely on expert testimony to rebut Qualys’
`proposed expert opinion that “a person of
`ordinary skill in the art as of the priority
`dates of the respective patents, reading the
`respective patents’ specifications, would not
`be able to identify corresponding structure
`for the term ‘receiver.’”
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Abstract;
`Fig. 2;
`Col. 3, ll. 30-61;
`Col. 5, ll. 38-51;
`Claims 1 – 38.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`8
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 11 of 29
`
`
`
`‘968 Terms For
`Construction
`
`“dynamically
`generating a policy
`index”
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`
`Finjan will rely on expert testimony to rebut
`any expert opinion that Qualys offers to
`support its constructions. Here, Finjan will
`rely on expert testimony to rebut Qualys’
`proposed expert opinion that “a person of
`ordinary skill in the art as of the priority
`dates of the respective patents, reading the
`respective patents’ specifications, would not
`be able to identify corresponding structure
`for the term ‘transmitter.’”
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Title;
`Abstract;
`Claims 1 – 38;
`Figs. 1, 2, 3;
`Col. 1, ll. 10-58, 63 - 67;
`Col. 2, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 3, ll. 16 – 67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 5, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 7, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 8, ll. 1 – 67; and
`Col. 9, ll. 1 – 44.
`
`‘968 Patent File History, including:
`Notice of Allowance dated June 23, 2005;
`Office Action Response dated June 6, 2005;
`Office Action Response dated May 11, 2005;
`Office Action dated February 9, 2005.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`
`
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`9
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 12 of 29
`
`
`
`‘968 Terms For
`Construction
`
`“known to be allowable
`relative to a given
`policy” / “allowable
`relative to a given
`policy”
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`Finjan will rely on expert testimony to rebut
`any expert opinion that Qualys offers to
`support its constructions. Here, Finjan will
`rely on expert testimony to rebut Qualys’
`proposed expert opinion that “a person of
`ordinary skill in the art as of the priority
`date of this patent, would understand the
`plain and ordinary meaning of this term in
`the context of this patent to be ‘creating or
`updating a policy index in response to
`user requests for cached or non-cached
`content.’”
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Title;
`Abstract;
`Claims 1-38;
`Figs. 1, 2;
`Col. 2, ll. 3 – 11, 28 – 67;
`Col. 3, ll. 31 – 40, 62 – 67;
`Col. 4, ll. 20-63;
`Col. 5, ll. 15 – 63;
`Col. 4, ll. 1 – 32;
`Col. 6, ll. 22 – 54;
`Col. 7, ll. 11 – 23, 35 – 38; and
`Col. 8, ll. 18 – 32, 64-67;
`Col. 9, ll. 3-8.
`
`‘986 Patent File History, including:
`Notice of Allowance dated June 23,
`2005; Office Action Response dated June
`6, 2005; Office Action Response dated
`May 11, 2005; Office Action dated
`February 9, 2005.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`October 20, 2014 Claim Construction
`Order – Finjan Inc. v. Blue Coat
`Systems, Inc., Civ. No. 5:13-cv-03999-
`BLF.
`
`
`10
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 13 of 29
`
`
`
`‘968 Terms For
`Construction
`
`“memory storing a
`cache of digital
`content”
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`March 26, 2019 Claim Construction Order –
`Finjan, Inc. v. SonicWall Inc., Civ. No. 17-
`cv-04467-BLF.
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`
`Finjan will rely on expert testimony to rebut
`any expert opinion that Qualys offers to
`support its constructions. Here, Finjan will
`rely on expert testimony to rebut Qualys’
`proposed expert opinion that “a person of
`ordinary skill in the art as of the priority date
`of this patent, would understand the plain and
`ordinary meaning of this term in the
`context of this patent to be ‘whether the
`given digital content may be sent to the
`web client.’”
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Title;
`Abstract;
`Claims 1 – 38;
`Figs. 1, 2, 3;
`Col. 1, ll. 10-58, 63 - 67;
`Col. 2, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 3, ll. 16 – 67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 5, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 7, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 8, ll. 1 – 67; and
`Col. 9, ll. 1 – 44.
`
`‘968 Patent File History, including:
`Notice of Allowance dated June 23,
`2005;
`Office Action Response dated June 6,
`2005;
`Office Action Response dated May 11,
`2005;
`Office Action dated February 9, 2005.
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`11
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 14 of 29
`
`
`
`‘968 Terms For
`Construction
`
`
`
`‘731 Terms For
`Construction
`“incoming files from
`the Internet”
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`
`Finjan will rely on expert testimony to rebut
`any expert opinion that Qualys offers to
`support its constructions. Here, Finjan will
`rely on expert testimony to rebut Qualys’
`proposed expert opinion that “a person of
`ordinary skill in the art as of the priority
`date of this patent, would understand the
`plain and ordinary meaning of this term in
`the context of this patent to be ‘a memory
`storing [memory for storing] a collection of
`digital content previously requested and
`retrieved for a web client.’”
