Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page1 of 36
`
`
`
`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
`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
`
`OAKLAND DIVISION
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
`INFRINGEMENT
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`FINJAN, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`BLUE COAT SYSTEMS, INC., a Delaware
`Corporation,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`____________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`Blue Coat Systems - Exhibit 1096
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page2 of 36
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`Plaintiff Finjan, Inc. (“Finjan”) files this Complaint for Patent Infringement and Jury Demand
`
`against Defendant Blue Coat Systems, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Blue Coat”) and alleges as follows:
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Finjan is a Delaware corporation, with its corporate headquarters at 1313 N. Market
`
`Street, Suite 5100, Wilmington, Delaware 19801. Finjan’s U.S. operating business was previously
`
`headquartered at 2025 Gateway Place, San Jose, California 95110.
`
`2.
`
`Blue Coat is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 420 North
`
`Mary Avenue, Sunnyvale, California 94085.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`This action arises under the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. This Court has
`
`original jurisdiction over this controversy pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c) and/or 1400(b).
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant. Upon information and belief,
`
`Defendant does business in this District and has, and continues to, infringe and/or induce the
`
`infringement in this District. Defendant also markets its products primarily in and from this District.
`
`In addition, the Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it has established minimum
`
`contacts with the forum and the exercise of jurisdiction would not offend traditional notions of fair
`
`play and substantial justice.
`
`INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT
`
`6.
`
`Pursuant to Local Rule 3-2(c), Intellectual Property Actions are assigned on a district-
`
`wide basis.
`
`
`
`1
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page3 of 36
`
`
`
`FINJAN’S INNOVATIONS
`
`7.
`
`Finjan was founded in 1997 as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Finjan Software Ltd., an
`
`Israeli corporation. Finjan was a pioneer in the developing proactive security technologies capable of
`
`detecting previously unknown and emerging online security threats recognized today under the
`
`umbrella of “malware.” These technologies protect networks and endpoints by identifying suspicious
`
`patterns and behaviors of content delivered over the Internet. Finjan has been awarded, and continues
`
`to prosecute, numerous patents in the United States and around the world resulting directly from
`
`Finjan’s more than decade-long research and development efforts, supported by a dozen inventors.
`
`8.
`
`Finjan built and sold software, including APIs, and appliances for network security
`
`using these patented technologies. These products and customers continue to be supported by
`
`Finjan’s licensing partners. At its height, Finjan employed nearly 150 employees around the world
`
`building and selling security products and operating the Malicious Code Research Center through
`
`which it frequently published research regarding network security and current threats on the Internet.
`
`Finjan’s pioneering approach to online security drew equity investments from two major software and
`
`technology companies, the first in 2005, followed by the second in 2006. Through 2009, Finjan has
`
`generated millions of dollars in product sales and related services and support revenues
`
`9.
`
`Finjan’s founder and original investors are still involved with and invested in the
`
`company today, as are a number of other key executives and advisors. Currently, Finjan is a
`
`technology company applying its research, development, knowledge and experience with security
`
`technologies to working with inventors, investing in and/or acquiring other technology companies,
`
`investing in a variety of research organizations, and evaluating strategic partnerships with large
`
`companies.
`
`2
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page4 of 36
`
`
`
`10.
`
`On October 12, 2004, U.S. Patent No. 6,804,780 (“the ‘780 Patent”), entitled
`
`SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROTECTING A COMPUTER AND A NETWORK FROM
`
`HOSTILE DOWNLOADABLES, was issued to Shlomo Touboul. A true and correct copy of the
`
`‘780 Patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit A and is incorporated by reference herein.
`
`11.
`
`All rights, title, and interest in the ‘780 Patent have been assigned to Finjan, who is the
`
`sole owner of the ‘780 Patent. Finjan has been the sole owner of the ‘780 Patent since its issuance.
`
`12.
