Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05831/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05831-23/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FORTINET, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

SOPHOS, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-05831-EMC 

ORDER RE SUPPLEMENTAL 

BRIEFING

Docket No. 218

Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiff Fortinet, Inc.‟s motion for summary 

judgment. See Docket No. 218 (motion). At the hearing on the motion, Fortinet raised an 

argument that it had not explicitly made in its papers with respect to the alleged invalidity 

(indefiniteness) of claim 9 of the „587 patent. More specifically, Fortinet argued that the first 

means-plus-function limitation in claim 9 (“means in a first data processor of the network for 

providing a second data processor of the network with a copy of an item of data which is stored 

for access by the first data processor”) was indefinite pursuant to Aristocrat Techs. Australia Pty 

Ltd. v .Int’l Game Tech., 521 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2008).1 

///

///

///

///

///

///

 

1

To be clear, Aristocrat was cited in Fortinet‟s opening brief to the extent the PTAB had cited the 

case in its decision on which Fortinet relied.

Case 3:13-cv-05831-EMC Document 290 Filed 10/14/15 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

Because this argument was not fully fleshed out in the parties‟ briefs, the Court hereby 

orders supplemental briefing as to whether the first means-plus-function limitation in claim 9 is 

indefinite under Aristocrat. Each party shall file a supplemental brief by 12:00 p.m., October 16, 

2015. The brief shall be no longer than five pages.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 14, 2015

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-05831-EMC Document 290 Filed 10/14/15 Page 2 of 2