Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc.

Filing 177

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY (In re: ECF Nos. 151 and 174 ). Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen on 1/31/2017. (ofr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/31/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 FINJAN, INC., Plaintiff, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Case No.15-cv-03295-BLF (SVK) v. BLUE COAT SYSTEMS, LLC, Defendant. ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY Re: Dkt. Nos. 151, 174 12 13 The Court has reviewed the parties’ Discovery Dispute Joint Report submitted November 14 23, 2016, that presented Plaintiff Finjan Inc.’s (“Finjan”) motion to compel responses to specific 15 discovery requests. (Dkt. No. 151.) The Court has also reviewed the Supplemental Brief to 16 Discovery Joint Report No. 1 submitted January 30, 2017, that narrowed the issues that remain. 17 (Dkt. No. 174.) The Court grants in part and denies in part Finjan’s motion. 18 First, with respect to the technical documents regarding design and functional 19 specifications for Mail Threat Defense (“MTD”), Security Analytics, and Webpulse 2.0 (Request 20 for Production Nos. 10, 12, and 13), Blue Coat Systems, LLC (“Blue Coat”) has agreed to confirm 21 whether additional technical documents exist. Blue Coat shall produce additional documents or 22 confirm production is complete on RFP Nos. 10 and 13 by February 3, 2017. The Court finds 23 RFP No. 12 is overly broad and therefore denies Finjan’s motion as to that request. 24 Second, regarding the revenue forecasts for the accused products (RFP No. 19), Blue Coat 25 has agreed to produce revenue forecasts for the accused products if the documents exist. Blue 26 Coat shall produce additional documents or confirm production is complete on RFP No. 19 by 27 February 3, 2017. 28 Third, regarding the schema of databases (RFP No. 53), Blue Coat shall produce additional 1 documents or confirm production is complete of those documents describing the database 2 structure of the “specifically identified databases,” as referenced in the January 30, 2017 Joint 3 Report (Dkt. No. 174 at 4). 4 Fourth, with respect to documents related to the valuation of Blue Coat, the accused 5 products, or the Finjan patents (RFP Nos. 54, 55; Dkt. No. 174), the Court grants the motion in 6 part as follows: Blue Coat shall produce documents arising out of acquisitions of Blue Coat in the 7 last six years that reflect a valuation of the Finjan patents or the accused products. Such 8 production shall be complete by February 3, 2017. Although it appears that the requests had been 9 narrowed by meet and confer efforts, to be clear, the motion is denied as to requests for valuation of Blue Coat as a whole. The request is also denied as to documents relating to mere offers for 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 sale, potential mergers or potential acquisitions or “other attempts to market Bluecoat.” 12 Finally, the Court denies without prejudice Finjan’s request regarding document 13 production deadlines for depositions. All documents should be produced by February 3, 2017. 14 15 SO ORDERED. Dated: 1/31/2017 16 17 SUSAN VAN KEULEN United States Magistrate Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?