California Verdicts
Find out about the most important recent California cases, selected by VerdictSearch editors. Coverage includes Alameda, Los Angeles, Orange, San Francisco and San Diego counties. Subscribe to VerdictSearch for access to all California verdictsPricing OptionsPatents on cybersecurity products were infringed: plaintiff
Amount:
$39,528,487
Type:
Verdict-Plaintiff
State:
California
Venue:
Federal
Court:
United States District Court, Northern District, San Jose
Case Type:
Intellectual Property – Patents, Infringement
Case Name:
Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc.,
No. 5:13-CV-03999-BLF
Date:
August 4, 2015
Plaintiff(s):
Finjan, Inc.
Plaintiff Attorney(s):
Paul J. Andre;
Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP;
Menlo Park,
CA,
for
Finjan, Inc. ■ Lisa Kobialka;
Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP;
Menlo Park,
CA,
for
Finjan, Inc.
Defendant(s):
Blue Coat Systems, Inc.
Defense Attorney(s):
Vera M. Elson;
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C.;
Palo Alto,
CA,
for
Blue Coat Systems, Inc. ■ Edward G. Poplawski;
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C.;
Los Angeles,
CA,
for
Blue Coat Systems, Inc.
Prior to August 2013, plaintiff Finjan Inc., a cybersecurity company, learned that several Internet security software products, or combination of products manufactured by competitor Blue Coat Systems Inc., a cybersecurity and networking company owned by a private equity firm, were seemingly similar to those products that Finjan had patents on. Finjan sued Blue Coat Systems, alleging that Blue Coat’s actions constituted patent infringement. Specifically, plaintiff’s counsel contended that several products, or combination of products, manufactured by Blue Coat — which included WebPulse, ProxySG, CAS (or Content Analysis System), MAA (or Malware Analysis Appliance), and ProxyAG — infringed on Finjan’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,154,844; 6,804,780; 6,965,968; 7,058,822; 7,418,731; and 7,647,633. Blue Coat’s counsel argued that Finjan’s patents were invalid, as they were anticipated.
Finjan sought a reasonable royalty for Blue Coat’s infringement. Although Finjan claimed the infringement occurred prior to August 2013, it was only seeking damages since August 2013.
The jury found that each of Finjan’s patents were valid. It also found that the ‘844 patent, ‘780 patent, ‘968 patent, and ‘731 patent were literally infringed by Blue Coat. Further, the jury found that the ‘633 patent was infringed by Blue Coat under the Doctrine of Equivalents. Thus, the jury awarded Finjan $39,528,487 in damages as reasonable royalties for Blue Coat’s infringement.
Judge:
Beth Labson Freeman
Trial Length:
2
weeks
This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiff’s counsel. Defense counsel did not respond to the reporter’s phone calls.