Transcript of the Testimony of:
`
`WENKE LEE
`
`NETSKOPE, INC.
`
`VS.
`
`FORTINET, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`July 26, 2023
`
`Volume |
`
`
`
`
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 1 of 180
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 1 of 180
`
`
`
`WENKE LEE
`
`NETSKOPE, INC.
`
`VS.
`
`FORTINET, INC.
`
`
`
`
`
`July 26, 2023
`
`Volume |
`
`
`
`
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 1 of 180
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 1 of 180
`
`
`
`· · · AT UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`· · · · · · · · · ·___________________
`
`· · · · BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`· · · · · · · · · ·___________________
`
`· · · · · · · · · · ·NETSKOPE, INC.,
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner,
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·v.
`· · · · · · · · · · ·FORTINET, INC.,
`· · · · · · · · · · · Patent Owner.
`· · · · · · · · · ____________________
`
`· · · · · · · ·PTAB Case No. IPR2023-00030
`
`· · · · · · · · Patent No. 10,826,941 B2
`
`· · · · · · · · · ____________________
`
`· · · · · · · · · REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · DEPOSITION OF
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · · WENKE LEE
`
`· · · · · · · · Wednesday, July 26, 2023
`
`· · · · · · · ·Via Zoom Video Conferencing
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · · 9:02 a.m.
`
`Reported by:· Rachel N. Barkume, CSR, RMR, CRR
`· · · · · · · Certificate No. 13657
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 2 of 180
`
`
`
`· · · · · · · · · A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`FOR THE PETITIONER:
`
`· · · · ·PERKINS COIE LLP
`· · · · ·By:· ANDREW KLEIN
`· · · · · · · WEI YUAN
`· · · · ·Attorneys at Law
`· · · · ·11452 El Camino Real, Suite 300
`· · · · ·San Diego, California 92130
`· · · · ·(858) 720-5700
`· · · · ·aklein@perkinscoie.com
`
`FOR THE PATENT OWNER:
`
`· · · · ·QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN LLP
`· · · · ·By:· QUINCY LU
`· · · · ·Attorney at Law
`· · · · ·865 South Figueroa Street, Floor 10
`· · · · ·Los Angeles, California 90017
`· · · · ·(213) 443-3251
`· · · · ·quincylu@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 3 of 180
`
`
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · · I N D E X
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`EXAMINATION BY MR. LU· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·4
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · · ·--o0o--
`
`· · · · · · · · · · ·E X H I B I T S
`
`EXHIBIT· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE
`
`· · · · · · · ·(No exhibits were marked.)
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 4 of 180
`
`
`
`· · · · ·BE IT REMEMBERED that on Wednesday, July 26,
`
`2023, commencing at 9:02 a.m. thereof, via Zoom Video
`
`Conferencing, before me, Rachel N. Barkume, a Certified
`
`Shorthand Reporter in and for the State of California,
`
`remotely appeared from Atlanta, Georgia,
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·WENKE LEE,
`
`a witness called on behalf of the Patent Owner, who,
`
`having been first duly sworn by me to testify the truth,
`
`was examined and testified as follows:
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· Good morning, Dr. Lee.· Could you spell your
`
`full name for the record.
`
`· · ·A.· W-E-N-K-E, L-E-E.
`
`· · ·Q.· Thank you.· And, Dr. Lee, where are you located
`
`today?
`
`· · ·A.· I'm in Atlanta, Georgia.
`
`· · ·Q.· And is Atlanta your place of residence?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· Is anyone else in the room with you today?
`
`· · ·A.· No.· This my home office.· The background is
`
`not.· The background is my -- whatever office
`
`building.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· Understood.· It's a fake background,
`
`just for the record?
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 5 of 180
`
`
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.· Right.
`
`· · ·Q.· Do you have any notes or documents in front of
`
`you?
`
`· · ·A.· I printed clean copies of my declaration.· It's
`
`clean.· And also I print -- yeah, I printed a clean copy
`
`of the '941 patent, a clean copy of the Wang patent, a
`
`clean copy of the Chambers patent, and a clean copy of
`
`the Terrill patent.· And that's it.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· And so by "clean copy," you mean there
`
`are no notes or highlights on those copies?
