Jordan Scopa is a partner in the Dispute Resolution Group at Goodmans. Jordan's practice focuses on intellectual property disputes, including disputes relating to patents, trademarks and copyright. He appears very frequently before the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal and has also appeared before the Supreme Court of Canada.
Jordan is one of the most active patent litigators in Canada, who assists his clients at all stages of litigation (i.e., pre-litigation strategy, pleadings, documentary and oral discovery, delivery of expert evidence, trial and appeal). Jordan also has a specialized appellate practice, devoted to taking over appeals from unsuccessful trials. In all facets of his practice, Jordan prides himself on client service and responsiveness.
Jordan’s practice has spanned numerous diverse industries, including pharmaceuticals (both small molecules and biologics), healthcare devices and mobility aids, mining equipment and heavy machinery, oil and gas (including hydraulic fracturing), consumer goods (including detergents), audio-video and internet technology and vertical farming.
Given his active practice, Jordan has been counsel on leading cases involving patent validity and infringement. He has also acted on the leading cases involving the assessment and quantification of remedies, for patent infringement (i.e., damages and accounting of profits) and damages pursuant to section 8 of the Patented Medicines (NOC) Regulations. Jordan has served as a reviewer for the reference book, “Calculating Monetary Remedies in Intellectual Property Cases in Canada”.
Jordan also advises pharmaceutical clients regarding regulatory issues relating to the Food and Drugs Act and the Food and Drug Regulations and pricing strategy relating to the Patented Medicines Prices Review Board (“PMPRB”). This has led to Jordan acting as counsel on judicial review applications, including from decisions of the Minister of Health.
He also advises clients regarding the licensing of intellectual property and technology.
Jordan is recognized by numerous publications for his IP expertise including Chambers Global and Chambers Canada where he is described as “amazing”, a “super smart”, “strategic and quick”, having "so much experience", bringing "extraordinary intelligence and strategy", providing "fantastic advice", and acting in “high-profile” cases.
WTR 1000 describes Jordan as follows: "Jordan is an elite litigator and a superb client manager. He is the total package: a brilliant and original thinker, adaptable and collaborative, and he has an outstanding business sense.”
Who’s Who Legal Life Sciences: Patent Litigation and Who’s Who Legal Canada – Life Sciences also note Jordan is a “great lawyer” with “superb knowledge of the pharmaceutical sector” and a national and global leader in patent litigation.
Jordan’s representative work includes:
- Sandoz Canada v. Janssen, 2023 FCA 221 – retained as appellate counsel after an unsuccessful challenge to the validity of a patent related to a pulmonary arterial hypertension medication
- Eli Lilly v. Apotex, 2023 FCA 125 – successful resistance to an appeal from a trial decision invalidating a patent relating to the dose of an ED medication, on the basis of obviousness
- Pharmascience v. Teva Canada Innovation, 2022 FCA 207 – acted as appellate counsel on issues relating to the impact of settlement overtures to costs awards
- Nova Chemicals v. Dow Chemical, 2022 SCC 43 – acted as counsel for an intervener, the Canadian Generic Pharmaceutical Association, on the leading case relating to the accounting of profits remedy for patent infringement (and the role of non-infringing options)
- AbbVie Corporation v. JAMP Pharma Corporation, 2022 FC 1209 – successful representation of JAMP in a judicial review application resulting in JAMP retaining its Notice of Compliance for its adalimumab product
- GEMAK Trust v. Jempak Corporation, 2022 FCA 141 – retained as appellate counsel, resulting in a successful appeal overturning a Judgment dismissing an action for patent infringement
- Pharmascience v. Teva Canada Innovation, 2022 FCA 2 – acted as appellate counsel on issues relating to the requirement for “proper disclosure” of the factual basis and sound line of reasoning supporting a sound prediction of utility
- Teva Canada Innovation v. Pharmascience, 2020 FC 1158 – successful challenge to the validity of a patent related to a multiple sclerosis medication, on the basis of obviousness
- Eli Lilly v. Apotex, 2020 FC 816 – successful challenge to the validity and infringement of a patent relating to the dose of an ED medication, on the bases of anticipation and obviousness
- Eli Lilly v. Apotex, 2020 FC 814 – successful challenge to the validity and infringement of a patent relating to the process to make the active ingredient in an ED medication, on the bases of anticipation and obviousness
- Evolution Technologies v. Human Care Canada, 2019 FCA 209 – successful appeal of a trial judgment enjoining the sale of a major mobility-aid product and awarding financial remedies on account of patent infringement
