`
`
`
`
`
`APPENDIX A
`
`Finjan’s Witness List
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 2 of 13
`
`PLAINTIFF FINJAN LLC’S LIST OF FACT AND EXPERT WITNESSES
`
`United States District Court
`For the Northern District of California (San Jose Division)
`
`Finjan LLC v. SonicWall, Inc.
`
`Case No. 5:17-cv-04467-BLF
`
`
`
`Trial Date: May 3, 2021
`
`Plaintiff Finjan LLC (“Finjan”) identifies the following witnesses whom it may call live or
`
`by deposition at trial. This list is not a commitment that Finjan will call any particular witness at
`
`trial, or a representation that any of the witnesses listed are available or will appear for trial. If any
`
`third-party witness is unavailable, Finjan reserves the right to use his or her deposition testimony.
`
`With respect to Defendant SonicWall, Inc.’s (“SonicWall”) witnesses, Finjan reserves the right to
`
`introduce testimony through deposition or live examination, as appropriate. Finjan also reserves
`
`the right to call any witnesses listed or called by SonicWall, and to revise this list in light of further
`
`rulings by the Court, including any rulings regarding the amount of time allotted for the parties to
`
`present their case at trial, or any other changed circumstances.
`
`Defendant SonicWall’s Objections to Finjan’s May Call Witness List
`
`SonicWall objects to Finjan presenting live testimony from Daniel Chinn. Finjan failed to
`
`disclose Mr. Chinn in its Initial Disclosures dated March 27, 2018 (“Initial Disclosures”) and thus
`
`Mr. Chinn was not deposed in the Finjan v. SonicWall case. Under Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure 26(a) and 37(c), Finjan is precluded from presenting live testimony from Mr. Chinn at
`
`trial. To the extent Finjan intends to call Mr. Chinn by deposition, Finjan is limited to Mr. Chinn’s
`
`deposition testimony in the Finjan v. Cisco case pursuant to the parties’ Stipulation Regarding
`
`Prior Depositions (Dkt. 235).
`
`SonicWall objects to Finjan presenting any testimony from Michael Kim, be it live or by
`
`deposition. Finjan failed to disclose Mr. Kim in its Initial Disclosures and thus Mr. Kim was not
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 3 of 13
`
`deposed in the Finjan v. SonicWall case. Further, Mr. Kim was not identified in the parties’
`
`Stipulation Regarding Prior Depositions (Dkt. 235). Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(a)
`
`and 37(c), Finjan is precluded from presenting Mr. Kim’s testimony at trial.
`
`SonicWall objects to Finjan presenting testimony from Philip Hartstein regarding facts that
`
`occurred at a point in time when he was not employed by Finjan and facts for which he lacks
`
`personal knowledge pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 602, including but not limited to facts related to the
`
`subject matter disclosed below. SonicWall further objects to Finjan presenting testimony from
`
`Mr. Hartstein related to Finjan’s interactions and/or communications with Dell and/or SonicWall.
`
`Mr. Hartstein did not participate in such interactions and/or communications and thus lacks
`
`personal knowledge pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 602. Further, Finjan failed to identify Mr. Hartstein
`
`as an individual with knowledge related to Finjan’s interactions and/or communications with
`
`SonicWall and/or Dell in response to SonicWall’s Interrogatory Nos. 6 and 16.
`
`SonicWall objects to Finjan presenting testimony from John Garland regarding facts that
`
`occurred at a point in time when he was not employed by Finjan and facts for which he lacks
`
`personal knowledge pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 602, including but not limited to Finjan’s
`
`communications with Dell and/or SonicWall that predate Mr. Garland’s employment with Finjan.
`
`SonicWall objects to Finjan presenting testimony from Julie Mar-Spinola regarding facts
`
`that occurred at a point in time when she was not employed by Finjan and facts for which she lacks
`
`personal knowledge pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 602, including but not limited to facts related to the
`
`subject matter disclosed below. SonicWall further objects to Finjan presenting testimony from
`
`Ms. Mar-Spinola related to Finjan’s interactions and/or communications with Dell and/or
`
`SonicWall to the extent that Ms. Mar-Spinola did not participate in such interactions and/or
`
`communications and thus lacks personal knowledge pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 602. Further, Finjan
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 4 of 13
`
`failed to identify Ms. Mar-Spinola as an individual with knowledge related to Finjan’s interactions
`
`and/or communications with SonicWall and/or Dell in response to SonicWall’s Interrogatory No.
`
`6.
`
`Finjan’s Response to SonicWall’s Objections to Finjan’s “May Call” list
`
`SonicWall’s objection to “Finjan presenting live testimony from Daniel Chinn” is
`
`irrelevant because Finjan only plans to present deposition testimony from Mr. Chinn.
