Case No. 5:17-cv-00072-BLF (SVK)

FINJAN, INC.’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

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

Juanita R. Brooks (CA SBN 75934) brooks@fr.com

Roger A. Denning (CA SBN 228998) denning@fr.com

Frank J. Albert (CA SBN 247741) albert@fr.com

Megan A. Chacon (CA SBN 304912) chacon@fr.com

K. Nicole Williams (CA SBN 291900) nwilliams@fr.com

Oliver J. Richards (CA SBN 310972) ojr@fr.com

Jared A. Smith (CA SBN 306576) jasmith@fr.com

Tucker N. Terhufen (CA SBN 311038) terhufen@fr.com

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

12390 El Camino Real, Suite 100

San Diego, CA 92130

Telephone: (858) 678-5070 / Fax: (858) 678-5099

Aamir A. Kazi (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) kazi@fr.com

Alana C. Mannige (CA SBN 313341) mannige@fr.com

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

1180 Peachtree Street NE, 21st Floor

Atlanta, GA 30309

Telephone: (404) 892-5005 / Fax: (404) 892-5002

Attorneys for Plaintiff

FINJAN, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION

FINJAN, INC., a Delaware Corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., a California 

Corporation, 

Defendant.

Case No. 5:17-cv-00072-BLF (SVK) 

FINJAN, INC.’S NOTICE OF 

MOTION AND MOTION FOR 

RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT’S 

ORDER ON CISCO’S MOTION TO 

STRIKE PORTIONS OF FINJAN’S 

AMENDED EXPERT REPORTS (DKT. 

NO. 582) 

REDACTED VERSION OF DOCUMENT 

SOUGHT TO BE SEALED 

Hon. Susan van Keulen 

Ctrm: 6, 4th Floor 

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 1 of 18
1 Case No. 5:17-cv-00072-BLF (SVK)

FINJAN INC.’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

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

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff Finjan, Inc. (“Finjan”) hereby moves for 

reconsideration of the Court’s Order on Cisco’s Motion to Strike Portions of Finjan’s Amended 

Expert Reports (Dkt. No. 582). 

Statement of Relief Requested: By and through this motion, Finjan seeks the Court’s 

reconsideration of its Order on Cisco’s Motion to Strike Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert 

Reports (Dkt. No. 582). This motion is supported by the following Memorandum of Points and 

Authorities and all supporting documents attached hereto. 

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 2 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 3 of 18
ii Case No. 5:17-cv-00072-BLF (SVK)

FINJAN INC.’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

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

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Cases Page(s)

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs.

Co., No. 5:12-CV-0630-LHK-PSG, 2014 WL 12917334 

(N.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2014) .............................................................................................................12

MLC Intellectual Prop., LLC v. Micron Tech., Inc.,

No. 14-CV-03657-SI, 2019 WL 1865921 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2019) .......................................12

Mobile Telecommunications Techs., LLC v. Blackberry Corp.,

No. 3:12-CV-1652-M, 2016 WL 2907735 (N.D. Tex. May 17, 2016) .....................................12

Rembrandt Wireless Techs., LP v. Samsung Elecs. Co.,

No. 2:13CV213-JRG-RSP, 2015 WL 1848524 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 23, 2015) .................................4

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 4 of 18
1 Case No. 5:17-cv-00072-BLF (SVK)

FINJAN INC.’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

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

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

I. INTRODUCTION

Finjan respectfully requests that the Court reconsider its ruling on Cisco’s Motion to Strike 

Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert Reports (Dkt. No. 582). Finjan did not have an opportunity 

to address Cisco’s post-hearing submission (which identified for the first time paragraphs Cisco

wanted struck from Dr. Medvidovic’s amended reports), and Finjan believes that this resulted in 

the Court not considering facts and arguments showing that the struck language had support in 

Finjan’s infringement contentions. Finjan also believes that the Court did not consider key 

evidence and arguments showing that the concepts of a “virtual environment agent” and 

“parameters to run the sample file or URL” as they appear in Dr. Medvidovic’s amended reports 

were appropriately disclosed in Finjan’s infringement contentions.