`
`· · ·A.· No.· Nothing.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· Thank you.· So I will be referring to
`
`your declaration and those prior art references
`
`throughout this deposition.· I may also refer to other
`
`exhibits.· We'll see.· But since you have physical
`
`copies, I think I will just reference the exhibit number
`
`of those documents and just ask you to look through
`
`those rather than upload them to the Zoom and having you
`
`download.· Unless you would prefer I upload electronic
`
`copies.· It's up to you.
`
`· · ·A.· Yeah, that's good.· Although I'm not sure I can
`
`remember the exhibit number so well, but if you tell me
`
`which patent by the name, then it would be easier for me
`
`to pick up the document.
`
`· · ·Q.· Oh, absolutely, yes.· I will refer to the name
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 6 of 180
`
`
`
`as well as the exhibit number so we have a clean record.
`
`· · ·A.· Okay.
`
`· · ·Q.· All right.· So you just took an oath to tell
`
`the truth; correct?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes, I did.
`
`· · ·Q.· And is there any reason you cannot tell the
`
`truth today?
`
`· · ·A.· No.
`
`· · ·Q.· Is there anything that would prevent you from
`
`giving truthful and accurate deposition testimony today?
`
`· · ·A.· No.
`
`· · ·Q.· Dr. Lee, have you ever had your deposition
`
`taken before?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes, I have.
`
`· · ·Q.· And how many times?
`
`· · ·A.· About ten times.
`
`· · ·Q.· And how many times in the past year have you
`
`had your deposition taken?
`
`· · ·A.· Four times.
`
`· · ·Q.· Four times?· And were those for patent cases?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· So all four were for patent cases; is that
`
`correct?
`
`· · ·A.· That's correct.
`
`· · ·Q.· And were they for -- all four for IPR cases or
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 7 of 180
`
`
`
`were there district court litigation cases as well?
`
`· · ·A.· I don't know -- I mean, I don't recall exact
`
`detail distinction, but definitely IPR.· Whether
`
`district court or not, I don't remember.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you ever testified at trial as a
`
`witness?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes, I have.
`
`· · ·Q.· And how many times?
`
`· · ·A.· Once.· And that time, I was scheduled, but I
`
`ran out of time, so I didn't -- you know.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· And when was that time that you
`
`testified as a trial witness?
`
`· · ·A.· I think about maybe seven years ago.
`
`· · ·Q.· And was that for a patent case?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· And what was the nature of the patents, if you
`
`remember?
`
`· · ·A.· Yeah.· It was SRI versus Cisco.· I was on the
`
`SRI International side --
`
`· · · · ·(Simultaneous crosstalk.)
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· Oh, go ahead.
`
`· · ·A.· Sorry.· SRI, they're the patent owners, so
`
`they're -- they are suing other companies for infringing
`
`their patents.
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 8 of 180
`
`
`
`· · ·Q.· Uh-huh.· And so for those patents, what was the
`
`field of endeavor for those -- of those patents?
`
`· · ·A.· Those patents -- they were on network intrusion
`
`detection, network monitoring.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· Understood.· For the depositions that
`
`you took in the last year, were they all with -- were
`
`you represented by Perkins Coie in all of them, or were
`
`there other law firms involved?
`
`· · ·A.· Other law firms involved, yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· Were any of them -- for any of those
`
`depositions, were you represented by Perkins Coie?
`
`· · ·A.· No.
`
`· · ·Q.· All right.· Are you being compensated for your
`
`testimony in this proceeding?
`
`· · ·A.· As part of my work on this case, yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· And who is providing that compensation?
`
`· · ·A.· It's through Perkins Coie.· I mean, we -- you
`
`know, the invoice will be sent to them.
`
`· · ·Q.· But the -- is Fortinet paying for those
`
`invoices?
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· Object to form.
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· Excuse me.· Is Netskope paying for those
`
`invoices?
`
`· · ·A.· I assume so.
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 9 of 180
`
`
`
`· · ·Q.· And what is your hourly rate, Dr. Lee?
`
`· · ·A.· I think for deposition work, if I recall
`
`correctly, it's about $600 an hour.
`
`· · ·Q.· And so you said for deposition work, you --
`
`$600 an hour.
`
`· · · · ·Is it also $600 an hour for your preparation of
`
`this declaration in this proceeding?
`
`· · ·A.· Preparation -- you know, prep work for
`
`deposition, yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· Let me re-ask that.
`
`· · · · ·So is it also $600 an hour for your work in
`
`preparing the declaration that you provided in this
`
`proceeding?
