Joseph M. Lipner is a partner in the Los Angeles office of Irell & Manella LLP, where he is a member of the firm’s intellectual property and litigation groups and chair of the firm's appellate practice group. He has litigated in the superior and appellate courts of California, federal district courts, the Second, Ninth and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal, and the United States Supreme Court.

After law school, Mr. Lipner clerked for Justice Ruth I. Abrams on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. He then worked as an associate of Professor Alan Dershowitz, litigating with him criminal and civil appeals.

Mr. Lipner joined Irell & Manella in 1991 and became a partner in 1997. In addition to his trial and appellate practice, Mr. Lipner is also the chair of the firm’s ethics committee, providing guidance on a variety of issues under the legal ethics rules. Mr. Lipner was selected for inclusion in Southern California “Super Lawyers” by Los Angeles Magazine every year since 2006.

Read More

Representative Matters

Representative cases in which Mr. Lipner has served as counsel include:

Crea v. City of Hope National Medical Center: a lawsuit by a scientist claiming a share of royalties on key biotechnology patents, in which the district court granted summary judgment that the firm’s client City of Hope owed no such royalties and the Federal Circuit affirmed after argument by Mr. Lipner;

Trealoff v. Liegl: an appeal from a multi-million dollar compensatory and punitive damages award involving, among other things, the theft of computer data, in which Mr. Lipner successfully argued for affirmance of the entire damage amount and an award of over $500,000 in fees and costs in favor of the firm’s client;

City of Hope National Medical Center v. Genentech, Inc.: Mr. Lipner played a significant role in the trial and appeal of this case concerning royalty payments, in which the jury awarded, and the California Supreme Court affirmed, a $300 million damage award in favor of the firm’s client City of Hope – the largest damage award ever affirmed by the California courts;

TiVo, Inc. v. Motorola and Time Warner Cable: a patent infringement lawsuit relating to DVR technology that settled days before trial with an agreement that secured for the firm’s client, TiVo, $490 Million in a lump sum payment;

TiVo, Inc. v. AT&T; TiVo, Inc. v. Verizon: patent infringement lawsuits relating to DVR technology that resulted in licensing payments to TiVo of $215 Million, plus per subscriber month license fees, from AT&T; and $250 Million, plus per subscriber month license fees, from Verizon;

Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass'n: United States Supreme Court case regarding the constitutionality of a California criminal statute relating to video games in which the firm filed an amicus brief on behalf of the State of  Rhode Island and nine other States and Territories arguing that the statute was unconstitutional; the Supreme Court's majority opinion cited Mr. Lipner's amicus brief;

Santarus, Inc. v. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc.: appeal in which the Federal Circuit reversed a judgment of patent invalidity, ruling in favor of the firm's client that the patents-in-suit were valid;

Tessera v. Micron and Infineon: a patent and antitrust lawsuit involving  semiconductor packaging, resolved by a settlement that entitled the firm’s client to $80 million and significant future royalties;

Microprocessor Enhancement Corporation v. Texas Instruments, Inc.: an appeal in which the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of the firm’s client, Texas Instrument, where plaintiff had sought over $94 million in damages and a permanent injunction against TI’s line of C6000 processors;

Intergraph Corporation v. Hewlett-Packard, Inc.: a patent lawsuit involving HP’s microprocessor technology and counterclaims by HP alleging that Intergraph committed antitrust violations;

MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Celltech and City of Hope: a lawsuit seeking to invalidate a biotechnology patent owned by Genentech and City of Hope, in which the parties litigated the issues presented before the district court, the Federal Circuit and the United States Supreme Court;

Beckman Research Institute of the City of Hope v. Genentech, Inc.: an arbitration involving royalty payments for biotechnology developed by City of Hope and Genentech scientists;

Xerox Corporation v. Hewlett-Packard, Inc.: a series of patent infringement lawsuits in which Xerox accused HP’s printers of infringement, resolved in favor of HP on summary judgment;

A.S.D. v. Western Municipal Water District of Riverside County: an appeal in which the California Court of Appeal upheld grant of summary judgment in favor of Mr. Lipner’s client in connection with the construction of a disputed contract provision;

Bances v. Immigration and Naturalization Service: an appeal in which the Ninth Circuit reversed the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals and directed the grant of asylum in favor of Mr. Lipner’s client;

O’Melveny & Myers v. FDIC: a proceeding in which the United States Supreme Court ruled for Mr. Lipner’s client, reversing the Ninth Circuit’s determination that federal law governed claims brought by the FDIC; and  

Wells Fargo & Co. v. First Interstate Bancorp: an action in which the court ruled that First Interstate had no obligation to auction itself to the highest bidder.

View More
View More


J. Lipner and L. Wright, Beyond Malpractice Cases: Determining the Existence of Federal Jurisdiction Under Gunn v. Minton, Intellectual Property Today (January 2014)

J. Lipner and B.J. Ard, The Final Word:  Civil Law Developments at State Supreme Court, Daily Journal (Recurring Column, 2012-2017)

M. Chu and J. Lipner, Adopting A Case Theme, in Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook (BNA 2010 and 2012 Supplement)

J. Lipner, Imposing Federal Business On Officers of The States:  What the Tenth Amendment Might Mean, 57 Geo. Wash. L.Rev. 907 (1989) 

View More
View More
View More
View More

Bar & Court Admissions

  • 1990, Massachusetts and New York; 1991, California
  • 1992, U.S. District Court, Central District of California
  • 1996, U.S. District Court, Southern District of California
  • 1998, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
  • 1999, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
  • 2002, Federal Circuit Court of Appeals
  • 2005, United States Supreme Court