`
`As to SonicWall’s assertion that Finjan is limited to Mr. Chinn’s deposition testimony in
`
`the Finjan v. Cisco case, as well as to its objection to Finjan’s use of deposition testimony from
`
`Michael Kim taken in other matters, Finjan notes that SonicWall is likewise proposing to introduce
`
`testimony, such as from Mr. Noonan, that was not given in the present litigation and is not covered
`
`by the parties’ Stipulation Regarding Prior Depositions (Dkt. 235). To the extent SonicWall seeks
`
`to introduce such testimony, it cannot simultaneously maintain an objection to Finjan doing the
`
`same.
`
`SonicWall’s objection to John Garland testifying about unspecified facts from before his
`
`tenure at Finjan is vague and incorrect. SonicWall does not specify what “facts” it objects to
`
`except to cite “Finjan’s communications with Dell and/or SonicWall that predate Mr. Garland’s
`
`employment with Finjan.” This appears to be the gravamen of SonicWall’s objection, and its
`
`objection is misplaced. Mr. Garland was and is a Finjan corporate witness on this topic and is
`
`entitled to testify to Finjan’s knowledge of communications it had with SonicWall or Dell based
`
`on corporate records. Mr. Garland was designated as Finjan’s corporate 30(b)(6) witness on
`
`Finjan’s communications with SonicWall or Dell, was specifically identified as being
`
`knowledgeable about this topic in Finjan’s interrogatory responses, and testified to Finjan’s
`
`corporate knowledge of such communications at deposition. SonicWall’s attempt to bar his
`
`testimony on this topic is meritless.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 5 of 13
`
`Also without merit are SonicWall’s blanket objections to Philip Hartstein and Julie Mar-
`
`Spinola testifying regarding unspecified facts from before their tenure at SonicWall. Again,
`
`SonicWall’s objection appears to relate to testimony about Finjan’s communications with
`
`SonicWall or Dell. Mr. Hartstein is a corporate representative of Finjan and has knowledge of
`
`facts relating to the communications with Dell/SonicWall on behalf of the corporation based on
`
`the corporate records. Ms. Mar-Spinola is likewise knowledgeable about Finjan’s corporate
`
`knowledge of such communications based on her role at Finjan. Furthermore, Mr. Hartstein was
`
`disclosed in Finjan’s initial disclosures as knowledgeable about “Finjan’s business” and SonicWall
`
`itself stated in its initial disclosures that it understood Mr. Hartstein to be knowledgeable about
`
`“all aspects of Finjan’s business,” including specifically including all its “licensing activities.”
`
`SonicWall likewise acknowledged in its initial disclosures that it understood Ms. Mar-Spinola to
`
`be “knowledgeable about Finjan’s litigation and licensing activities” including issues of “notice
`
`under 35 U.S.C. §287.” Further, SonicWall’s interrogatories nos. 6 and 16 do not request
`
`information regarding those in possession of Finjan corporation’s knowledge of discussions with
`
`SonicWall, and in any case (as Finjan objected at the time) were overbroad and unduly
`
`burdensome, and thus not proportional to the needs of the case, in asking for an identification of
`
`all persons with personal knowledge of such communications.
`
`I.
`
`FACT AND EXPERT WITNESSES
`
`A. Witnesses That Will Be Called in Connection with Finjan:
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 6 of 13
`
`Witness
`
`Subject Matter
`
`Dr. Eric Cole
`(expert)
`
`SonicWall’s
`infringement of U.S.
`Patent Nos.
`6,154,844
`and 8,677,494
`
`Estimated
`length
`(Direct/Cross)
`
`1.5 hours direct /
`1 hour cross
`[Live]
`
`Dr. Michael
`Goodrich
`(expert)
`
`Validity of U.S.
`Patent Nos.
`7,975,305,
`8,225,408, and
`8,141,154
`
`50 minutes direct /
`35 minutes cross
`[Live]
`
`Expert Testimony
`
`Expert CV
`and Report
`Citation1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Theory: SonicWall’s
`infringement of
`Finjan’s patents
`
`Bases: Knowledge and
`experience in field,
`testing of accused
`products, review of
`Finjan and SonicWall
`documents, source
`code, deposition
`testimony, public
`documents, pleadings;
`materials identified
`within expert reports
`dated September 3,
`2020
`Theory: Rebuttal to
`SonicWall’s expert’s
`invalidity theories
`
`Bases: Knowledge and
`experience in field,
`review of SonicWall’s
`expert reports, prior art,
`deposition testimony,
`Finjan and SonicWall
`documents, public
`documents, pleadings;
`materials identified
`within expert report
`dated October 9, 2020
`
`
`
`1 Copies of Finjan’s Expert Reports are concurrently being lodged with the Court.