`
`· · ·A.· If I recall correctly, I think for deposition,
`
`maybe lower.· I don't know, maybe 450 an hour.· I mean,
`
`I -- I don't recall the precise number.
`
`· · ·Q.· So you said for deposition, it was maybe 450 an
`
`hour.
`
`· · · · ·Did you mean to say for the declaration, it was
`
`maybe 450 an hour?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.· For the declaration work, it's 450 an
`
`hour.· For deposition and related prep work, it's $600
`
`an hour.
`
`· · ·Q.· So do you typically charge a higher rate for
`
`deposition work?
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 10 of 180
`
`
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· Besides your hourly rates, are you being
`
`compensated in any other way?
`
`· · ·A.· You mean the context of this case; right?
`
`· · ·Q.· Yes.
`
`· · ·A.· No.
`
`· · ·Q.· How much have you billed Netskope to date for
`
`your work in all of the IPR matters?
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· Object to scope.
`
`· · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't recall exact number. I
`
`would say dozens of hours.
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· All right.· So the -- your counsel objected to
`
`scope.· Let me re-ask the question then.
`
`· · · · ·How much have you billed Netskope to date for
`
`your work in this particular IPR matter?
`
`· · ·A.· Like I said, I don't recall exact number. I
`
`need to go back to look at my log.· I do keep a log. I
`
`would say, you know, dozens of hours for sure.
`
`· · ·Q.· So by "dozens," do you mean over 100 hours?
`
`· · ·A.· I am not sure.· Maybe close.· I would say I
`
`wouldn't be surprised.· Like I said, I don't know the
`
`exact number.
`
`· · ·Q.· Would it be close to 100 hours for just this
`
`case?
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 11 of 180
`
`
`
`· · ·A.· Well, I mean -- you mean this -- mean this
`
`patent specifically?
`
`· · ·Q.· Yes.
`
`· · ·A.· That, I'm not sure.· I need to -- like I said,
`
`I work on multiple patents with Perkins Coie, and I have
`
`a log that basically each hour doing what, on which
`
`patent.· I need to go there and take a look closely, you
`
`know, to answer your question.· But I would say that
`
`even for this particular case -- would be dozens of
`
`hours.
`
`· · ·Q.· So you understand that Netskope has filed
`
`several IPR petitions against Fortinet patents; correct?
`
`· · ·A.· I believe that's the case, yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· And you -- oh, go ahead.
`
`· · ·A.· I believe that true, yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· And you have provided declarations for at least
`
`some of these IPR petitions; correct?
`
`· · ·A.· That's correct.
`
`· · ·Q.· Do you remember how many?
`
`· · ·A.· I would say in the range of two or three.
`
`Maybe three, but two for sure.· I think so, yeah.
`
`· · ·Q.· But this is the first time you've been deposed
`
`for one of these Netskope/Fortinet IPR petitions?
`
`· · ·A.· That's correct.
`
`· · ·Q.· So for the hours that you billed to Netskope,
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 12 of 180
`
`
`
`does that include preparing for and appearing at this
`
`deposition?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· Dr. Lee, when were you first retained by
`
`Netskope as an expert for these IPR proceedings?
`
`· · ·A.· I try to remember.· More than year ago for
`
`sure.· I don't know whether it's two years or not.
`
`Yeah, I mean, again, I am not -- I need to look back at
`
`my log to actually track it.· Yeah.
`
`· · ·Q.· So you would say maybe last summer or last
`
`spring -- early last year or later last year?
`
`· · ·A.· I would say it's before last year.· I mean,
`
`that's how I recall it.· Maybe the fall of the year
`
`before last year, so that would be 2021, I think.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.
`
`· · ·A.· Again -- again, I'm just -- try to -- best from
`
`my memory.
`
`· · ·Q.· Understood.· Yes.· If you can't remember
`
`exactly, just provide the best you can.
`
`· · ·A.· Yeah.
`
`· · ·Q.· Did you do anything to prepare for this
`
`deposition, Dr. Lee?
`
`· · ·A.· I'm sorry.· Can you repeat that question again?
`
`· · ·Q.· Did you do anything to prepare for this
`
`deposition?
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 13 of 180
`
`
`
`· · ·A.· What do you mean "anything"?
`
`· · ·Q.· Did you meet with any attorneys to prepare for
`
`this deposition?