`
`The ‘780 Patent is generally directed towards methods and systems for generating a
`
`Downloadable ID. By generating an identification for each examined Downloadable, the system
`
`allows the Downloadable to be recognized without reevaluation. Such recognition increases
`
`efficiency while also saving valuable resources, such as memory and computing power.
`
`13.
`
`On June 6, 2006, U.S. Patent No. 7,058,822 (“the ‘822 Patent”), entitled MALICIOUS
`
`MOBILE CODE RUNTIME MONITORING SYSTEM AND METHODS, was issued to Yigal
`
`Mordechai Edery, Nimrod Itzhak Vered, David R. Kroll and Shlomo Touboul. A true and correct
`
`copy of the ‘822 Patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit B and is incorporated by reference
`
`herein.
`
`14.
`
`All rights, title, and interest in the ‘822 Patent have been assigned to Finjan, who is the
`
`sole owner of the ‘822 Patent. Finjan has been the sole owner of the ‘822 Patent since its issuance.
`
`15.
`
`The ‘822 Patent is generally directed towards computer networks and more
`
`particularly provides a system that protects devices connected to the Internet from undesirable
`
`operations from web-based content. One of the ways this is accomplished is by determining whether
`
`any part of such web-based content can be executed and then trapping such content and neutralizing
`
`possible harmful effects using mobile protection code. Additionally, the system provides a way to
`
`analyze such web-content to determine whether it can be executed.
`
`3
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page5 of 36
`
`
`
`16.
`
`On January 12, 2010, U.S. Patent No. 7,647,633 (“the ‘633 Patent”), entitled
`
`MALICIOUS MOBILE CODE RUNTIME MONITORING SYSTEM AND METHODS, was issued
`
`to Yigal Mordechai Edery, Nimrod Itzhak Vered, David R. Kroll and Shlomo Touboul. A true and
`
`correct copy of the ‘633 Patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit C and is incorporated by
`
`reference herein.
`
`17.
`
`All rights, title, and interest in the ‘633 Patent have been assigned to Finjan, who is the
`
`sole owner of the ‘633 Patent. Finjan has been the sole owner of the ‘633 Patent since its issuance.
`
`18.
`
`The ‘633 Patent is generally directed towards computer networks, and more
`
`particularly, provides a system that protects devices connected to the Internet from undesirable
`
`operations from web-based content. One of the ways this is accomplished is by determining whether
`
`any part of such web-based content can be executed and then trapping such content and neutralizing
`
`possible harmful effects using mobile protection code.
`
`19.
`
`On November 28, 2000, U.S. Patent No. 6,154,844 (“the ‘844 Patent”), entitled
`
`SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ATTACHING A DOWNLOADABLE SECURITY PROFILE TO
`
`A DOWNLOADABLE, was issued to Shlomo Touboul and Nachshon Gal. A true and correct copy
`
`of the ‘844 Patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit D and is incorporated by reference herein.
`
`20.
`
`All rights, title, and interest in the ‘844 Patent have been assigned to Finjan, who is the
`
`sole owner of the ‘844 Patent. Finjan has been the sole owner of the ‘844 Patent since its issuance.
`
`21.
`
`The ‘844 Patent is generally directed towards computer networks, and more
`
`particularly, provides a system that protects devices connected to the Internet from undesirable
`
`operations from web-based content. One of the ways this is accomplished is by linking a security
`
`profile to such web-based content to facilitate the protection of computers and networks from
`
`malicious web-based content.
`
`4
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page6 of 36
`
`
`
`22.
`
`On November 15, 2005, U.S. Patent No. 6,965,968 (“the ‘968 Patent”), entitled
`
`POLICY-BASED CACHING, was issued to Shlomo Touboul. A true and correct copy of the ‘968
`
`Patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit E and is incorporated by reference herein.
`
`23.
`
`All rights, title, and interest in the ‘968 Patent have been assigned to Finjan, who is the
`
`sole owner of the ‘968 Patent. Finjan has been the sole owner of the ‘968 Patent since its issuance.