`
`
`
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`‘731 patent at:
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1–3;
`Claim 1;
`Col. 1, ll. 25–67;
`Col. 2, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 3, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 5, ll. 19–32, 54–67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1–24, 54-60;
`Col. 7, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 8, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 9, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 10, ll. 1–51;
`Col. 11, ll. 14 – 20;
`‘731 Patent File History.
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,154,844
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`12
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 15 of 29
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`
`
`‘731 Terms For
`Construction
`
`
`
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1–8;
`Col. 1, ll. 62–67;
`Col. 2, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 3, ll. 33–67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1–64;
`Col. 5, ll. 14–67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1–24;
`Col. 7, ll. 41–67;
`Col. 8, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 9, ll. 1–18, ll. 63–67;
`Col. 10, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 11, ll. 1–11.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,965,968
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1, 2;
`Col. 1, ll. 10–67;
`Col. 2, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 3, ll. 47–67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1–13;
`Col. 6, ll. 27–30;
`Col. 7, ll. 23–67;
`Col. 8, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 9, ll. 1–45.
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,092,194
`Figs. 1-5;
`Col. 1, ll. 60–67;
`Col. 2, ll. 1–36, 65 – 67;
`Col. 3, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1–67
`Col. 5, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 7, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 8, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 9, ll. 57–67;
`Col 10, ll. 1–6.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,167,520
`Figs. 1–7;
`Col. 2, ll. 53 – 67;
`Col. 3, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1–67;
`
`13
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 16 of 29
`
`
`
`‘731 Terms For
`Construction
`
`
`
`
`‘154 Terms For
`Construction
`“a content processor”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Col. 5, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1–67.
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,480,962
`Figs. 1–7;
`Col. 2, ll. 6–40, 61–67;
`Col. 3, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 5, ll. ll. 1–23;
`Col. 6, ll. 60–67;
`Col. 7, ll. 1–7.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`
`Finjan will rely on expert testimony to rebut
`any expert opinion that Qualys offers to
`support its constructions. Here, Finjan will
`rely on expert testimony to rebut Qualys’
`proposed expert opinion that “a person of
`ordinary skill in the art as of the priority
`date of this patent, would understand the
`plain and ordinary meaning of this term in
`the context of this patent to be ‘Internet files
`requested by an intranet computer.’”
`
`
`
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1–5;
`Claims 1 – 12;
`Col. 2, ll. 64 – 67 (example of software
`application running on a computer that
`process Internet content);
`Col. 3, ll. 1 – 30;
`Col. 4, ll. 55 – 67;
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`14
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 17 of 29
`
`
`
`‘154 Terms For
`Construction
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Col. 5, ll. 4 – 25, 26 – 67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 7, ll. 20 – 31;
`Col., 10, ll. 15 – 67 (web browser running
`on a client computer);
`Col. 11, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 12, ll. 7–67;
`Col. 13, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 14, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 15, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 16, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 17, ll. 1–29.
`
`‘154 Patent File History, including:
`June 28, 2011 Non-Final Rejection; October
`5, 2011 Amendment and Response to Office
`Action; and December 22, 2011 Notice of
`Allowance.
`
`Symantec Corp. v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-
`01547, including Petition to Institute IPR
`(Paper No. 1), Davidson Declaration (Ex.
`1010), Decision Denying Institution (Paper
`No. 9).
`
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Finjan, Inc.,
`IPR2015-01979; Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v.
`Finjan, Inc., IPR2016-00151; IPR2016-
`00919; IPR2016-01071.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`March 2, 2015 Claim Construction Order –
`Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos, Inc., N.D. Cal. Case
`No. 14-cv-1197-WHO.
`
`December 3, 2015 Claim Construction
`Order – Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint, Inc., et
`al., Case No. 3:13-cv-05808-HSG (N.D.
`Cal.).
`
`February 10, 2017 Claim Construction
`Order – Finjan, Inc. v. Symantec Corp.,
`Case No. 3:14- cv-02998-HSG (N.D. Cal.)
`
`15
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 18 of 29
`
`
`
`‘154 Terms For
`Construction
`
`“process content”
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`
`March 14, 2017 Order re Post-trial Motions
`in Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos, Inc., N.D. Cal.
`Case No. 14-cv-1197-WHO.
`
`February 14, 2019 Claim Construction
`Order – Finjan, Inc. v. Bitdefender, Inc.
`Case No. 17-cv-04790-HSG (N.D. Cal.).
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1–5;
`Claims 1 – 12;
`Col. 2, ll. 64 – 67 (example of software
`application running on a computer that
`process Internet content);
`Col. 3, ll. 1 – 30;
`Col. 4, ll. 55 – 67;
`Col. 5, ll. 4 – 25, 26 – 67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 7, ll. 20 – 31;
`Col., 10, ll. 15 – 67 (web browser running
`on a client computer);
`Col. 11, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 12, ll. 7–67;
`Col. 13, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 14, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 15, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 16, ll. 1–67;
`Col. 17, ll. 1–29.
`
`‘154 Patent File History, including:
`June 28, 2011 Non-Final Rejection; October
`5, 2011 Amendment and Response to Office
`Action; and December 22, 2011 Notice of
`Allowance.
