Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` __________________________________
`
` Palo Alto Networks, Inc.,
`
` Petitioner
`
` v
`
` Finjan, Inc.,
`
` Patent Owner
`
` __________________________________
`
` Inter Partes Review No. 2015-01979
`
` U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154
`
` __________________________________
`
` CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`
` DEPOSITION of NENAD MEDVIDOVIC, PHD
`
` SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA
`
` FRIDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2016
`
` Veritext Legal Solutions
`
` Mid-Atlantic Region
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3 4
`
`5 6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
` 1250 Eye Street NW - Suite 350
`
` Washington, D.C. 20005
`
`25
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. - Exhibit 1038
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-01979
`
`

`
`Page 2
`
`Page 4
`
`1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL (CONTINUED):
`
` FOR THE PATENT OWNER FINJAN, INC.:
`
`2 3
`
`4 5
`
` KRAMER, LEVIN, NAFTALIS & FRANKEL
`6 BY: JAMES HANNAH, ATTORNEY AT LAW
`7 990 Marsh Road
`8 Menlo Park, California 94025
`9 650.752.1712
`10 JHannah@KramerLevin.com
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1 2 3 4
`
`25
`
` Deposition of NENAD MEDVIDOVIC, PHD, taken on behalf
`5 of Petitioner Palo Alto Networks, at 1333 Second
`6 Street, Suite 400, Santa Monica, California,
`7 beginning at 9:30 a.m., and ending at 1:15 p.m., on
`8 Friday, October 21, 2016, before Daryl Baucum, RPR,
`9 CRR, RMR, CSR No. 10356, Pursuant to Notice.
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23 Veritext Legal Solutions
` Mid-Atlantic Region
`24 1250 Eye Street NW - Suite 350
` Washington, D.C. 20005
`
`1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:
`
`1 I N D E X
`
`Page 3
`
`Page 5
`
` WITNESS: NENAD MEDVIDOVIC, PHD
`
`2 3 4
`
`5 EXAMINATION PAGE
`
`6 BY: MR. ARMON &&
`
`7 BY: MR. HANNAH &&
`
`8 9
`
`10
`
`11 QUESTIONS WITNESS WAS INSTRUCTED NOT TO ANSWER:
`
`12 (NONE)
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16 INFORMATION TO BE SUPPLIED:
`
`17 (NONE)
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` FOR THE CO-PETITIONER PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC.:
`
`2 3
`
`4 5
`
` COOLEY
`6 BY: ORION ARMON, ATTORNEY AT LAW
`7 380 Interlocken Crescent
`8 Broomingfield, Colorado 80021
`9 720.566.4119
`10 OArmon@Cooley.com
`11
`12
`13 FOR THE CO-PETITIONER SYMANTEC:
`14
`15 QUINN, EMANUEL
`16 BY: NATHAN HAMSTRA, ATTORNEY AT LAW
`17 500 West Madison Street
`18 Suite 2450
`19 Chicago, Illinois 60661
`20 312.705.7400
`21 NathanHamstra@QuinnEmanuel.com
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`2 (Pages 2 - 5)
`
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. - Exhibit 1038
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
`v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-01979
`
`

`
`Page 6
`
`Page 8
`
`1 spent on matters related to this IPR?
`2 A All together, within the last week, week
`3 and a half, probably on the order of 30, 40 hours
`4 and probably longer than that in preparing the
`5 declaration.
`6 Q In aggregate, how much time have you spent
`7 on this case?
`8 A Maybe on the order of -- well, there are
`9 two different IPR's involving the same patent. So I
`10 might not be able to give the exact answer. So
`11 maybe on the order of 100, 120 hours.
`12 Q You are compensated for all of your time
`13 in this case at your hourly rate of $350 an hour,
`14 correct?
`15 A That is correct.
`16 Q And $500 an hour for deposition time,
`17 correct?
`18 A That is correct.
`19 Q You take care in preparing the
`20 declarations you submit in litigation proceedings,
`21 correct?
`22 A Yes.
`23 Q Do you check the declarations before you
`24 sign them to make sure that they're correct?
`25 A To the best of my ability, yes.
`
`Page 9
`1 Q As part of that process of developing your
`2 opinions, you take care to ensure that the opinions
`3 you offer in your declarations are technically
`4 sound, correct?