`
`24.
`
`The ‘968 Patent is generally directed towards methods and systems for enabling
`
`policy-based cache management to determine if digital content is allowable relative to a policy. One
`
`of the ways this is accomplished is scanning digital content to derive a content profile and
`
`determining whether the digital content is allowable for a policy based on the content profile.
`
`25.
`
`On August 26, 2008, U.S. Patent No. 7,418,731 (“the ‘731 Patent”), entitled
`
`METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CACHING AT SECURE GATEWAYS, was issued to Shlomo
`
`Touboul. A trued and correct copy of the ‘731 Patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit F and is
`
`incorporated by reference herein.
`
`26.
`
`All rights, title, and interest in the ‘731 Patent have been assigned to Finjan, who is the
`
`sole owner of the ‘731 Patent. Finjan has been the sole owner of the ‘731 Patent since its issuance.
`
`27.
`
`The ‘731 Patent is generally directed towards methods and systems for enabling
`
`policy-based cache management to determine if digital content is allowable relative to a policy. One
`
`of the ways this is accomplished is scanning digital content to derive a content profile, including at
`
`least one computer command the content would perform, and determining whether the digital content
`
`is allowable for a policy based on the content profile.
`
`5
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page7 of 36
`
`
`
`BBLUE COAAT
`
`
`
`
`
`Blue CCoat makes, uses, sells, offers for saale, and/or immports into t
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`he United Sttates and
`
`
`
`
`
`28.
`
`
`
`the oftware and tances and SoyAV Appliaftware, Proxynces and SofySG Applianthis Distrrict its Proxy
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`WebPulsse Cloud Serrvice, shownn below:
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`
`
`http://wwww.bluecoat..com/documments/downlooad/d84549cc4-05f3-4c644-920c-f48cddccad4ae/4ee23e1a8-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`b292-4afff-9271-e24331918dc0f att 2 (attachedd as Exhibit GG).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The BBlue Coat ProoxySG Applliances and SSoftware aree a family off proxy appliiances
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`29.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`and softwware placed aat the Internnet gateway tto provide seecurity with
`
`
`
`
`
`respect to WWeb-based
`
`
`
`communications andd support security, acceleeration and ppolicy controol features off the appliannce. See
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`http://wwww.sec.gov/AArchives/edggar/data/10995600/00011193125111611263/d10k.hhtm at 8 (attaached as
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit HH). The ProxxySG Appliaances and Sooftware incluude the ProxxySG 300, PProxySG 6000,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ProxySGG 900, PrxySSG 9000, ProoxySG softwware and Secuure Web Gaateway Virtuual Appliancee. See
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`_________ _________________________________________________________________________________
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAAINT FOR PPATENT INNFRINGEMMENT
`
`
`
`
`CCASE NO.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page8 of 36
`
`
`
`http://www.bluecoat.com/products/proxysg (attached as Exhibit I); see also
`
`bcs_ds_SWG_VA_EN_v2a.pdf, at 1 (attached as Exhibit J).
`
`30.
`
`The Blue Coat ProxySG Appliances and Software enforce network policy utilizing the
`
`Blue Coat Content Policy Language (“CPL”) that evaluates every Web request. The Blue Coat
`
`ProxySG implements policy layers by selecting and customizing policy. In this way, CPL is used to
`
`scan HTML and ASX files for active content and remove it or replace it with a customized message
`
`indicating a policy violation. See Content_Policy_Language_Reference_Guide.c.pdf at 17-18, 476
`
`(attached as Exhibit K). CPL is also used to detect and remove executables with hidden file types.
`
`See Preventing_Malware_with_Blue_Coat_Proxies 2.pdf at 3-4 (attached as Exhibit L).
`
`31.
