`Case 5:15—cv-03295—BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 1 of 6
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`
`
`FINJAN, INC, a Delaware Corporation,,
`
`Case No.: 15-cv-03295-BLF-SVK
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`VERDICT FORM
`
`V.
`
`BLUE COAT SYSTEMS LLC, a Delaware
`Corporation,
`
`Defendant.
`
`VERDICT FORM
`
`15-cv-0329_5-BLF-SVK
`
`
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 2 of 6
`Case 5:15—cv-03295—BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 2 of 6
`
`VERDICT FORM
`
`When answering the following questions and filling out this Verdict Form, please follow
`
`the directions provided throughout this Verdict Form. Your answer to each question must be
`
`unanimous. Some of the questions contain legal terms that are defined and explained in detail in
`
`the Jury Instructions. Please refer to the Jury Instructions if you are unsure about the meaning or
`
`usage of any legal term that appears in the questions below.
`
`We, the jury, unanimously agree to the answers to the following questions and return them
`
`under the instructions of this court as our verdict in this case.
`
`
`
`HIION
`
`00
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`VERDICT FORM
`15-cv-03295—BLF—SVK
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 3 of 6
`Case 5:15—cv-03295—BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 3 of 6
`
`QUESTION 1: Did Finjan prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Blue Coat’s
`
`product or combination of products as identified below literally infringes the identified claim or
`
`claims of the Asserted Patents? Answer “Yes” or “No” for each claim.
`
`‘494 Patent
`- GIN/WebPulse
`
`
`
`
`1731 Patent
`‘
`
`
`”844 Patent
`
`I GIN/WebPuise
`
`‘968 Patent
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 15
`
`I
`.
`Clan“ 10 —
`
`Cl
`
`Cl
`
`'
`
`'
`
`1
`
`1
`
`fig 3
`
`Eli
`
`‘408 Patent
`
`I WSS with GlN/WebPulse
`
`
`Cl
`
`,
`mm
`
`22
`
`Rs
`
`A
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`‘621 Patent
`It GIN/WebPulse
`
`
`
`Claim 1
`
`
`N0
`
`For each claim you did not find literally infringed, answer Question 2.
`
`VERDICT FORM
`lS-cv-03295~BLF-SVK
`
`2
`
`00quwa
`
`\O
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`1‘7
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`23
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 4 of 6
`Case 5:15—cv-03295—BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 4 of 6
`
`QUESTIION 2: For any patent claim you did not find Blue Coat literally infringed in
`
`Question 1, did Finjan prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Blue Coat’s product or
`
`combination of products as identified below infringes the identified claim or claims under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents? Answer “Yes” or “No” for each claim.
`
`’844 Patent
`
`. GIN/WebPuise
`
`‘494 Patent
`" GIN/WebPulse
`
`.
`
`‘731 Patent
`
`,
`I ASG w1th MAA
`
`‘968 Patent
`
`.
`I ASG With MAA
`
`,
`CiaIm 15
`
`.
`Claim 10
`
`_
`
`——-—
`
`—'"““
`
`_
`Claim 1
`
`Claim 1
`
`-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`‘621 Patent
`
`- GTN/WebPulse
`Claim 10
`11c;
`
`
`Claim 1
`
`_h'_\_);(_§_
`
`VERDICT FORM
`lS-cv-0329S-BLF-SVK
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 5 of 6
`Case 5:15—cv-03295—BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 5 of 6
`
`QUESTION 3: For only those Asserted Patents for which you found infringement in
`
`Question 1 or Question 2 above, has Finjan proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Blue
`
`Coat willfully infringed the patent? Answer “Yes” or “No” for each patent.
`
`
`
`-_
`
`
`-—
`
`
`-—
`
`-m
`ttttttett_
`-_
`
`
`
`
`VERDICT FORD/I
`15-cv-03295-BLF-SVK
`
`4
`
`NJONM-h-LDN
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`13
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 6 of 6
`Case 5:15—cv-03295—BLF Document 435 Filed 11/20/17 Page 6 of 6
`
`Answer Question 4 only if you have found one or more claims of the Assorted Patents to
`
`be infringed in Questions I or 2 above.
`QUESTION 4: What sum? of money do you find that Finjan has proven by a
`
`preponderance of the evidence would fairly and reasonably compensate Finjan for Blue Coat’s
`
`infringement of Finjan’s Asserted Patents for the life of each of the patents?
`
`
`
`_
`
`_-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`OO-QON
`
`\D
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`__
`
`
`
`You have now reached the end of the verdict form and should review it to ensure it
`
`accurately reflects your unanimous determinations. The Presiding Juror should then sign and date
`the verdict form in the spaces below and notify the Security Guard that you have reached a
`verdict. The Presiding Juror should retain possession of the verdict form and bring it when the
`jury is brought back into the courtroom.
`
`DATED: New 10 ,2017
`
`By:
`
`( «10)an V
`
`an...
`
`Presiding Juror
`
`VERDiCT FORM
`15-cv—0329S—BLF—SVK
`
`5
`
`
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