- Evolution Technologies v. Human Care Canada, 2019 FCA 11 – successful motion to stay a trial judgment enjoining the sale of a major mobility-aid product and awarding financial remedies, pending the outcome of an appeal
- Apotex v. Eli Lilly, 2018 FCA 217 – successful appeal of a trial award of $75 million in pre-judgment interest as damages for patent infringement
- Amgen Canada v. Apotex, 2015 FC 1261 – successful challenge to the validity of a patent relating to a biologic medication, on the basis of obviousness
- Canada (National Revenue) v. Amdocs Canadian Managed Services, 2015 FC 1234 – successful opposition to an application for a compliance order pursuant to section 231.7 of the Income Tax Act
- Eli Lilly Canada v. Apotex, 2015 FC 1016 - successful challenge to the validity and infringement of a patent relating to the formulation of an ED medication, on the basis of obviousness
- Apotex v. Merck & Co., 2015 FCA 171 – successful in the adoption of the legal relevance of non-infringing alternatives in the assessment of damages for patent infringement
- Alcon Canada v. Apotex, 2014 FC 791 - successful challenge to the validity of a patent relating to the formulation of a glaucoma medication, on the basis of obviousness
- Alcon Canada v. Apotex, 2014 FC 699 - successful challenge to the validity of a patent relating to a glaucoma medication, on the bases of anticipation and obviousness
- Apotex v. Sanofi-Aventis Canada, 2012 FC 553 and Teva Canada v. Sanofi-Aventis Canada, 2012 FC 551 and 2012 FC 552 – claims for damages pursuant to section 8 of the Patented Medicines (NOC) Regulations by multiple generic pharmaceutical companies relating to an anti-hypertensive medication
Awards & Recognition
Chambers Global Band 2, Intellectual Property: Litigation 2024
Chambers Canada Band 2, Intellectual Property: Litigation 2024
The Legal 500 Canada Leading Individual, Intellectual Property 2024
Best Lawyers in Canada Recognized, Intellectual Property Law 2024
Chambers Global Band 3, Intellectual Property: Litigation 2023
Who's Who Legal Recognized National Leader, Patents and Life Sciences 2023
Jordan is a Member-At-Large of the Executive of the Intellectual Property Section of the Canadian Bar Association.
Jordan lectures in the Intellectual Property in Health Law course in the Professional LLM program at Osgoode Hall Law School.
During his undergraduate studies, Jordan completed a two-year laboratory study relating to Huntington’s disease at Massachusetts General Hospital (and Harvard Medical School).
Jordan has successfully acted pro bono in student disciplinary appeals held before the Child and Family Services Review Board.
- University of Toronto, J.D., 2009
- Harvard University, A.B., 2004, magna cum laude in biology
- Law Society of Ontario
- Ontario Bar Association
- Canadian Bar Association
- Canadian Technology Law Association
- Intellectual Property Institute of Canada
- Toronto Intellectual Property Group
- Licensing Executives Society
Call to Bar
- 2010 Ontario
Intellectual PropertyOn December 1, 2023, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) will be implementing changes to two of its practice notices: (1) Practice in trademark opposition proceedings; and (2) Practice in section…
Patent, Trademark and Copyright LitigationGiven this weekend's cancellation of Formula 1's Emilia Romagna Grand Prix at Imola, otherwise known as the "Autodromo Enzo e Dino Ferrari", the Goodmans IP Team decided to review some recent patent…
Intellectual PropertyIn its new drug submission for SIMLANDI, a biosimilar containing adalimumab, JAMP Pharma Corporation (“JAMP”) sought approval for three specific presentations: (i) 40 mg/0.4 mL pre-filled syringe…
Intellectual PropertyThere are some intellectual property law events that are so culturally important that they cannot wait for a weekday update. They deserve a special weekend update. This is one of them.As…
Intellectual PropertyThe Goodmans IP Team is proud to have been recognized in the 26th edition of the Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory 2022.As a group, the Goodmans IP Team was recognized as follows:Intellectual Property…
Intellectual PropertyThe Goodmans IP Team is proud to have been recognized in the 2022 edition of the World Trademark Review 1000 (WTR 1000) – The World’s Leading Trademark Professionals.Goodmans is described as being…
News & Events
Banking and Financial ServicesWe are proud to announce Goodmans LLP has once again received top-tier recognition from Chambers and Partners in the Chambers Global 2024 Guide released today. Recognition from…
Dispute ResolutionWe are delighted to announce the Lexpert Special Edition: Litigation 2023 once again features Goodmans partners among Canada's experts in litigation.Congratulations to our 13 featured…
Banking and Financial ServicesWe are pleased to share Goodmans lawyers have been recognized across Who's Who Legal's National Guide: Canada 2023. WWL National Guides identify national or regional leaders in a sector, industry…