`
`The Blue Coat ProxySG Appliances and Software replace active content such as Script
`
`Tags, JavaScript Entities, JavaScript Strings, JavaScript Events, Embed Tags and Object Tags. See
`
`SGOS_6.3.x_Visual_Policy_Manager_Reference.d.pdf at Ch. 4, 201-03 (attached as Exhibit M).
`
`32.
`
`CPL includes the “define active_content” rule for removing or replacing active content
`
`in HTML or ASX documents. This definition is invoked by a transform action in a define action
`
`definition block, and that block in turn enables an action as a result of policy evaluation. See
`
`Content_Policy_Language_Reference_Guide.c.pdf at 476 (attached as Exhibit N).
`
`33.
`
`The Blue Coat ProxySG Appliances and Software are able to cache an object each
`
`time a request is received and check its object store for a cached copy.
`
`Preventing_Malware_with_Blue_Coat_Proxies.pdf at 7 (attached as Exhibit K).
`
`34.
`
`The Blue Coat ProxyAV Appliances and Software are designed for use with ProxySG
`
`Appliances and Software and provide inline threat protection and malware scanning of Web content
`
`at the Internet gateway. The ProxyAV Appliances and Software work in conjunction with BlueCoat
`
`WebPulse and WebFilter to prevent entry of viruses, Trojans, worms and other forms of malicious
`
`7
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page9 of 36
`
`
`
`content into the end user’s network. See
`
`http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1095600/000119312511161263/d10k.htm at 9 (attached as
`
`Exhibit H). The ProxyAV Appliances and Software include the ProxyAV 510, ProxyAV 1200,
`
`ProxyAV 1400, ProxyAV 2400 and ProxyAV software. See
`
`http://www.bluecoat.com/products/proxyav (attached as Exhibit O).
`
`35.
`
`The Blue Coat ProxyAV Appliances and Software scan objects such as webpages and
`
`create a secure hash fingerprint of the file’s content and compare its contents to a database of hashes
`
`from previously scanned objects. See
`
`Integrating_the_ProxySG_and_ProxyAV_Appliances_(SGOS_5.4).e.pdf at 14 (attached as Exhibit
`
`P).
`
`36.
`
`The Blue Coat WebPulse service is a cloud-based infrastructure utilizing multiple
`
`technologies to analyze URL requests and can be used with the ProxySG Appliances and Software,
`
`ProxyAV Appliances and Software, Blue Coat WebThreat Blade, Blue Coat WebFilter and Blue Coat
`
`Web Security Service. WebPulse includes Dynamic Real-Time Rating (“DRTR”) to analyze
`
`unknown content in real-time. DRTR looks for characteristics of the content that may indicate
`
`danger. Access to suspicious content triggers a response from the real-time malware detection
`
`modules indicating a category for the content to be blocked immediately. See
`
`Bcs_WebPulse_Tech_Overview_wp_v1b.pdf at 7-8 (attached as Exhibit Q); see also
`
`bcs_ds_Web_Security_Service_EN_v5a.pdf at 1 (attached as Exhibit R).
`
`BLUE COAT’S INFRIGEMENT OF FINJAN’S PATENTS
`
`37.
`
`Defendant has been and is now infringing the ‘780 Patent, the ‘822 Patent, the ‘633
`
`Patent, the ‘844 Patent, the ‘968 Patent and the ‘731 Patent (collectively “the Patents-In-Suit”) in this
`
`judicial District, and elsewhere in the United States by, among other things, making, using,
`
`8
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page10 of 36
`
`
`
`importing, selling, and/or offering for sale the claimed system and methods on the Blue Coat
`
`ProxySG Appliances and Software, ProxyAV Appliances and Software and WebPulse.
`
`38.
`
`In addition to directly infringing the Patents-In-Suit pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a)
`
`either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, Defendant indirectly infringes the Patents-In-Suit
`
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by instructing, directing and/or requiring others, including its users
`
`and developers, to perform all or some of the steps of the method claims, either literally or under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents, of the Patents-In-Suit.