`5 A Yes.
`6 Q And based upon your experience as a person
`7 of greater than ordinary skill in the art, correct?
`8 A Yes.
`9 Q You hold yourself out as a person who had
`10 at least ordinary skill in the art as of 2005,
`11 correct?
`12 A That is correct.
`13 Q Mark this as Exhibit 1, please.
`14 (Petitioner's Exhibit 1 was marked for
`15 identification by the court reporter and
`16 is attached hereto.)
`17 BY MR. ARMON:
`18 Q Dr. Medvidovic, before I get to that
`19 document, is there any reason why you can't give
`20 full, truthful and accurate testimony today?
`21 A No.
`22 Q Turning back to the document, Exhibit 1,
`23 please, confirm this is the declaration that you
`24 submitted in this IPR.
`25 A That is correct.
`
`3 (Pages 6 - 9)
`
`1 DEPOSITION EXHIBITS
`2 NENAD MEDVIDOVIC, PHD
`
`34
`
` NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE
`5 Exhibit 1 Declaration of Nenad Medvidovic, &&
` Ph.D., on the Validity of Claims
`6 1-5, 6-8, 10, and 11 of U.S.
` Patent No. 8,141,154 in Support
`7 of Patent Owner's Response
`8 Exhibit 2 Declaration of Nenad Medvidovic &&
` in Support of Plaintiff Finjan,
`9 Inc.'s Opening Claim Construction
` Brief
`
`10
`
` Exhibit 3 Declaration of Nenad Medvidovic &&
`11 in Support of Plaintiff Finjan,
` Inc.'s Opening Claim Construction
`12 Brief
`13 Exhibit 4 Declaration of Nenad Medvidovic &&
` in Support of Finjan's Opening
`14 Claim Construction Brief
`15 Exhibit 5 United States Patent Application &&
` Publication, US 2005/0108562 A1
`
`16
`
`17
`
` Exhibit 6 Biography of Roger I. Khazan &&
`
` Exhibit 7 Avast software claim chart &&
`18 regarding the '154 patent
`19 Exhibit 8 F-Secure software claim chart &&
` regarding the '154 patent
`
`20
`
` Exhibit 9 Websense software claim chart &&
`21 regarding the '154 patent
`22 Exhibit 10 Armorize software claim chart &&
` regarding the '154 patent
`
`23
`24
`25
`
`1 SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA; FRIDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2016
`
`Page 7
`
`2 9:30 A.M.
`
` NENAD MEDVIDOVIC, PHD,
`
`3 4
`
`5 having been first duly sworn, was
`
`6 examined and testified as follows:
`
` MR. ARMON: Orion Armon, lead counsel for
`
`7 8
`
`9 Petitioner Palo Alto Networks in this case,
`
`10 IPR2015-01979.
`
`11 MR. HAMSTRA: Nathan Hamstra, the lead
`
`12 counsel for Joint Petitioner Symantec.
`
`13 MR. HANNAH: James Hannah of Kramer,
`
`14 Levin, on behalf of Finjan and the witness.
`
`15 THE WITNESS: Nenad Medvidovic, N-E-N-A-D,
`
`16 M-E-D-V-I-D-O-V-I-C, witness.
`
`17
`
`18 EXAMINATION
`
`19 BY MR. ARMON:
`
`20 Q Good morning, Dr. Medvidovic.
`
`21 A Good morning.
`
`22 Q You prepared and submitted a declaration
`
`23 in this case, correct?
`
`24 A That is correct.
`
`25 Q Approximately how much time total have you
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. - Exhibit 1038
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
`v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-01979
`
`

`
`Page 10
`
`Page 12
`
`1 Q Who drafted the first version of this
`2 declaration, you or someone else?
`3 A I drafted every version of the
`4 declaration.
`5 Q All the words in the declaration are
`6 yours?
`7 A To the extent that there are parts of this
`8 that were legal standards provided to me by the
`9 counsel, I -- I mean they're in my declaration but I
`10 wouldn't say that all of those words are mine.
`11 All the technical opinions are definitely
`12 mine and I reviewed the legal standards and made
`13 sure I understood them and that they are phrased in
`14 a way that I would phrase them, but they were
`15 provided to me by counsel.
`16 Q Turn to the last page of the document,
`17 please.
