Finjan, LLC v. Qualys Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 FINJAN LLC, CASE NO. 4:18-cv-07229-YGR
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S
vs. RENEWED MOTION TO STRIKE
QUALYS INC., Re: Dkt. No. 194, 197 Defendant.
11 Before the Court is Defendant Qualys Inc. renewed motion to strike portions of Dr. Nenad Medvidovic’s expert report proffered on behalf of Plaintiff Finjan LLC. (Dkt. No. 194 (“Mot.”).)1 Qualys seeks to strike Dr. Medvidovic’s theory that the accused products “receiv[e] an incoming stream of program code,” as required by the asserted U.S. Patent No. 8,225,408 (“’408 Patent”), because the theory was not disclosed in Finjan’s infringement contentions. The Court previously denied the motion on this ground, without prejudice to renewal, for lack of clear explanation. (See Dkt. No. 188 (“Order”) at 7 & n.5.) Qualys now clarifies as follows: Finjan accuses vulnerability management features in Qualys’ Cloud Platform. (Dkt. No. 194-2 (“Medvidovic…