Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-02024/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-02024-51/pdf.json

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

---

1

13-cv-02024-RMW

ORDER RE USE OF MASTERS APPLICATION

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

RADWARE, LTD., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

F5 NETWORKS, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 13-cv-02024-RMW 

ORDER RE USE OF MASTERS 

APPLICATION 

Defendant F5 seeks to preclude introduction of an F5 patent application (“the Masters 

application”) for certain purposes at trial. Radware argues that the court’s ruling on F5’s Motion in 

Limine No. 6 permits Radware to use the Masters application as evidence of copying. The court 

takes this opportunity to clarify its rulings on F5’s MIL Nos. 5-6, and for the reasons set forth 

below, concludes that Radware 1) may not use the Masters application to show copying, and 2) 

may not suggest that F5’s alleged copying prior to the issuance of Radware’s ’319 patent was 

improper.

In MIL No. 5, F5 sought to prevent Radware’s use of F5’s patents or applications to show

F5’s awareness of the ’319 patent. See Dkt. No. 370. The court ruled that Radware would be 

permitted to use the citations to the ’702 patent and ’319 application that appear in the file history 

of the Masters application to suggest that F5 would have had knowledge of the ’319 patent after it 

Case 5:13-cv-02024-RMW Document 494 Filed 02/23/16 Page 1 of 2
2

13-cv-02024-RMW

ORDER RE USE OF MASTERS APPLICATION

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

Northern District of California

issued. Dkt. No. 456 at 12. 

In MIL No. 6, F5 sought to prevent Radware from introducing evidence of F5’s alleged 

copying. See Dkt. No. 371. This court previously ruled that a jury could find willfulness based on 

evidence of F5’s desire to enter the field of link load balancing, if such evidence were presented in 

conjunction with evidence of F5’s awareness of the’319 patent. See Dkt. No. 256 at 55. The court 

denied F5’s MIL No. 6, allowing Radware to present evidence of F5’s desire to enter the field of 

link load balancing, including evidence of alleged copying. Dkt. 456 at 11-12. However, the court 

did not specifically address Radware’s use of the Masters application for this purpose. Even if the 

evidence suggests that F5 copied the LinkProof manual into its Masters application, Radware may 

not use the Masters application to show copying. 

Although evidence that F5 copied Radware’s products in creating F5’s infringing products

may be relevant to show that F5 was willful in continuing to infringe after it learned of the ’319 

patent, the connection between the Masters application and F5’s infringement is much weaker. F5 

abandoned the Masters application before the ’319 patent issued. The introduction of evidence

regarding the contents of the Masters application would confuse the jury and distract from the 

asserted patents. The very limited probative value that the Masters application may have for 

tending to show willfulness is substantially outweighed by the danger of misleading the jury by 

suggesting that copying of an unpatented device is a violation of patent law. 

Furthermore, F5’s alleged copying of Radware’s product becomes relevant to the 

willfulness inquiry only after F5 is aware of the ’319 patent. Therefore, in the course of presenting 

evidence and argument as to F5’s alleged copying, Radware may not suggest that F5 did anything 

wrong by copying Radware’s products before it learned of the issuance of the ’319 patent.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2016

______________________________________

Ronald M. Whyte

United States District Judge

Case 5:13-cv-02024-RMW Document 494 Filed 02/23/16 Page 2 of 2