Netskope, Inc. v. Fortinet, Inc.

STIPULATION RE
CLAIM CONSTRUCTION TERMS
CASE NO. 4:25-CV-02360-HSG
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
.7Thomas N. Millikan, Bar No. 234430
TMillikan@perkinscoie.com
Joseph P. Reid, Bar No. 211082
JReid@perkinscoie.com
Kyle R. Canavera, Bar No. 314664
KCanavera@perkinscoie.com
Ashlee E. Sherman, Bar No. 348085
Asherman@perkinscoie.com
Sarah M. Anderson, Bar No. 359690
SarahAnderson@perkinscoie.com
PERKINS COIE LLP
11452 El Camino Real, Ste 300
San Diego, California 92130-2080
Telephone: +1.858.720.5700
Facsimile: +1.858.720.5799
Andrew N. Klein, Bar No. 300221
AKlein@perkinscoie.com
Hessam Gharaviram, Bar No. 345690
HGharaviram@perkinscoie.com
PERKINS COIE LLP
3150 Porter Drive
Palo Alto, California 94304-1212
Telephone: +1.650.838.4300
Facsimile: +1.650.838.4350
Michael Merabi, Bar No. 343752
MMerabi@perkinscoie.com
PERKINS COIE LLP
1888 Century Park East, Suite 1700
Los Angeles, California 90067-1721
Telephone: +1.310.788.9900
Facsimile: +1.310.788.3399
Attorneys for Plaintiff Netskope, Inc.
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
David A. Nelson (IL Bar No. 6209623;
pro hac vice application forthcoming)
davidnelson@quinnemanuel.com
191 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 2700
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Telephone: +1.312.705.7400
GISH PLLC
Ryan Iwahashi (CA SBN 284766)
ryan@gishpllc.com
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: +1.415.630.2000
Attorneys for Defendant Fortinet, Inc.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION
NETSKOPE, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
FORTINET, INC.,
Defendant.
Case No.4:25-cv-02360-HSG
JOINT STIPULATION AND
ORDER RE: AGREED CLAIM
CONSTRUCTION TERMS
Case 4:25-cv-02360-HSG Document 147 Filed 02/17/26 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

- 1 - 	STIPULATION RE
CLAIM CONSTRUCTION TERMS
CASE NO. 4:25-CV-02360-HSG
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
Plaintiff Netskope, Inc. (“Netskope”) and Defendant Fortinet, Inc. (“Fortinet”)
(collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their undersigned counsel, respectfully submit this
Joint Stipulation Regarding Agreed Claim Construction Terms. In support of that request, the
Parties stipulate as follows:
WHEREAS, Netskope filed its Amended Opening Claim Construction Brief on January
5, 2026 (Dkt. 123).
WHEREAS, Fortinet filed its Responsive Claim Construction Brief on January 16, 2026
(Dkt. 130).
WHEREAS, Netskope filed its Reply Claim Construction Brief on January 23, 2026
(Dkt. 132).
WHEREAS, the Parties filed its Second Amended Joint Claim Construction and
Prehearing Statement (the “Second Amended JCCPS”) on February 3, 2026 (Dkt. 141).
WHEREAS, the Second Amended JCCPS identified two terms which the parties agree
upon the construction:
1. 	“a network access gateway device” (’710 Patent, claim 15)
o 	Agreed construction: preamble is limiting.
2. 	“anomaly” (’936 Patent, claims 1-2, 10, 12-13, 18)
o 	Agreed construction: “an unexpectedly present asset, an unexpectedly
absent asset, or an asset that has an unknown value”
WHEREAS, the Court held the Markman hearing for this case on February 6, 2026 (Dkt.
142).
WHEREAS, at the Markman hearing, the Court directed the Parties to meet and confer
and file a stipulation and proposed order regarding the agreed upon terms (Dkt. 142).
WHEREAS, the Parties agree to the following constructions:
1. 	“a network access gateway device” (’710 Patent, claim 15)
o 	Agreed construction: preamble is limiting.
2. 	“anomaly” (’936 Patent, claims 1-2, 10, 12-13, 18)
o 	Agreed construction: “an unexpectedly present asset, an unexpectedly
Case 4:25-cv-02360-HSG Document 147 Filed 02/17/26 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

