Attorney Detail Banner
Back to Attorneys
Jaffe, Jordan

Jordan Jaffe

Direct Tel: +1 415-875-6315
San Francisco
Tel: +1 415 875 6600 Fax: +1 415 875 6700

Jordan R. Jaffe is a partner in the San Francisco office and Chair of Quinn Emanuel’s Autonomous Vehicle Practice.  Jordan’s practice focuses on working with cutting edge technology clients on their most important intellectual property and business litigation disputes.  When representing plaintiffs, Jordan’s experience includes recovering hundreds of million dollars of value for his clients.  And when representing defendants, he has similarly defeated claims for hundreds of millions of dollars of claimed damages.   Jordan was recently selected as a Rising Star by Law360, which honors “the top legal talent under 40.”

Jordan’s highlighted recent experience includes: 

  • Jordan played a leading role in what was likely the most-watched technology litigation in the country in 2017-8—Waymo v. Uber. Jordan and others at Quinn Emanuel represented Waymo LLC, formerly Google’s self-driving car program, in an action asserting misappropriation of trade secrets and patent infringement related to Waymo’s LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) and self-driving technology against Uber Technologies, Inc. and Ottomotto LLC.   Jordan led the technical team at Quinn Emanuel, including co-presenting Waymo’s opening statement at trial.  After opening statements and on the fourth day of trial, the parties settled the litigation, with Uber granting Waymo a percentage of equity in Uber (valued at $245 million) as well as injunctive relief that ensures Uber will not use Waymo’s trade secret hardware and software self-driving car technology.
  • Jordan and a team of Quinn Emanuel lawyers won a confidential settlement for Fortinet Inc. in its suit against rival security software company Sophos Group Plc.  Fortinet alleged Sophos poached Fortinet’s workers, stole its technology and infringed its patents.  The settlement came after an arbitrator found that Sophos and a former Fortinet employee should pay Jordan’s client $1.7 million for poaching employees.  Fortinet successfully convinced the arbitrator that one former Fortinet employee had engaged in “despicable,” “deceitful and malicious” conduct, and awarded Fortinet actual damages, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees. 
  • Jordan was deeply involved in the “smartphone wars” representing HTC, Samsung and Google across the country. As part of those litigations, Jordan cross-examined at trial and deposition some of the original creators of iPhone touch screen technology and other Apple engineers.

Jordan's cases and work have been widely covered in both industry and legal press including the New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, The Verge, Bloomberg, CNet, Law360, and Courthouse News. 

Based on his experience, Jordan regularly presents to other attorneys on cutting edge litigation topics.  Recent examples include:

  • Recent Developments in Artificial Intelligence and Privacy at the FTC, EU and Beyond (Moderator), Bar Association of San Francisco, June 2021
  • Can Artificial Intelligence Invent? (After DABUS) (Moderator), San Francisco Intellectual Property Association, October 2020
  • California Consumer Privacy Act and the Internet of Things: The CCPA’s Private Right of Action As Applied to Autonomous Vehicles and AI Systems, The Cybersecurity and Privacy Law Conference, presented by The Bar Association of San Francisco, October 2019
  • Autonomous Vehicle Litigation & Liability: Early Lessons Learned from the Front Lines, Quinn Emanuel Institute for the Future of the Auto Industry, Stuttgart, Germany, October 2019
  • Legal Considerations for Urban Air Mobility: Past, Present, Future, Sustainable Aviation Symposium, October 2019
  • Cybersecurity, Privacy and IP: In-House Perspectives (Moderator), 2019 Annual Seminar, San Francisco Intellectual Property Litigation Association
  • Litigation In The Spotlight: Preparing For Front Page News Litigation, CPA Global Webinar, September 2018
  • IP Litigation for Driverless Car, AI and Other New Industries, San Francisco Intellectual Property Litigation Association, August 2018

Jordan has a national practice, including litigating cases before the International Trade Commission and district courts throughout the United States.  Jordan has practiced in the Northern District of California, Eastern District of Texas, Western District of Texas, Delaware of Delaware, Southern District of California, Eastern District of Missouri, District of Arizona, and Central District of California.  

With his degree in computer science, Jordan is adept has worked on matters involving a broad range of technologies.  His experience includes litigation concerning touch screen sensor design, autonomous vehicles, internet search technology, cryptography, business intelligence software, network security, Ethernet chip design, graphical user interfaces, object-oriented programming, 3G cellular communications, and wireless network design.