`18 A Yes.
`19 Q That's your signature?
`20 A That is may signature.
`21 Q And there is a declaration stating that
`22 all statements made herein on your own knowledge are
`23 true and all statements made on information and
`24 belief are believed to be true; is that correct?
`25 A Yes, that is among the other things that
`
`1 A Okay.
`2 Q So the opinion that you offer in your
`3 declaration, Exhibit 1, is that the proper
`4 construction of the term content is the data
`5 container that can be rendered by a client web
`6 browser, correct?
`7 A Correct.
`8 Q You applied the broadest reasonable
`9 interpretation of the term "content" to reach that
`10 construction, correct?
`11 MR. HANNAH: Objection; form.
`12 THE WITNESS: The broadest reasonable
`13 interpretation in the context of the '154 patent,
`14 yes.
`15 BY MR. ARMON:
`16 Q And you understand that the broadest
`17 reasonable interpretation of BRI standard is the
`18 claim construction standard that the Supreme Court
`19 has affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`20 should use in an IPR proceeding, correct?
`21 A That is what I understand, yes.
`22 Q This construction of content is not the
`23 same construction that you have suggested in the
`24 past; isn't that correct?
`25 MR. HANNAH: Form.
`
`Page 11
`
`1 that paragraph, sentence says. That's correct.
`2 Q I'm not asking you if those are the words.
`3 I'm asking if that's what you believed at the time
`4 you signed the document that you statements were
`5 true or you believe them to be true.
`6 A That is correct.
`7 Q Do you take the same approach with each
`8 declaration you submit for a legal proceeding?
`9 A Yes.
`10 Q Do you ensure that the statements that
`11 they contain are either true if you have personal
`12 knowledge or that you believe them to be true?
`13 A To the best of my ability, yes.
`14 Q Turn to page -- there is two page numbers
`15 in this document. Let's turn to page 19 of the
`16 document Exhibit 1.
`17 And Dr. Medvidovic, for today's purposes,
`18 you will see there is a Finjan page number and there
`19 is a document page number. I'm going to refer to
`20 these document page numbers.
`21 A So just to make sure the same page that
`22 has paragraph 53 as the first complete paragraph on
`23 it.
`24 Q Correct. And I may also refer to
`25 paragraph numbers.
`
`Page 13
`1 THE WITNESS: If you can point me to a
`2 construction that I suggested in the past, I would
`3 be able to answer your question better.
`4 BY MR. ARMON:
`5 Q Do you remember whether you have ever
`6 taken a different position on the meaning of
`7 "content" other than what is proposed here in
`8 paragraph 53?
`9 A As we sit here, not off the top of my
`10 head.
`11 Q And let's step back for one minute.
`12 In preparing your opinion regarding the
`13 construction of content in paragraph 53 here, I take
`14 it that you did study the '154 patent disclosure as
`15 part of your opinion development process, correct?
`16 A Correct.
`17 Q You also considered the file history of
`18 the patent?
`19 A Correct.
`20 Q And your experience and knowledge as a
`21 person of at least ordinary skill in the art?
`22 A Yes.
`23 Q And did you develop this opinion with a
`24 view toward the meaning of the term "content" as of
`25 the application filing date of 2005?
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`4 (Pages 10 - 13)
`
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. - Exhibit 1038
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
`v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-01979
`
`

`
`Page 14
`
`Page 16
`
`1 A That is correct.
`2 Q I should say the priority date in 2005.
`3 A Correct.
`4 Q Exhibit 2.
`5 (Petitioner's Exhibit 2 was marked for
`6 identification by the court reporter and
`7 is attached hereto.)
`8 BY MR. ARMON:
`9 Q Dr. Medvidovic, Exhibit 2 is a declaration
`10 you submitted in support of Finjan's claim
`11 construction positions in the Finjan, Inc. versus
`12 Websense, Inc. case, correct?
`13 A That is correct.
`14 Q I will ask you to turn to the last page of
`15 Exhibit 2.
`16 And that's your signature at the last
`17 page, correct?
`18 A That is correct.
`19 Q Turn to paragraph 37 of the document on
`20 page 15.
`21 A Okay.