- 2 - 	STIPULATION RE
CLAIM CONSTRUCTION TERMS
CASE NO. 4:25-CV-02360-HSG
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
absent asset, or an asset that has an unknown value”
WHEREAS, the Parties have not reached an agreement regarding any other terms for
construction.
WHEREAS, Fortinet proposed alternative construction of “service provider network”
(’697 Patent, claims 1, 15, 24-25) as "a network outside of the local area network" at the
Markman hearing.
WHEREAS, Netskope maintains its plain and ordinary meaning position on “service
provider network” (’697 Patent, claims 1, 15, 24-25).
WHEREAS, the Parties agree to submit “service provider network” (’697 Patent, claims
1, 15, 24-25) on the briefs and the argument presented at the Markman hearing.
WHEREAS, the Parties request that the Court continue to consider the meaning of the
following terms:
1. 	“shared network” (’336 Patent, claims 1-2, 4, 6-9, 11, 13-17, 20)
2. 	“subordinate to” (’710 Patent, claims 1, 6, 8, 13, 15, 20)
3. 	“proxy for access sessions to the other services” (’426 Patent, claim 1)
4. 	“principal believing interactions are with the external service” (’426 Patent,
claim 1)
5. 	“snapshots” (’936 Patent, claims 1, 7-8, 12, 21-22)
6. 	“arbitrary number of attributes” (’153 Patent, claims 1, 10, 15)
7. 	“generating an alert” (’697 Patent, claims 1, 15, 24)
8. 	“service provider network” (’697 Patent, claims 1, 15, 24-25)
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Netskope and Fortinet
through their respective counsel that “a network access gateway device” and “anomaly” have
agreed upon meanings and no longer require construction by the Court.
Case 4:25-cv-02360-HSG Document 147 Filed 02/17/26 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

- 3 - 	STIPULATION RE
CLAIM CONSTRUCTION TERMS
CASE NO. 4:25-CV-02360-HSG
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
DATED: February 13, 2026 	Respectfully Submitted,
PERKINS COIE LLP
By: /s/ Andrew N. Klein
Thomas N. Millikan
TMillikan@perkinscoie.com
Joseph P. Reid
JReid@perkinscoie.com
Kyle R. Canavera
KCanavera@perkinscoie.com
Ashlee E. Sherman
ASherman@perkinscoie.com
Sarah M. Anderson
SarahAnderson@perkinscoie.com
11452 El Camino Real, Ste 300
San Diego, California 92130-2080
Andrew N. Klein
AKlein@perkinscoie.com
Hessam Gharaviram
HGharaviram@perkinscoie.com
3150 Porter Drive
Palo Alto, California 94304-1212
Michael Merabi
MMerabi@perkinscoie.com
1888 Century Park East, Suite 1700
Los Angeles, California 90067-1721
Counsel for Plaintiff Netskope, Inc.
GISH PLLC
By: /s/ Ryan Iwahashi
Ryan Iwahashi (CA SBN 284766)
ryan@gishpllc.com
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
Andrew D. Gish (NY SBN 4918454)
(pro hac vice)
andrew@gishpllc.com
Christopher Gerson (NY SBN 4595708)
(pro hac vice)
chris.gerson@gishpllc.com
41 Madison Avenue, Floor 31
New York, NY 10010
Counsel for Defendant Fortinet, Inc.
Case 4:25-cv-02360-HSG Document 147 Filed 02/17/26 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

- 4 - 	STIPULATION RE
CLAIM CONSTRUCTION TERMS
CASE NO. 4:25-CV-02360-HSG
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
ECF ATTESTATION
I, Andrew N. Klein, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this
Stipulation regarding Agreed Claim Construction Terms. 	In compliance with Civil Local Rule
5-1, I hereby attest that Ryan Iwahashi, counsel for Fortinet, Inc., has concurred in this filing.
Dated: February 13, 2026
By: /s/Andrew N. Klein
Andrew N. Klein
Case 4:25-cv-02360-HSG Document 147 Filed 02/17/26 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

- 5 - 	STIPULATION RE
CLAIM CONSTRUCTION TERMS
CASE NO. 4:25-CV-02360-HSG
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
ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 2/17/2026 ___________________________
The Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
U.S. District Court Judge
Case 4:25-cv-02360-HSG Document 147 Filed 02/17/26 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>