`
`· · ·A.· I -- I did work with the counsel, the team,
`
`yeah.· From Perkins Coie, yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· And which attorneys did you work with to
`
`prepare for this deposition?
`
`· · ·A.· Andrew, Wei, and Babak.
`
`· · ·Q.· And so that's Andrew Klein, Wei Yuan, and who
`
`was the third person?
`
`· · ·A.· Babak Tehranchi.· I hope I say his name
`
`correctly.
`
`· · ·Q.· We'll get that name later.
`
`· · · · ·Did you meet with these attorneys multiple
`
`times in preparation for your deposition?
`
`· · ·A.· Yeah, couple times.· Yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· Do you know how many times?
`
`· · ·A.· Two times.
`
`· · ·Q.· And how long did you meet with them for each
`
`time?
`
`· · ·A.· I think the first time is close to two hours.
`
`The second time I would say close to four or five hours,
`
`yeah.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· And when were those meetings?
`
`· · ·A.· I think one was last Thursday or Friday; don't
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 14 of 180
`
`
`
`remember.· Another one was yesterday.
`
`· · ·Q.· And did you review any documents during these
`
`meetings with your attorneys?
`
`· · ·A.· I review my declaration, the patents -- patents
`
`'941, the Wang, the Chambers, Terrill.· I also looked at
`
`the initial response from the patent owner and also the
`
`Court decision as well.
`
`· · ·Q.· And by Court decision, you mean the Board's
`
`institution decision?
`
`· · ·A.· That's correct.· Yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· I'd like you to turn to Exhibit 1002,
`
`which is your declaration.
`
`· · ·A.· Okay.
`
`· · ·Q.· And this is for IPR 2023-00030, Exhibit 1002
`
`from that case.· Now, I'd like you to turn to the last
`
`page, page 136.
`
`· · ·A.· Okay.
`
`· · ·Q.· Dr. Lee, is that your signature on page 136?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· And did you handwrite this signature, or is it
`
`electronic?
`
`· · ·A.· I handwrite using the mouse, Microsoft Word;
`
`then you can say draw.· So it's my handwriting.
`
`· · ·Q.· I see.· And you handwrote the signature on the
`
`declaration, or did you provide the signature
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 15 of 180
`
`
`
`electronically?
`
`· · ·A.· I do it, like I said, on Microsoft Word using
`
`Microsoft Word's draw feature to draw it on the
`
`document.
`
`· · ·Q.· I see.· Did you write the first draft of this
`
`declaration?
`
`· · ·A.· I work with the counsels throughout, and -- to
`
`come up with this draft.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· But my question was:· Did you write the
`
`first draft of your declaration?
`
`· · ·A.· I was --
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· Objection to the extent -- hold on,
`
`Dr. Lee.· Objection to the extent it calls for
`
`disclosure of information covered by the attorney/client
`
`privilege.· But you can say yes or no to his answer --
`
`or to his question.
`
`· · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Can you repeat the question
`
`again?
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· Sure.· Did you write the first draft of this
`
`declaration?
`
`· · ·A.· Yeah.
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· Same objection.
`
`· · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Yeah.· Okay.· Thank you.· So I
`
`was part of the writing process.
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 16 of 180
`
`
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· So you were part of the writing process of the
`
`first draft of this declaration?· Is that what you're
`
`saying?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· Same objection.
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· Did you write the entire declaration?
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· Same objection.
`
`· · · · ·THE WITNESS:· So like I said, I -- I work with
`
`the counsel throughout the -- you know, throughout the
`
`process, and we discuss everything we wanted to write.
`
`I was part of the writing process.· I -- you know, I
`
`wouldn't be able to tell you exactly which word was my
`
`writing to it, but I definitely, you know, own this
`
`document because, like I said, I was in the process.
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· Understood.· Yes or no -- so you did not
`
`write every single word in this declaration; correct?
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· Same objection.
`
`· · · · ·THE WITNESS:· So like I said, I know every
`
`single word is put in.· Did I actually type it in?· Not
`
`every single word.
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· Thank you.
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 17 of 180
`
`
`
`· · · · ·How many times have you ever worked as an
`
`expert in a patent case before this one?
`
`· · ·A.· I would say around 16, 17 times.
`
`· · ·Q.· And over how many years would that be?