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 7 of 13
`
`Estimated
`length
`(Direct/Cross)
`
`30 minutes direct /
`40 minutes cross
`[Live]
`
`
`
`Expert Testimony
`
`Expert CV
`and Report
`Citation1
`
`
`
`
`
`Witness
`
`Subject Matter
`
`Philip Hartstein,
`President of
`Finjan
`
`Finjan’s business,
`including Finjan’s
`products and
`financials, Finjan’s
`agreements and
`contracts, including
`Finjan’s license
`agreements; Finjan’s
`interactions with
`SonicWall and Dell,
`and communications
`with SonicWall and
`Dell; the preparation
`and prosecution of
`the asserted patents
`and related patents;
`conception and
`reduction to
`practice;
`products/designs/ser
`vices that embody
`the subject matter of
`the asserted patents;
`the value of Finjan’s
`technology and
`intellectual property;
`Finjan’s awareness
`of SonicWall’s
`infringement; non-
`infringing
`alternatives; factual
`basis for damages;
`communications
`with M86 Security
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 8 of 13
`
`Witness
`
`Subject Matter
`
`Dr. DeForest
`McDuff
`(expert)
`
`Damages
`
`Estimated
`length
`(Direct/Cross)
`
`1 hour direct /
`40 minutes cross
`[Live]
`
`Dr. Nenad
`Medvidovic
`(expert)
`
`1.5 hours direct /
`1 hour cross
`[Live]
`
`SonicWall’s
`infringement of U.S.
`Patent Nos.
`8,225,408,
`7,975,305, and
`8,141,154
`
`Dr. Michael
`Mitzenmacher
`(expert)
`
`1.5 hours direct /
`1 hour cross
`[Live]
`
`SonicWall’s
`infringement of U.S.
`Patent Nos.
`6,804,780,
`6,965,968,
`7,613,926
`
`7
`
`Expert Testimony
`
`Expert CV
`and Report
`Citation1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Theory: Damages owed
`by SonicWall to Finjan
`for patent infringement
`
`Bases: Knowledge and
`experience in field,
`review of Finjan and
`SonicWall documents,
`deposition testimony,
`public documents,
`pleadings; articles and
`books; materials
`identified within expert
`reports dated
`September 4, 2020
`
`Theory: SonicWall’s
`infringement of
`Finjan’s patents
`
`Bases: Knowledge and
`experience in field,
`testing of accused
`products, review of
`Finjan and SonicWall
`documents, source
`code, deposition
`testimony, public
`documents, pleadings;
`materials identified
`within expert reports
`dated September 3,
`2020
`
`Theory: SonicWall’s
`infringement of
`Finjan’s patents
`
`Bases: knowledge and
`experience in field,
`testing of accused
`products, review of
`Finjan and SonicWall
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 9 of 13
`
`Witness
`
`Subject Matter
`
`Estimated
`length
`(Direct/Cross)
`
`Expert Testimony
`
`Expert CV
`and Report
`Citation1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`documents, source
`code, deposition
`testimony, public
`documents, pleadings;
`materials identified
`within expert reports
`dated September 3,
`2020
`
`Theory: Rebuttal to
`SonicWall’s expert’s
`invalidity theories
`
`Bases: Knowledge and
`experience in field,
`review of SonicWall’s
`expert reports, prior art,
`deposition testimony,
`Finjan and SonicWall
`documents, public
`documents, pleadings;
`materials identified
`within expert report
`dated October 9, 2020.
`
`Theory: Technology
`related to the Asserted
`Patents and
`SonicWall’s use and
`incorporation of the
`technology within their
`products
`
`Bases: Knowledge and
`experience in field,
`testing of accused
`products, review of
`Finjan and SonicWall
`documents and expert
`reports, source code,
`deposition testimony,
`public documents,
`pleadings; materials
`
`Dr. Alessandro
`Orso (expert)
`
`Validity of U.S.
`Patent Nos.
`6,154,844,
`8,677,494,
`6,804,780,
`7,613,926, and
`6,965,968
`
`1.5 hour direct /
`1 hour cross
`[Live]
`
`Dr. Aaron
`Striegel
`(expert)
`
`Technology related
`to the Asserted
`Patents
`
`30 minutes direct /
`30 minutes cross
`[Live]
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 10 of 13
`
`Witness
`
`Subject Matter
`
`Estimated
`length
`(Direct/Cross)
`
`Expert Testimony
`
`Expert CV
`and Report
`Citation1
`
`
`
`identified within expert
`reports dated
`September 3, 2020.
