[U.S.] Finjan v. Secure Computing <November 2010, CAFC>
Updated: 6 hours ago
Article information
Article type: Case note
Category: United States
Topics: —
First published on this website: 2026-11-01
Display and classification checked: November 2, 2026
Originally published on Ameblo: 2025-06-29 (Japan time). Full English translation.
[U.S.] Finjan v. Secure Computing <November 2010, CAFC (626 F.3d 1197)>
Software for proactive scanning incorporated in a product constituting a recording medium was locked.
⇒ Product invention infringed; method invention not infringed.
(1) Because a user could unlock it by purchasing a key, direct infringement of the product invention was established.
*In ACCO v. ABA, 501 F.3d 1307 (Fed. Cir. 2007), the claims required a particular configuration (for example, locking-device pins positioned in particular slots), so direct infringement required actual use in an infringing mode. By contrast, Finjan's claims did not require a particular configuration or “activation” for the proactive-scanning function to operate; the presence of a program capable of performing that function was sufficient for infringement.
(2) No infringement of the method invention because it was not actually practiced.
=Southwest Software v. Harlequin, 226 F.3f 1280 (Fed. Cir. 2000)
Update history
The first-published date remains unchanged. Display maintenance, classification changes, related-article updates, and text corrections are recorded separately.
November 1, 2026: First published on this website.
November 2, 2026: Added article information, classification, topics, language navigation, related articles where the same case was confirmed, consultation guidance, and SEO. The original text and first-published date were preserved.
Comments