`
`· · ·A.· I would say over close to 20 years.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· So you began working as an expert in
`
`patent cases in the early 2000s?· Is that your
`
`testimony?
`
`· · ·A.· May not be as early as -- maybe 2005 or '6 time
`
`frame.· I'm not -- I don't know exactly.· Yeah.· Maybe
`
`2005, '6 time frame, yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· Have you ever worked for Netskope before
`
`these IPR petitions?
`
`· · ·A.· No.· I don't think so.· No.
`
`· · ·Q.· Have you ever worked with Perkins Coie before
`
`these IPR petitions?
`
`· · ·A.· No, I have not.
`
`· · ·Q.· Have you ever had any of your expert opinions
`
`excluded before?
`
`· · ·A.· No.
`
`· · ·Q.· So you said you previously consulted around 16
`
`or 17 times.· Not all of those engagements involved
`
`testifying; correct?
`
`· · ·A.· Not all of them.· That's correct.
`
`· · ·Q.· And so what else were you doing if you were not
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 18 of 180
`
`
`
`testifying in those engagements, just generally?
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· I'll just caution the witness not
`
`to disclose anything that might be covered by
`
`confidentiality agreements.· I'm not sure if there is,
`
`but just in case.
`
`· · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Okay.· Yeah.· General expert
`
`work; like, declaration kind of thing, yeah.
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· All right.· Going back to your declaration,
`
`Exhibit 1002, could you turn to paragraph 36, which
`
`begins on -- excuse me, paragraph 3 -- hold on -- yes,
`
`paragraph 36, which begins on page 11.
`
`· · ·A.· Okay.
`
`· · ·Q.· Let me know when you're there.
`
`· · ·A.· Yes, I'm here.
`
`· · ·Q.· All right.· So here you say, "The development
`
`of firewalls" -- actually, sorry.· Let me back up.
`
`· · · · ·Do you have any changes that you want to make
`
`to your declaration?
`
`· · ·A.· No, not --
`
`· · ·Q.· Corrections?
`
`· · ·A.· No, not at this moment.
`
`· · ·Q.· No?
`
`· · ·A.· No.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· Going back to paragraph 36.· So you
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 19 of 180
`
`
`
`state here, "The development of firewalls was motivated
`
`by the need to control what data, i.e., network traffic,
`
`can be allowed to go from a local network onto the
`
`internet and come from the internet into the network.
`
`In other words, firewalls can screen traffic to and from
`
`a network.· For example, firewalls in 1989 can already,"
`
`quote, "'screen packets based not only on destinations
`
`but on sources or source-destination pairs,'" end quote,
`
`"and with Cisco firewall systems in 1989," quote, "'one
`
`could deny access to all but one host on a particular
`
`network.· The Cisco gateways also allow discrimination
`
`based on IP protocol type and TCP or UDP port numbers,"
`
`and you have a citation.
`
`· · · · ·And then you go on and say, "That is, packet
`
`filtering rules, i.e., rules for blocking or admitting
`
`packets, were available prior to 1989, and firewalls
`
`were developed to implement such rules."
`
`· · · · ·Did I read that correctly?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· And you still agree with this statement,
`
`Dr. Lee?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· So if I refer to these firewalls as
`
`traditional firewalls, would you understand what I'm
`
`saying?
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 20 of 180
`
`
`
`· · ·A.· I would say that would be the firewalls at the
`
`time, like, the late 1980s.
`
`· · ·Q.· Did firewalls in 2018 still -- were --
`
`withdrawn.
`
`· · · · ·In 2018, were firewalls still able to provide
`
`these functions that you describe in this paragraph?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes, and more.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· So when you say -- so -- withdrawn.
`
`· · · · ·You would agree that these traditional
`
`firewalls you described here could control the flow of
`
`network traffic to or from a network?
`
`· · ·A.· That's correct.
`
`· · ·Q.· And as you say, these traditional firewalls
`
`could control -- withdrawn.
`
`· · · · ·So you would agree that such control also
`
`includes traffic to and from the internet; correct?
`
`· · ·A.· Yes.· Basically from network to network.· So
`
`internet is another network.· At least with respect to
`
`local network, yeah.
`
`· · ·Q.· And the internet existed in 1989?
`
`· · ·A.· Yeah.· Even before that, yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· Did the World Wide Web exist in 1989?
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· Object to form.
`
`· · · · ·THE WITNESS:· We won't call it -- we didn't
`
`call it World Wide Web, but, you know...