`22 Q You understand, sir, that in district
`23 court, the claim construction standard that is
`24 applied follows the what is called the Philips case
`25 and is a narrower claim construction standard than
`
`1 "For example, the specification of the
`2 '154 patent describes a web browser
`3 rendering scripts but there is no
`4 requirement that scripts must be rendered
`5 in a web browser or that the only content
`6 types possible are those that are
`7 processible by web browser of" -- I think
`8 you mean "or" perhaps -- "Java machine."
`9 That was your sentence, correct?
`10 A That is correct.
`11 Q And did you mean "of" or "or" there, sir?
`12 A This was slightly over two years ago if I
`13 check the date correctly. So I can't -- yeah,
`14 slightly over two years ago.
`15 It's possible that it was supposed to be
`16 or Java virtual machine but that's not what it says.
`17 So let me read the sentence one more time just to
`18 make sure.
`19 It should be "or" because that's Websense
`20 proposed construction has an "or" in the
`21 construction. So that's a typo.
`22 Q Thank you, sir.
`23 Back to paragraph 38. Beginning on line
`24 nine, your opinion continues,
`25 "Other applications beside web browsers
`
`Page 15
`1 the broadest reasonable interpretation standard
`2 applied in the Patent Office, correct?
`3 A That is my understanding but I can't claim
`4 expertise in that area, so.
`5 Q But surely your counsel has explained to
`6 you that that is the law.
`7 A I have heard that multiple times.
`8 MR. HANNAH: Objection to form.
`9 BY MR. ARMON:
`10 Q On page 15 of Exhibit 2, your declaration
`11 in the Websense case, bottom of page 15, you render
`12 the opinion that beginning at the very last sentence
`13 of page 15,
`14 "'Content' is a generic term used to
`15 indicate material being accessed or used
`16 and does not require any construction, so
`17 even a layperson would understand the
`18 meaning of 'content' when read with the
`19 claims," correct?
`20 A That's what it says.
`21 Q That's with respect to the '154 patent,
`22 correct?
`23 A That is correct.
`24 Q And at paragraph 38 on page 16 of
`25 Exhibit 2, your third sentence reads,
`
`Page 17
`1 could download content that could be acted
`2 on and the patent specifically uses a
`3 broad term."
`4 Did I read that correctly?
`5 A Yes, that is correct.
`6 Q This entire paragraph 38 concerns the '154
`7 patent, correct?
`8 A That is correct.
`9 Q And it concerns the term "content,"
`10 correct?
`11 A That is correct, as well.
`12 Q Beginning on line ten, next sentence,
`13 "For example, JavaScript and VBScript were
`14 both provided as examples in the '154
`15 patent and do not need to be executed in a
`16 web browser; other examples of content
`17 that can be processed neither in a Web
`18 browser nor in a Java virtual machine
`19 include C and C++ files, as well as many
`20 others."
`21 Did I read that correctly?
`22 A That is correct.
`23 Q That was the opinion that you expressed in
`24 this declaration, correct?
`25 A I did.
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`5 (Pages 14 - 17)
`
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. - Exhibit 1038
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
`v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-01979
`
`

`
`Page 18
`1 Q And finally beginning on line 13 and a
`2 half or 14,
`3 "The '154 patent describes that any
`4 application that runs the content may be
`5 used, with a Web browser and Java virtual
`6 machine providing only these two
`7 examples."
`8 Did I read that correctly?
`9 A Yes.
`10 Q The opinions you express here in paragraph
`11 38 are inconsistent with the positions you have
`12 expressed in the declaration you offered in this
`13 case, correct?
`14 MR. HANNAH: Objection; form.
`15 THE WITNESS: I do not think that the
`16 opinion is inconsistent. It's not identical but
`17 it's not inconsistent.
`18 MR. ARMON: Mark this as Exhibit 3,
`19 please.
`20 (Petitioner's Exhibit 3 was marked for
`21 identification by the court reporter and
`22 is attached hereto.)
`23 BY MR. ARMON:
`24 Q Dr. Medvidovic, Exhibit 3 is a declaration
`25 that you submitted in support of Finjan's claim
`
`Page 20
`
`1 BY MR. ARMON:
`2 Q Sir, did you renders an opinion on the
`3 meaning of the claim term "content processor" with
`4 respect to the '154 patent in this declaration?
`5 A I did.
`6 Q You did or you did not?
`7 A I did, '154 and '289, to be more specific.