II. STATEMENT OF ISSUES TO BE DECIDED

1) Whether the Court should grant Finjan’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s 

Order on Cisco’s Motion to Strike Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert Reports (Dkt. No. 582), 

vacate said Order, and deny Cisco’s Motion Strike Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert Reports 

(Dkt. No. 491-3). 

III. LEGAL STANDARD

“[A]ny order or other decision ... that adjudicates fewer than all the claims ... may be 

revised at any time before the entry of a judgment adjudicating all the claims....” Fed. R. Civ. P. 

54(b). Accordingly, “courts have complete discretion to modify interim orders at any time before 

final judgment for any appropriate reason.” Golden Gate Autobon Soc’y, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps 

of Eng’rs, 732 F. Supp. 1014, 1023 (N.D. Cal. 1989). A Motion for Reconsideration may be 

granted after a party shows “[a] manifest failure by the Court to consider material facts or 

dispositive legal arguments which were presented to the Court before such interlocutory order.” 

See Civil L.R. 7-9. Additionally, in Judge Freeman’s May 1, 2020 Order, Judge Freeman stated 

that:

“The undersigned held a Final Pretrial Conference on April 30, 2020. In that 

Conference, counsel for Finjan indicated that Finjan intends to appeal from the SVK 

Order to this Court on two grounds: (1) a procedural issue – because Finjan did not 

have an opportunity to oppose Cisco’s post-hearing submission at ECF 558 and (2) 

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 5 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 6 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 7 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 8 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 9 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 10 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 11 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 12 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 13 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 14 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 15 of 18
Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 16 of 18
13 Case No. 5:17-cv-00072-BLF (SVK)

FINJAN INC.’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

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

Finjan’s Amended Expert Reports (Dkt. No. 582) be vacated, and that Cisco’s Motion Strike 

Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert Reports (Dkt. No. 491-3) be denied. Additionally, if the 

Court finds the issue outlined supra in Section V.C.3 to be dispositive, then Finjan respectfully 

requests that the parties have an opportunity to brief the issue of whether Finjan’s replacement 

language corresponds to theories that Finjan was previously denied permission to add to its 

infringement contentions (including whether this issue should be relevant to the present motion).

Dated: May 15, 2020 Respectfully Submitted,

By: /s/ Aamir A. Kazi

Juanita R. Brooks (CA SBN 75934) brooks@fr.com

Roger A. Denning (CA SBN 228998) 

denning@fr.com

Frank J. Albert (CA SBN 247741) albert@fr.com

Megan A. Chacon (CA SBN 304912) 

chacon@fr.com

K. Nicole Williams (CA SBN 291900) 

nwilliams@fr.com

Oliver J. Richards (CA SBN 310972) ojr@fr.com

Jared A. Smith (CA SBN 306576) jasmith@fr.com

Tucker N. Terhufen (CA SBN 311038) 

terhufen@fr.com

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

12390 El Camino Real, Suite 100

San Diego, CA 92130

Phone: (858) 678-5070 / Fax: (858) 678-5099

Aamir A. Kazi (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 

kazi@fr.com

Alana C. Mannige (CA SBN 313341) 

mannige@fr.com

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

1180 Peachtree Street NE, 21st Floor

Atlanta, GA 30309

Phone: (404) 892-5005 / Fax: (404) 892-5002

Attorneys for Plaintiff FINJAN, INC.

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 17 of 18
14 Case No. 5:17-cv-00072-BLF (SVK)

FINJAN INC.’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing 

document has been served on May 15, 2020 to all counsel of record who are deemed to have 

consented to electronic service via the Court’s CM/ECF system. Any other counsel of record will 

be served by electronic mail and regular mail.

/s/ Aamir A. Kazi

Aamir A. Kazi 

kazi@fr.com

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 623 Filed 05/15/20 Page 18 of 18