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 21 of 180
`
`
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· What did you call it?
`
`· · ·A.· I forgot the name, but some kind of a
`
`document --
`
`· · · · ·(Reporter clarification.)
`
`· · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Document search and retrieval
`
`system was already there.· But we didn't call it World
`
`Wide Web.
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· So these firewalls that you describe in
`
`paragraph 36, could they automatically block traffic
`
`from another network or from another domain?
`
`· · ·A.· Yeah, sure.· If they know the IP address in
`
`particular, yes, they can do that.
`
`· · ·Q.· So you said if they knew the IP address in
`
`particular.
`
`· · · · ·Do you mean the IP address of the network?
`
`· · ·A.· Meaning the domain.· I'm talking about
`
`domain.
`
`· · ·Q.· So assuming the domain had a single IP address,
`
`if they know that IP address, they can block traffic
`
`from it.· Is that what your -- what you said?
`
`· · ·A.· A range of IPs.· Doesn't have to be single
`
`IPs.
`
`· · ·Q.· Correct.· So if the firewall -- or if the
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 22 of 180
`
`
`
`firewall administrator knows either the domain's single
`
`IP address or its range of IP addresses, it could block
`
`traffic from that domain; is that correct?
`
`· · ·A.· That's correct.· And also depending on the
`
`protocol, you're not sure about the IP address, meaning
`
`IP address can vary from day to day.· But if you know
`
`exactly the domain name, you're able to actually find it
`
`from the traffic, you can also block that traffic -- you
`
`can also block traffic from that domain.· ·So really
`
`depending on the exact nature of the traffic.
`
`· · ·Q.· Excuse me.· Did these firewalls use a single
`
`shared network address to control traffic to and from
`
`another domain?
`
`· · ·A.· Can you elaborate that question?· I'm not sure
`
`I understand.
`
`· · ·Q.· So the firewall you described in paragraph 36,
`
`did it have its own network address?
`
`· · ·A.· So again, it's a complicated matter meaning
`
`that depending on where you place it, you may or may not
`
`need to have a so-called -- your own unique
`
`internet-facing IP address.· But of course, you need to
`
`have -- have a way to -- to reach it in particular if
`
`you are an administrator.
`
`· · · · ·So it does have a, you know, address, whether
`
`it's a internet-facing publicly-known unique IP
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 23 of 180
`
`
`
`address -- again, depending on the situation.· Yeah, you
`
`don't have to have it, in terms of a internet-facing
`
`unique IP address.· Yeah.· Again, those are details
`
`that depending on the deployment situation.
`
`· · ·Q.· Right.· So when you say you don't have to have
`
`an IP address -- or excuse me, when you say you don't
`
`have to have a publicly-known external IP address, that
`
`is because not all firewalls interface with the
`
`internet; is that correct?
`
`· · ·A.· No, that's not what I meant.· I meant is
`
`that -- what I meant was that you don't need to have a
`
`unique IP address that's known internet -- that's
`
`fixed -- that's basically fixed; hey, this IP -- this
`
`firewall has to have this IP address and it's fixed.
`
`That's usually -- normally doesn't have to be this way.
`
`· · · · ·There's multiple ways to deploy and configure
`
`the firewall.· What it comes down to it is that what you
`
`want is that -- to make sure is that when you send
`
`traffic to that network, that traffic would go through
`
`the firewall for that network.· That's all.· And then
`
`multiple ways you can do this.
`
`· · ·Q.· And one of those ways you can do this is by
`
`having the firewall have a single address; correct?
`
`· · ·A.· To be honest, I haven't seen such a situation
`
`where say, hey, my firewall was known for this IP
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 24 of 180
`
`
`
`address; it's fixed; it's known for internet.· That's
`
`not normally how people would do it.· I mean, anybody
`
`would do it that way -- like I said, I don't recall. I
`
`don't recall seeing it.
`
`· · ·Q.· So -- yeah.· I understand.· I'm not actually
`
`referring to a fixed address.· I'm just saying -- I'm
`
`just asking -- so a -- let me re-ask the question.
`
`· · · · ·So a firewall protects a network which can
`
`constitute a number of devices; correct?
`
`· · ·A.· Yeah, there would be devices in a network, yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· And external to this network -- withdrawn.
`
`· · · · ·And this network appears as a single device
`
`that has the firewall's network address; correct?