`8 Q And paragraph 36, line 15, you render the
`9 opinion that,
`10 "'Content' is a term used to indicate
`11 digital data and does not require any
`12 construction, as this meaning is clear to
`13 even a layperson when read in the context
`14 of the claims," correct?
`15 A Yes.
`16 Q And then paragraph 37, you render the
`17 opinion,
`18 "In my opinion, there is nothing in
`19 this specification or file history that
`20 would limit the term 'content processor'
`21 to software that renders the content for
`22 interactive viewing on a display monitor,"
`23 correct?
`24 A That is the first sentence of paragraph
`25 37.
`
`Page 19
`
`1 construction brief in the Finjan, Inc., versus
`2 Symantec Corp case, correct?
`3 A That is correct.
`4 Q The last page of Exhibit 3, your signature
`5 again appears, correct?
`6 A Yes.
`7 Q If you turn to page 2 of the document,
`8 please, you will see under material reviewed
`9 paragraph eight of this declaration also concerns
`10 the '154 patent, among others, correct?
`11 A Correct.
`12 Q Turning to paragraph 36 on page 14, you
`13 again render an opinion on the meaning of the term
`14 "content" and this time content processor and the
`15 '154 patent, correct?
`16 MR. HANNAH: Objection; form. Also object
`17 outside the scope to the extent that this document
`18 is talking about the term "content processor," not
`19 "content."
`20 So do I have an agreement, Counselor I
`21 have a standing objection on Exhibit 3? Is that
`22 okay?
`23 MR. ARMON: That is fine.
`24 THE WITNESS: So.
`25
`
`Page 21
`1 Q And continuing on page 15, continuation of
`2 paragraph 37, you explain that that proposed
`3 construction was incorrect because -- beginning at
`4 line one --
`5 ". . . as evident from the specification
`6 and the claims, themselves, the content
`7 processor processes scripts and other code
`8 that would not be rendered on the display
`9 monitor, but may store or retrieve data or
`10 perform some other backend or background
`11 operation," correct?
`12 A That is correct.
`13 Q Mark this as Exhibit 4, please.
`14 (Petitioner's Exhibit 4 was marked for
`15 identification by the court reporter and
`16 is attached hereto.)
`17 BY MR. ARMON:
`18 Q Exhibit 4, sir, is a declaration you
`19 authored in support of Finjan's claim construction
`20 brief in Finjan versus Proofpoint and Armorize
`21 Technologies limitation, correct?
`22 A That is correct.
`23 Q And again, last page of the document bears
`24 your signature, correct?
`25 A Correct.
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`6 (Pages 18 - 21)
`
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. - Exhibit 1038
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
`v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-01979
`
`

`
`Page 22
`
`Page 24
`
`1 Q You signed on May 1 of 2015?
`2 A That is correct.
`3 Q And I will ask you to turn to paragraph
`4 eight, please.
`5 This declaration also concerns the '154
`6 patent among others, correct?
`7 A Correct.
`8 Q And turning to paragraph 45, beginning on
`9 line 24, you render the opinion that,
`10 "Further, there is nothing in the
`11 specification or file history that would
`12 limit the term 'content processor' to a
`13 web browser," correct?
`14 MR. HANNAH: Objection; form. Outside the
`15 scope.
`16 Again, Counsel, I would like to have the
`17 same standing objection as to Exhibit 4 so I don't
`18 have to make the same objection.
`19 MR. ARMON: That's fine. You may have
`20 that standing objection.
`21 BY MR. ARMON:
`22 Q That is your opinion, correct?
`23 A That is what that sentence says, right.
`24 Q And that was with respect to the '154
`25 patent, correct?
`
`1 Q Mark this as Exhibit 5, please.
`2 (Petitioner's Exhibit 5 was marked for
`3 identification by the court reporter and
`4 is attached hereto.)
`5 THE WITNESS: So the defendant's
`6 construction was a means plus function construction
`7 that has quite a bit of text in it. It wasn't only
`8 on content processor.
`9 BY MR. ARMON:
`10 Q Sir, Exhibit 5 is patent publication
`11 number U.S. 2005/0108562, from Khazan.
`12 Do you recognize this?
`13 A I do.
`14 Q It's the lead reference in this IPR,
`15 correct?
`16 A Correct.