`
`39.
`
`In addition to directly infringing the ‘822 Patent and ‘633 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 271(a) either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, Defendant indirectly infringes the ‘822
`
`Patent and the ‘633 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by selling a material component of a
`
`patented machine or apparatus for use in practicing the claims of the ‘822 Patent and ‘633 Patent,
`
`either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by its customers, users and developers, and
`
`especially adapted for use in an infringement of the ‘822 Patent and ‘633 Patent.
`
`COUNT I
`(Direct Infringement of the ‘780 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a))
`
`40.
`
`Finjan repeats, realleges, and incorporates by reference, as if fully set forth herein, the
`
`allegations of the preceding paragraphs, as set forth above.
`
`41.
`
`Defendant has infringed and continues to infringe one or more claims of the ‘780
`
`Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`42.
`
`Defendant’s infringement is based upon literal infringement or, in the alternative,
`
`infringement under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`43.
`
`Defendant’s acts of making, using, importing, selling, and/or offering for sale infringing
`
`products and services have been without the permission, consent, authorization or license of Finjan.
`
`9
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page11 of 36
`
`
`
`44.
`
`Defendant’s infringement includes, but is not limited to, the manufacture, use, sale,
`
`importation and/or offer for sale of Defendant’s products and services, including, but not limited to,
`
`the ProxyAV Appliances and Software, which embody the patented invention of the ‘780 Patent.
`
`45.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s unlawful activities, Finjan has suffered and will continue to
`
`suffer irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law. Accordingly, Finjan is entitled
`
`to preliminary and/or permanent injunctive relief.
`
`46.
`
`Defendant’s infringement of the ‘780 Patent has injured and continues to injure Finjan
`
`in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`COUNT II
`(Indirect Infringement of the ‘780 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(b))
`
`47.
`
`Finjan repeats, realleges, and incorporates by reference, as if fully set forth herein, the
`
`allegations of the preceding paragraphs, as set forth above.
`
`48.
`
`Defendant has induced and continues to induce infringement of at least claims 1-8 and
`
`16 of the ‘780 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`
`49.
`
`In addition to directly infringing the ‘780 Patent, Defendant indirectly infringes the
`
`‘780 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by instructing, directing and/or requiring others,
`
`including, but not limited to, its customers, users and developers, to perform all or some of the steps
`
`of the method claims, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, of the ‘780 Patent, where
`
`all the steps of the method claims are performed by either Blue Coat or its customers, users or
`
`developers, or some combination thereof. Defendant knew or was willfully blind to the fact that it
`
`was inducing others, including customers, users and developers, to infringe by practicing, either
`
`themselves or in conjunction with Defendant, one or more method claims of the ‘780 Patent.
`
`50.
`
`Defendant knowingly and actively aided and abetted the direct infringement of the
`
`‘780 Patent by instructing and encouraging its customers, users and developers to use the Blue Coat
`
`10
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page12 of 36
`
`
`
`ProxyAV Appliances and Software. Such instructions and encouragement include, but are not
`
`limited to, advising third parties to use the Blue Coat ProxyAV Appliances and Software in an
`
`infringing manner, providing a mechanism through which third parties may infringe the ‘780 Patent,
`
`specifically through the use of the Blue Coat ProxyAV Appliances and Software, advertising and
`
`promoting the use of the Blue Coat ProxyAV Appliances and Software in an infringing manner, and
`
`distributing guidelines and instructions to third parties on how to use the Blue Coat ProxyAV
`
`Appliances and Software in an infringing manner.
`
`51.