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· Object to form.
`
`· · · · ·THE WITNESS:· No.· I mean, normally, let's say,
`
`we're connected to -- sorry.· I say "normally" -- you
`
`don't associate or identify a network by its firewall or
`
`by its firewall address.· Normally don't do that.· You
`
`just know that -- assume that if the -- if the
`
`organization is, you know -- is protected or is -- if
`
`the organization has network security policy mechanism,
`
`you would know that when you send traffic to that -- to
`
`the network of the organization, it will go through
`
`firewall.· That's all.
`
`///
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 25 of 180
`
`
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· How do you ensure that the traffic goes through
`
`the firewall?
`
`· · ·A.· So there are a number of things you could do.
`
`I mean, there's all sorts of routers, gateways, VPN
`
`technologies, and so and so forth.· The whole point is
`
`that you make sure that before the traffic -- let's say
`
`from external -- be able to reach the device internal to
`
`network, the traffic would have no choice but going
`
`through the firewall.
`
`· · ·Q.· Do you use a firewall at home for your home
`
`network?
`
`· · ·A.· I do.· I mean, I have AT&T, network comes with
`
`home, you know -- home network router with a firewall.
`
`I also use VPN on my laptop.· In fact, right now our
`
`communication is through VPN.
`
`· · ·Q.· And when you're not using a VPN -- well, let me
`
`ask this question first.
`
`· · · · ·So how many devices does your home network
`
`have?
`
`· · ·A.· I would say 40 to 50.
`
`· · ·Q.· Oh, okay.· That's quite a lot.
`
`· · ·A.· I have two teenage boys.· What do you think?
`
`Yeah.
`
`· · ·Q.· Yes.· Everybody has iPads and iPhones and TVs.
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 26 of 180
`
`
`
`· · ·A.· Yeah, Xbox, whatever.
`
`· · ·Q.· Yeah.· Understand.· So -- and your laptop -- or
`
`the computer that you're using right now, that is also a
`
`device on your home network; is that correct?
`
`· · ·A.· That's correct, yes.
`
`· · ·Q.· And when you're not connected to a VPN, does
`
`your computer have an IP address that is known to the
`
`public?
`
`· · ·A.· Normally, you don't -- if you're in a home
`
`network, your router -- whatever the ISP gives to you --
`
`has a IP address that's not even permanent.· It's on a
`
`lease called DHCP lease.· It can be hours, can be weeks,
`
`can be month, depending on ISPs.· And then all the
`
`devices in your network essentially share the same IP
`
`address to the external world.
`
`· · · · ·Internally, you have your own set of IP
`
`address, but doesn't matter.· I mean that -- your home
`
`router would do the so-called network address
`
`translation comes in.· When traffic comes in, it would
`
`translate and send the correct destination.· Yeah.· It's
`
`very similar to a -- how enterprise network set up
`
`except in a smaller scale.
`
`· · ·Q.· So you said internally, you have your own set
`
`of IP addresses, but that doesn't matter.
`
`· · · · ·Is that because to the external world, they do
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 27 of 180
`
`
`
`not know of those internal IP addresses?
`
`· · ·A.· They do not know and they don't need to know
`
`because everything going through my home network
`
`router --
`
`· · ·Q.· And so --
`
`· · ·A.· -- connected to the outside, yeah.
`
`· · ·Q.· I see.· And so your home network router has a
`
`single IP address, although it's not permanent; correct?
`
`· · ·A.· That's correct.· Yeah.
`
`· · ·Q.· So in order for -- assuming you're not on a
`
`VPN, in order for my laptop to communicate with your
`
`computer, I would need to send a packet that has your
`
`firewall's IP address; correct?
`
`· · ·A.· No.· Like I said -- so depending on your setup,
`
`your firewall may not be having an internet-facing IP
`
`address.· It is -- normally your router has the
`
`internet-facing IP address.· And normally, you couldn't
`
`even find it, you know, in the case of the home network.
`
`· · · · ·In an organization, you can always -- because
`
`you know the name of the organization, you can do all
`
`kind of network lookup, information lookup, you know,
`
`domain lookup to know the IP address range.· And then
`
`from there, you can connect to it.· Particularly if
`
`you're able to connect to the main address, normally
`
`it's the main router, you know that the router will be
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 28 of 180
`
`
`
`responsible for making sure that traffic go through the
`
`firewall before reaches internal.