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 11 of 13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`B. Witnesses That May Be Called Live or by Deposition:
`
`Witness
`
`Subject Matter2
`
`
`
`Dmitriy Ayrapetov
`
`Vice President of SonicWall’s
`Platform Architecture
`
`Yuval Ben-Itzhak
`
`Inventor of the ’154 patent;
`Former Finjan CTO and
`consultant
`
`Daniel Chinn
`
`Chairman of the Finjan Board of
`Directors and former CEO
`
`Graham Carter
`
`Director of Business Intelligence
`and Analysis
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services
`
`Conception, development, and
`reduction to practice of the ’154
`Patent; the Finjan Vital Security
`Appliances; Finjan’s interactions
`with SonicWall
`
`Communications with SonicWall,
`Finjan’s business
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services
`
`Senthil Cheetancheri
`
`Distinguished Engineer
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services
`
`Estimated Length
`(Direct or Finjan
`/ SonicWall or Cross)
`
`15 minutes Finjan /
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`15 minute Finjan/
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Live]
`
`10 minutes Finjan /
`5 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`10 minutes Finjan /
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`20 minutes Finjan /
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`Brook Chelmo
`
`Senior Product Marketing Manger
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services, marketing, and
`communications
`
`15 minutes Finjan /
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`Ravi Chopra
`
`Chief Financial Officer
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services, sales and
`financial information
`
`20 minutes Finjan /
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`Evan Daar
`
`Principal at Francisco Partners
`
`Alex Dubrovsky
`
`Vice President of Software
`Engineering
`
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services, financial
`information, and acquisition
`history
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services
`
`
`10 minutes Finjan /
`5 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`20 minutes Finjan /
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`
`2 Finjan also incorporates by reference the subject matter of its designated deposition testimony.
`10
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 12 of 13
`
`Witness
`
`Subject Matter2
`
`
`
`Estimated Length
`(Direct or Finjan
`/ SonicWall or Cross)
`
`John Garland
`
`Director of Business Development
`
`Finjan’s licensing practices,
`communications with SonicWall
`and Dell
`
`20 minute direct /
`15 minute cross
`[Live]
`
`John Gmuender
`
`Chief Technology Officer
`
`John Gordineer
`
`Former Director Product
`Marketing
`
`Eric Hawkes
`
`Former Principal Software
`Engineer
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services
`
`20 minutes Finjan /
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services, marketing, and
`communications
`
`10 minutes Finjan /
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services
`
`10 minutes Finjan /
`5 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`Michael Kim
`
`Former Finjan Senior IP Counsel
`
`Knowledge of the Asserted
`Patents
`
`5 minutes Finjan /
`5 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`Michael King
`
`Senior Software Engineer
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services
`
`15 minutes Finjan /
`5 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`David R. Kroll
`
`Inventor of the ’926 and ’494
`Patents
`
`Matt Neiderman
`
`
`Chief Administration Officer
`
`Conception, development and
`reduction to practice of the ’926
`and ’494 Patents
`
`20 minute direct /
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Live]
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services and licensing
`practices
`
`15 minutes Finjan /
`10 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 372-1 Filed 03/04/21 Page 13 of 13
`
`Estimated Length
`(Direct or Finjan
`/ SonicWall or Cross)
`
`15 minutes Finjan /
`15 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`Witness
`
`Subject Matter2
`
`
`
`Julie Mar-Spinola
`
`Finjan Vice President of Legal
`Operations and Chief IP Officer
`
`Finjan’s litigation, business,
`licenses, and licensing practices;
`facts concerning objective indicia
`of non-obviousness; ownership of
`the asserted patents; economic
`analyses and valuations of the
`asserted patents and Finjan’s
`intellectual property portfolio;
`marking; Finjan’s
`communications concerning
`SonicWall or Dell and the accused
`products/services/technology;
`non-infringing alternatives; factual
`basis for damages
`
`
`Shlomo Touboul
`
`Inventor of the ’844, ’780, ’968,
`’408, ’305, and ’494 Patents,
`founder and former CEO of Finjan
`
`Shunhiu Zhu
`
`Vice President of Engineering
`
`Conception, development, and
`reduction to practice of the ’844,
`’780, ’968, ’408, ’305, and ’494
`Patents; Finjan’s business
`
`20 minutes Finjan /
`15 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`SonicWall’s accused
`products/services
`
`20 minutes Finjan /
`15 minutes SonicWall
`[Deposition]
`
`
`
`12
`
`