`
`Blue Coat regularly updates and maintains the Blue Coat website
`
`(http://www.bluecoat.com) and the BlueTouch Online website (https://bto.bluecoat.com and
`
`https://kb.bluecoat.com) to provide demonstration, instruction, and technical assistance to users to
`
`help them use the Blue Coat ProxyAV Appliances and Software, including:
`
` Blue Coat® Systems ProxyAV® Appliance: Configuration and Management Guide (see e.g.,
`http://bto.bluecoat.com/doc/19366, attached as Exhibit S, directs users in the use and
`management of the Blue Coat ProxyAV Appliances and states that “it is vital to dedicate more
`attention to securing Web traffic.”);
`
` Blue Coat ProxyAV 1200/1400/2400 Datasheet (see e.g.,
`bcs_ds_proxyav_1200_1400_2400_EN-v7a.pdf, attached as Exhibit T, states that “ProxyAV
`appliances also provide in-line threat protection and malware scanning of web content at the
`gateway.”);
`
` Security Empowers Business (see e.g., bcs_wp_Security_Empowers_Business_EN_2.3.pdf,
`attached as Exhibit U, states that “Implemented and used properly, security is about
`empowerment. It’s about boosting efficiency, driving productivity, accelerating innovation,
`increasing collaboration, optimizing user experiences, and expanding the awesome power of
`technology”);
`
` Unified Web Security Solutions (see e.g., bcs_wp_Unified_Security_EN_v2b.pdf, attached as
`Exhibit V, states that “IT and security professionals must be able to manage and enforce
`consistent policies throughout the entire work force”).
`
`52.
`
`Blue Coat instructs users, including employees, to use and test the ProxyAV
`
`Appliances and Software. For example, Blue Coat has the BlueTouch Training Services that provide
`
`a technical expert to assist users in installing, configuring, and troubleshooting Blue Coat products.
`
`11
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page13 of 36
`
`
`
`Blue Coat has training centers with courses and certification related to the Blue Coat products. See
`
`http://www.bluecoat.com/support/training/bluetouch-training-services (attached as Exhibit W).
`
`53.
`
`Blue Coat provides value added resellers, system integrators and distributors with the
`
`Blue Coat Channel Advantage Program to encourage and expand use of the Blue Coat ProxyAV
`
`Appliances and Software. The Blue Coat Channel Advantage Program offers “compelling top- and
`
`bottom-line growth opportunities to Blue Coat partners.” The Blue Coat Channel Advantage
`
`Program also offers several partner level tiers to further encourage and expand the use of the Blue
`
`Coat ProxyAV Appliances and Software. See http://www.bluecoat.com/partners/channel-advantage-
`
`program (attached as Exhibit X).
`
`54.
`
`Blue Coat regularly updates and maintains the Blue Coat website and BlueTouch
`
`Online to provide demonstration, instruction, and technical assistance to users to help them use the
`
`Blue Coat ProxyAV Appliances and Software. (http://bluecoat.com/support/technical-support,
`
`https://bto.bluecoat.com/ and https://kb.bluecoat.com).
`
`55.
`
`Defendant has had knowledge of the ’780 Patent at least as of the time it learned of
`
`this action for infringement and, by continuing the actions described above, has had the specific intent
`
`to or was willfully blind to the fact that its actions would induce infringement of the ‘780 Patent.
`
`56.
`
`Blue Coat actively and intentionally maintains its website to promote the Blue Coat
`
`ProxyAV Appliances and Software and to encourage potential customers, users and developers to use
`
`the Blue Coat ProxyAV Appliances and Software in the manner described by Finjan.
`
`(http://bluecoat.com/support/technical-support, https://bto.bluecoat.com/ and
`
`https://kb.bluecoat.com).
`
`57.
`
`Blue Coat actively updates its websites, including Blue Coat’s BlueTouch Online
`
`information center, to promote the Blue Coat ProxyAV Appliances and Software, including the
`
`12
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page14 of 36
`
`
`
`Content Policy Language, to encourage customers, users and developers to practice the methods
`
`taught in the ‘780 Patent. (http://bluecoat.com/support/technical-support, https://bto.bluecoat.com
`
`and https://kb.bluecoat.com).