`
`· · · · ·So I'm not sure you can send traffic directly
`
`to my machine because you don't even know the IP address
`
`of my router.· I don't even know because I -- can't --
`
`sorry.· I don't need to.· So...
`
`· · ·Q.· Are routers -- do routers have firewall
`
`functionalities?
`
`· · · · ·MR. KLEIN:· Object to form.
`
`· · · · ·THE WITNESS:· So router's main function is to
`
`route packets, you know, from one network to the other.
`
`Or internally, it may be responsible for doing some of
`
`the, you know, function of, let's say, you know, gateway
`
`or switch, whatever you want to configure it, to do
`
`network address translation.
`
`· · · · ·It will also send -- you know, make sure that
`
`the -- how to put it -- the wiring is such that before
`
`traffic can reach anything internal, it goes through the
`
`firewall.
`
`BY MR. LU:
`
`· · ·Q.· So going back -- excuse me -- so going back to
`
`paragraph 36, do you agree that these traditional
`
`firewalls were used to screen traffic to and from
`
`subnetworks within a larger network?
`
`· · ·A.· So I think a POSITA would easy understand that,
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 29 of 180
`
`
`
`you know, in particular, if you -- I mean, again,
`
`depending on how you configure your network.· You can
`
`configure your network so that you can control traffic
`
`from, let's say, one subnet to the other or from, you
`
`know, one subnet to the rest of the enterprise network.
`
`Yeah.· That's, I would say, obvious to a POSITA.
`
`· · ·Q.· Would that have been obvious in 1989?
`
`· · ·A.· In 1989, I would think so.· I mean, you --
`
`again, if you have somebody who works at AT&T Bell Labs,
`
`which probably was doing some of the work in
`
`networking -- anyway, I think those people would know.
`
`· · ·Q.· Okay.· But you don't --
`
`· · ·A.· Obvious -- would find it obvious, I think.
`
`Yeah.
`
`· · ·Q.· But you're not actually aware of any networks
`
`that were set up with subnetworks where each subnetwork
`
`had its own firewall in 1989?
`
`· · ·A.· So I would say -- I would say in 1989, I would
`
`say big enterprise would have already done this already.
`
`Just because a big organization such as AT&T or IBM --
`
`there's so many different locations -- Intel, you
`
`know -- there's so many locations across the world.· And
`
`obviously, if you in different country, different
`
`region, you have your own, whatever, physically
`
`computers together, you form a local area network.· But
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 30 of 180
`
`
`
`you do want to basically communicate with each other
`
`within the company's scope and also with the internet.
`
`· · · · ·So I would say that for those organizations,
`
`you can say each location is actually a subnet, you
`
`know.· Let's say Intel at Oregon is -- Intel in Santa
`
`Clara -- that's, I would say, easily two different big
`
`subnets.· And then, of course, you want to put firewall
`
`at each of those subnets.· You know, I would say that by
`
`late 1990 -- 1980s, all these big companies already
`
`doing that.
`
`· · ·Q.· So you provided an example where -- for
`
`example, at Intel, they may have a subnetwork for
`
`computers in Oregon and then a subnetwork for computers
`
`in Santa Clara, California?
`
`· · ·A.· Uh-huh.· Yep.
`
`· · ·Q.· Is that correct?
`
`· · ·A.· I would say that would be for example.· Right
`
`now within -- within Oregon, there are so many different
`
`location, different farms like this farm, that farm -- I
`
`mean, they could even have subdivided the Oregon
`
`location into multiple subnets again.
`
`· · · · ·So again, the -- the concept of subnets and
`
`protecting traffic from one subnet to the other -- I
`
`mean, that's well understood by 19 -- by the late 1990s,
`
`I would say.
`
`Fortinet Ex. 2009, Page 31 of 180
`
`
`
`· · ·Q.· And you said the concept of subnets and
`
`protecting traffic from one subnet to the other -- you
`
`would use a firewall to provide that protection -- a
`
`firewall on -- for the subnet; is that correct?
`
`· · ·A.· So again, you could say either firewall for
`
`subnet -- or there's a way that you do the switch and
`
`router so that you make sure that when traffic -- let's
`
`say traffic from Subnet 1 goes to -- goes through Subnet
`
`2, the traffic routed through the firewall that you pay
`
`somewhere -- that you make sur
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