`
`Symantec Corp. v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-
`01547, including Petition to Institute IPR
`
`16
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 19 of 29
`
`
`
`‘154 Terms For
`Construction
`
`“receiver”
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`(Paper No. 1), Davidson Declaration (Ex.
`1010), Decision Denying Institution (Paper
`No. 9).
`
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Finjan, Inc.,
`IPR2015-01979; Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v.
`Finjan, Inc., IPR2016-00151; IPR2016-
`00919; IPR2016-01071.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`March 2, 2015 Claim Construction Order –
`Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos, Inc., N.D. Cal. Case
`No. 14-cv-1197-WHO.
`
`December 3, 2015 Claim Construction
`Order – Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint, Inc., et
`al., Case No. 3:13-cv-05808-HSG (N.D.
`Cal.).
`
`February 10, 2017 Claim Construction
`Order – Finjan, Inc. v. Symantec Corp.,
`Case No. 3:14- cv-02998-HSG (N.D. Cal.)
`
`March 14, 2017 Order re Post-trial Motions
`in Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos, Inc., Case No. 14-
`cv-1197-WHO (N.D. Cal.).
`
`February 14, 2019 Claim Construction
`Order – Finjan, Inc. v. Bitdefender, Inc.
`Case No. 17-cv-04790-HSG (N.D. Cal.).
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1–5;
`Claims 1 – 12;
`Col. 2, ll. 54 – 67;
`Col. 3, ll. 1 – 30;
`Col. 4, ll. 55 – 60
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`17
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 20 of 29
`
`
`
`‘154 Terms For
`Construction
`
`“transmitter”
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Col. 5, ll. 4 – 25, 26 – 67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 7, ll. 20 – 31, 51-65;
`Col. 8, ll. 41-60;
`Col., 10, ll. 15 – 67;
`Col. 11, ll. 41 – 67;
`Col. 12, ll. ll. 1–67;
`Col. 15, ll. 14 – 64.
`
`‘154 Patent File History, including:
`June 28, 2011 Non-Final Rejection; October
`5, 2011 Amendment and Response to Office
`Action; and December 22, 2011 Notice of
`Allowance.
`
`Symantec Corp. v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-
`01547, including Petition to Institute IPR
`(Paper No. 1), Davidson Declaration (Ex.
`1010), Decision Denying Institution (Paper
`No. 9).
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`
`Finjan will rely on expert testimony to rebut
`any expert opinion that Qualys offers to
`support its constructions. Here, Finjan will
`rely on expert testimony to rebut Qualys’
`proposed expert opinion that “a person of
`ordinary skill in the art as of the priority
`dates of the respective patents, reading the
`respective patents’ specifications, would not
`be able to identify corresponding structure
`for the term ‘receiver.’”
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1–5;
`Claims 1 – 12;
`Col. 2, ll. 54 – 67;
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`18
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 21 of 29
`
`
`
`‘154 Terms For
`Construction
`
`“security computer”
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Col. 3, ll. 1 – 30;
`Col. 4, ll. 55 – 60
`Col. 5, ll. 4 – 25, 26 – 67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1 – 67;
`Col. 7, ll. 20 – 31, 51-65;
`Col. 8, ll. 41-60;
`Col., 10, ll. 15 – 67;
`Col. 11, ll. 41 – 67;
`Col. 12, ll. ll. 1–67;
`Col. 15, ll. 14 – 64.
`
`‘154 Patent File History, including:
`June 28, 2011 Non-Final Rejection; October
`5, 2011 Amendment and Response to Office
`Action; and December 22, 2011 Notice of
`Allowance.
`
`Symantec Corp. v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-
`01547, including Petition to Institute IPR
`(Paper No. 1), Davidson Declaration (Ex.
`1010), Decision Denying Institution (Paper
`No. 9).
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`Any intrinsic and extrinsic evidence relied
`upon by Qualys.
`
`Qualys’ Invalidity Contentions.
`
`Finjan will rely on expert testimony to rebut
`any expert opinion that Qualys offers to
`support its constructions. Here, Finjan will
`rely on expert testimony to rebut Qualys’
`proposed expert opinion that “a person of
`ordinary skill in the art as of the priority
`dates of the respective patents, reading the
`respective patents’ specifications, would not
`be able to identify corresponding structure
`for the term ‘transmitter.’”
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`Abstract;
`Figs. 1–5;
`
`No construction necessary –
`plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`19
`FINJAN’S AMENDED PRELIMINARY CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTIONS PURSUANT TO P.L.R. 4-2
`
`CASE NO.: 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
`
`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 4:18-cv-07229-YGR Document 60-2 Filed 04/13/20 Page 22 of 29
`
`
`
`‘154 Terms For
`Construction
`
`
`
`Proposed Constructions
`
`Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 11;
`Col. 1:5-3:13;
`Col. 3, ll. 30-38-67;
`Col. 4, ll. 1-26, 30-55;
`Col. 5, ll. 4-67;
`Col. 6, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 7, ll. 1-50;
`Col. 8:10-67;
`Col. 9, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 10, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 11, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 12, ll. 1-67;
`Col. 13, ll. 1-3, 8-67;
`Col. 14