`
`COUNT III
`(Direct Infringement of the ‘822 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a))
`
`58.
`
`Finjan repeats, realleges, and incorporates by reference, as if fully set forth herein, the
`
`allegations of the preceding paragraphs, as set forth above.
`
`59.
`
`Defendant has infringed and continues to infringe one or more claims of the ‘822
`
`Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`60.
`
`Defendant’s infringement is based upon literal infringement or, in the alternative,
`
`infringement under the doctrine of equivalents.
`
`61.
`
`Defendant’s acts of making, using, importing, selling, and/or offering for sale infringing
`
`products and services have been without the permission, consent, authorization or license of Finjan.
`
`62.
`
`Defendant’s infringement includes, but is not limited to, the manufacture, use, sale,
`
`importation and/or offer for sale of Defendant’s products and services, including but not limited to
`
`the ProxySG Appliances and Software, which embody the patented invention of the ‘822 Patent.
`
`63.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s unlawful activities, Finjan has suffered and will continue to
`
`suffer irreparable harm for which there is no adequate remedy at law. Accordingly, Finjan is entitled
`
`to preliminary and/or permanent injunctive relief.
`
`64.
`
`Defendant’s infringement of the ‘822 Patent has injured and continues to injure Finjan
`
`in an amount to be proven at trial.
`
`COUNT IV
`(Indirect Infringement of the ‘822 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(b)-(c))
`
`65.
`
`Finjan repeats, realleges, and incorporates by reference, as if fully set forth herein, the
`
`allegations of the preceding paragraphs, as set forth above.
`
`13
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page15 of 36
`
`
`
`66.
`
`Defendant has induced and continues to induce infringement of at least claims 1, 4, 6
`
`and 8 of the ‘822 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).
`
`67.
`
`In addition to directly infringing the ‘822 Patent, Defendant indirectly infringes the
`
`‘822 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by instructing, directing and/or requiring others, including
`
`but not limited to its customers, users and developers, to perform all or some of the steps of the
`
`method claims, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, of the ‘822 Patent, where all the
`
`steps of the method claims are performed by either Blue Coat or its customers, users or developers, or
`
`some combinations thereof. Defendant knew or was willfully blind to the fact that it was inducing
`
`others, including customers, users and developers, to infringe by practicing, either themselves or in
`
`conjunction with Defendant, one or more method claims of the ‘822 Patent.
`
`68.
`
`Defendant has contributorily infringed and continues to contributorily infringe at least
`
`claims 1, 2, 4, 9, 10, 12, 15, 28, 31, 33, 34 and 35 of the ‘822 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c).
`
`69.
`
`In addition to directly infringing the ‘822 Patent, Defendant indirectly infringes the
`
`‘822 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by selling the ProxySG Appliances and Software, a
`
`material component of a patented machine or apparatus for use in practicing the claims of the ‘822
`
`Patent by its customers, users and developers, and especially adapted for use in an infringement of the
`
`‘822 Patent. The ProxySG Appliances and Software are not a staple article or commodity of
`
`commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use. Defendant knew or was willfully blind to the
`
`fact that it contributed to the direct infringement of one or more claims of the ‘822 Patent by others,
`
`either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, including customers, users and developers.
`
`70.
`
`Defendant knowingly and actively aided and abetted the direct infringement of the
`
`‘822 Patent by instructing and encouraging its customers, users and developers to use the Blue Coat
`
`ProxySG Appliance and Software. Such instructions and encouragement include, but are not limited
`
`14
`__________________________________________________________________________________
`COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`CASE NO.
`
`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
`
`

`
`Case5:13-cv-03999-BLF Document1 Filed08/28/13 Page16 of 36
`
`
`
`to, advising third parties to use the Blue Coat ProxySG Appliances and Software in an infringing
`
`manner; providing a mechanism through which third parties may infringe the ‘822 Patent, specifically
`
`through the use of the Blue Coat ProxySG Appliances and So