`17 Q You mentioned in your declaration, sir,
`18 that -- well, I will get to that in a moment.
`19 You agree, sir, that scripted languages
`20 are examples of higher level non-compiled languages,
`21 correct?
`22 MR. HANNAH: Objection; form.
`23 THE WITNESS: Some scripted languages are
`24 high level interpreted. That is non-compiled
`25 languages, yes.
`
`Page 23
`1 A That is with respect to the term "content
`2 processor" in the context of '154, yes.
`3 Q And turning to the next page, paragraph
`4 46, beginning on line two, you say,
`5 "In my opinion, there is no clear
`6 disavowal of content processor in the
`7 specification or prosecution history.
`8 Indeed, the specification shows a content
`9 processor on a client computer and merely
`10 states that 'it may' -- underlined -- "be
`11 a web browser running on client computer
`12 210.'"
`13 That was your opinion, correct?
`14 A Correct.
`15 Q And then beginning on line six and a half
`16 your opinion continuing,
`17 "Defendants' structure for the content
`18 processor improperly limits the structure
`19 to a web browser based on a single
`20 embodiment."
`21 That was also your opinion, correct?
`22 A That is my opinion.
`23 Give me a second, if you don't mind, to
`24 look at the defendant's proposed construction in
`25 that case.
`
`Page 25
`
`1 BY MR. ARMON:
`2 Q Would you characterize -- what types of --
`3 what examples would you give of scripted languages
`4 that are higher level non-compiled languages?
`5 A JavaScript is a common example that I
`6 think I use in my declaration of an interpreted
`7 scripted language.
`8 Q Any others you can think of?
`9 A Sure. Python, depending on how you count
`10 some of the like Ruby languages like Ruby, DB
`11 Script. There are a range of them.
`12 Q Turning to page 1 of Exhibit 5, first of
`13 all, you have read the entirety of the Khazan
`14 disclosure before today, correct?
`15 A Yes.
`16 Q Multiple times?
`17 A Probably before I wrote my declaration and
`18 certainly since.
`19 Q You would agree, sir, that Khazan teaches
`20 a number of techniques for detecting malicious --
`21 executable malicious code at run time, correct?
`22 MR. HANNAH: Objection; form.
`23 THE WITNESS: I would actually have to
`24 somewhat disagree with that characterization.
`25
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`7 (Pages 22 - 25)
`
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. - Exhibit 1038
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
`v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-01979
`
`

`
`Page 26
`
`1 BY MR. ARMON:
`2 Q Let's look at the figures. Turn to
`3 Figure 7, for example, on page 9.
`4 Are you familiar with this figure?
`5 A Yes.
`6 Q You would agree, sir, that this Figure 7
`7 describes one, perhaps, the preferred embodiment, of
`8 one of several embodiments that was discussed in
`9 Khazan for detecting executable malicious code using
`10 static and dynamic analysis, correct?
`11 MR. HANNAH: Objection to form.
`12 THE WITNESS: This is a part of Khazan's
`13 overall technique. There is kind of a half of this
`14 picture that is or of this technique that is not
`15 shown here.
`16 BY MR. ARMON:
`17 Q And this is one of a number of embodiments
`18 that are disclosed in Khazan, correct?
`19 MR. HANNAH: Objection to form.
`20 THE WITNESS: For the dynamic analysis
`21 part, this is one variation of what boils down to
`22 essentially the same embodiment, in my view.
`23 BY MR. ARMON:
`24 Q So in your opinion, sir, Khazan only
`25 describes one embodiment; is that correct?
`
`Page 28
`1 to the predetermined functions or routines as being
`2 monitored as part of dynamic analysis, correct?
`3 A Unless you can point me to a specific part
`4 in the specification that describes another control
`5 flow, I do not recall that I saw anything that was
`6 materially different from Figure 7.
`7 Q So your opinion, sir, is that Figure 7 is
`8 not an example; it's the example; is that correct?
`9 A Again, they raise a number of things in
`10 the specification that in my opinion are either
`11 directly or easily captured by Figure 7. So that's
`12 why I was asking if there is a specific different
`13 embodiment that you believe is described elsewhere,
`14 I would be happy to look at it.
`15 Q Turning to paragraph 29, please, beginning
`16 eight lines down, sir, description of.
