- University of Southern California (J.D., 2006); Order of the Coif; Executive Articles Editor of the Southern California Law Review
- Washington University, St. Louis (B.A., History, 1994), with Honors
Josh Gordon is counsel in the Los Angeles office of Irell & Manella LLP, where he is a member of the firm's litigation practice group. Mr. Gordon has represented both individuals and corporations in a variety of intellectual property and other commercial disputes. His practice spans various industries, having represented clients in the entertainment, technology, life-sciences, telecommunications, and consumer-electronics industries. He has experience in both state and federal court, as well as in mediations, arbitrations and before a federal administrative commission. Mr. Gordon and his colleagues have secured key rulings on motion practice and appellate review, arbitration victories, multi-million dollar settlements, and the release of all claims against their clients prior to and after trial.
In addition to his practice, Mr. Gordon is actively involved in the firm's Hiring and Mentoring Committees and is currently the co-chair of the firm’s Summer Committee. He was recently elected to the board of the LA County Bar Association Counsel for Justice. Mr. Gordon was recognized as a "Rising Star" by Super Lawyers magazine in 2014-2017.
Mr. Gordon earned his J.D. from the University of Southern California, where he was the executive articles editor of the Southern California Law Review. He authored "Pacifica is Dead. Long Live Pacifica: Formulating a New Argument Structure to Preserve Government Regulation of Indecent Broadcasts," 79 S. Cal. L. Rev. 1451 (2006). Mr. Gordon had the honor of serving as a judicial extern to the Honorable Candace Cooper of the California Court of Appeal for the Second District.
Prior to law school, Mr. Gordon held management positions in entrepreneurial ventures in the professional sports and e-commerce industries.
- Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc.
Represented Ariosa Diagnostics in well-publicized proceedings in which a Federal Circuit panel affirmed the District Court’s summary judgment order invalidating Sequenom’s patent for failing to claim patent-eligible subject matter and in which the Federal Circuit subsequently declined to rehear that decision en banc.
- Verinata Health, Inc. and Illumina, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics
Currently representing Ariosa Diagnostics in three consolidated patent infringement suits in the Northern District of California which, like the action involving Sequenom, seek to enjoin Ariosa from selling its innovative non-invasive test for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Ariosa persuaded the district court to stay the cases, which involve three patents, pending inter partes reviews and appeals to the Federal Circuit.
- QED Holdings, LLC v. QED International, LLC and William H. Block, et al.
Represented QED Holdings, LLC, an independent film company, in trademark, contract and tort proceedings, both in federal court and arbitration. The proceedings resolved to the satisfaction of all parties.
- Currently representing one of Hollywood's largest studios in a well-publicized class action alleging that the studios have failed to account properly for the exploitation of motion pictures on home video.
- PDL BioPharma, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc. and F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
Represented PDL BioPharma in a Nevada state court action alleging breach of a 2003 settlement agreement that, among other things, barred Genentech from taking any action to challenge the validity of certain PDL patent rights. After extensive discovery and motion practice, the case was stayed by agreement of the parties pending Genentech and Roche’s interlocutory appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court of a trial court order granting PDL’s motion to compel them to produce critical documents withheld on grounds of privilege. The case settled during the appeal, with Genentech entering into amended license agreements with PDL. Certain details about the settlement can be found in PDL’s public disclosures.
- Represented TiVo Inc. against Microsoft and Verizon, including before the International Trade Commission. Cases resolved favorably to TiVo, including a settlement in which Verizon agreed to provide TiVo with total compensation worth at least $250.4 million.
- Represented the Natural Resources Defense Council in highly publicized litigation involving the effects of naval sonar on marine mammals. Mr. Gordon participated in the litigation before a federal district court, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court.
- Successfully represented several major motion picture studios in contract disputes.
- Won a complete victory in an arbitration proceeding, preserving his client's 100% rights to a highly-successful video game franchise.
- Represented a major telecommunications company in negotiations and a subsequent arbitration, obtaining a settlement of over $50 million and additional relief.
- Obtained positive settlements for multiple technology companies in licensing and patent disputes.
- California, 2006
- U.S. District Court, Central and Northern Districts of California
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit and Federal Circuit