`17 "The communication media 18 May be any one
`18 of a variety of networks or other type
`19 communication connections as known to
`20 those skilled in the art."
`21 And then two sentences after that, it
`22 references the Internet.
`23 Do you see that?
`24 Q For example, the communication media 18
`25 may be the Internet.
`
`Page 27
`
`Page 29
`
`1 A It discusses several slight variations but
`2 materially in my opinion it teaches one technique
`3 and this is one portion of that technique. There is
`4 a static analysis part that is not captured in this
`5 picture.
`6 Q With respect to the dynamic analysis
`7 portion of this disclosure, your position is that
`8 Khazan only teaches one embodiment; is that correct?
`9 MR. HANNAH: Objection; form.
`10 THE WITNESS: It teaches several
`11 variations on this embodiment but they all fall
`12 within this general technique, in my opinion.
`13 BY MR. ARMON:
`14 Q Turn to page 16, please, paragraph 17,
`15 specifically.
`16 As a person of at least ordinary skill in
`17 the art reading Khazan, sir, you would agree as
`18 stated in paragraph 17, each of the embodiments
`19 described in the Figures 1 through 12 is an
`20 examplary embodiment, correct?
`21 A I would have to disagree with that.
`22 Q And paragraph 25, you would agree, sir, as
`23 stated there, that Figure 7 is just an example, not
`24 the only disclosure, of a logical flow of control
`25 with functions that are run time to intercept calls
`
`1 A I see. Thank you.
`2 Q You would agree, sir, that the disclosures
`3 of Khazan of the host storage device encompass a
`4 network that includes the Internet, correct?
`5 MR. HANNAH: Objection to form.
`6 THE WITNESS: I disagree with that.
`7 BY MR. ARMON:
`8 Q Turning to page 18, please,
`9 paragraph 39 -- paragraph 9 -- or 39, sorry --
`10 Exhibit 5 states,
`11 "In one embodiment, an operating
`12 system, such as the Windows operating
`13 system by Microsoft Corporation, may
`14 reside and be executed on one or more of
`15 the host computer systems included in the
`16 computer system 10 of Figure 1."
`17 You would agree, sir, that Khazan's
`18 teachings are not limited to the Windows operating
`19 system, correct?
`20 MR. HANNAH: Objection to form.
`21 THE WITNESS: Everything that Khazan talks
`22 about is -- all of the embodiments that they
`23 describe are drawn from Windows. So I would have to
`24 disagree with that.
`25
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`8 (Pages 26 - 29)
`
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc. - Exhibit 1038
`Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
`v. Finjan, Inc., IPR2015-01979
`
`

`
`Page 30
`
`Page 32
`
`1 BY MR. ARMON:
`2 Q You would agree, sir, there is a number of
`3 different types of calls that can be made using
`4 software, correct?
`5 A Can you be more specific.
`6 Q Well, there are multiple types of calls,
`7 not just one type of call, correct?
`8 MR. HANNAH: Object to form.
`9 THE WITNESS: Again, I am not sure I
`10 understand that question.
`11 BY MR. ARMON:
`12 Q Turn to paragraph 46 on page 18 of
`13 Exhibit 5, disclosure, states,
`14 "The particular type of target calls
`15 and their form may vary in accordance with
`16 each embodiment."
`17 You would agree that that statement is
`18 technically accurate?
`19 A I guess that statement is technically
`20 accurate with respect to what is stated below in
`21 that paragraph, but I think -- and I state that in
`22 my declaration -- that, for example, equating a jump
`23 instruction and a call is incorrect and that's
`24 exactly what they state in that paragraph.
`25 So they equate a jump instruction and a
`
`Page 31
`1 call. And based on that, they say that the type of
`2 target calls may vary, but if you do not agree that
`3 a jump instruction and a call are equivalent, then
`4 that statement is incorrect.
`5 So if we take that their belief for what
`6 they say below this sentence in this paragraph is in
`7 their opinion correct, then that is a sentence that
`8 is consistent with what they describe here, but I
`9 believe that sentence to be incorrect because the
`10 very example they give is wrong, in my opinion.
`11 Q And, sir, when you used the word "they,"
`12 you were referring to Khazan, correct?
`13 A Sorry. Khazan and the other coinventors,
`14 yes.
`15 Q Tu