Jordan also maintains an active pro bono practice.  He helped organize a day trip of over 15+ QE attorneys to Modesto, California in partnership with One Justice.  There, Jordan and others assisted 28 low-income Californians in applying for US citizenship.   He also represented pro bono Jonathan Gray, a former deputy sheriff of the City and County of San Francisco, in his claims against the city for sex discrimination in the staffing of San Francisco’s jails.  The case, Ambat et al v. City & County of San Francisco et al, 3:07-cv-03622-SI (N.D. Cal.), settled favorably before a trial in federal court, with the city agreeing to rescind the policy in question. 

  • Waymo
  • Google Inc.
  • Fortinet, Inc.
  • HTC
  • Marvell Semiconductor, Inc.
  • Samsung
  • Blackberry
  • Sony Mobile (formerly Sony Ericsson)
  • Mixbook
  • IBM
  • On behalf of Google Inc., obtained summary judgment of invalidity on Section 101 grounds for patent asserted against Google search-related functionality. 
  • Represented Fortinet Inc. as a plaintiff in wide-ranging dispute with its competitor and certain former employees, involving alleged misappropriation of trade secrets, patent infringement claims and other various state law claims.  The dispute included parallel proceedings in the Northern District of California, JAMS arbitration, the District of Delaware and three inter partes reviews before the Patent Trial and Appeals Board.  In JAMS arbitration, Fortinet successfully convinced the arbitrator that one former Fortinet employee had engaged in “despicable,” “deceitful and malicious” conduct, and awarded Fortinet actual damages, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.  The parties settled shortly before trial in the Northern District of California on Fortinet’s trade secret and patent infringement claims, with the competitor agreeing to make a confidential one-time payment to Fortinet. 
  • Represented defendant Samsung Electronics and third party Google in the second “smartphone” patent case brought by Apple in the Northern District of California.  Representation focused on Apple patents on alleged universal search, for which Apple did not recover, including Apple dropping one patent before trial (after it had previously obtained a preliminary injunction on the same patent) and a jury verdict of non-infringement for the other.  
  • Represented respondent HTC in an ITC investigation (337-TA-710) initiated by Apple involving ten patents covering object-oriented operating systems, real-time processing, user interface and networking technologies.  Five patents were dismissed prior to trial, and one additional patent was dismissed during trial.  All patent claims defended by the firm were determined to be not infringed and invalid.  
  • Represented respondent HTC in a second ITC investigation (337-TA-797) filed by Apple involving patents concerning sensor-based rotation of user interface, and touch panel sensor design.  Secured ITC Staff recommendation for complete defense victory in second investigation.  Shortly before an initial determination was due, HTC and Apple executed a worldwide settlement.
  • Represented Marvell Semiconductor, Inc. in defending patent infringement claims brought by U.S. Ethernet Innovations, LLC, involving four patents related to Ethernet technology. Some of the asserted patents had previously been asserted against other parties, including one assertion resulting a $45 million jury verdict in N.D. Cal.  After successfully transferring its suit from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District California. Marvell won summary judgment of invalidity and/or non-infringement as to all of the asserted patents.
  • Represented eHarmony, ESPN, Fox, Gannett, LinkedIn,, MTV, Twitter and Skype in defending against patent infringement claims in the Eastern District of Texas.  Each defendant settled for a fraction (less than two orders of magnitude) less than plaintiff's original demand early in the litigation.
  • Represented Catalina Marketing in its suit to enforce a patent in the field of electronic coupon distribution. The suit settled on the eve of the claim construction hearing, with a full recognition that the patent at issue was valid and enforceable.
  • Represented Mixbook in a patent infringement suit brought by its much larger competitor, involving patents concerning photobook software technology.  
  • Represented IBM in a patent infringement indemnity suit concerning automated telephony systems.
  • Represented IBM in a patent infringement suit concerning database reporting software. 
  • University of San Francisco School of Law
    (J.D., cum laude, 2007)
    • University of San Francisco Law Review:
      • Executive Editor, 2006-2007
    • Intellectual Property Law Bulletin:
      • Articles Editor, 2005–2006
  • Lake Forest College
    (B.A., Computer Science and Politics, 2004)
  • The State Bar of California
  • United States District Court:
    • Central District of California
    • Northern District of California
    • Southern District of California
    • Eastern District of Texas
  • United States Court of Appeals:
    • Ninth Circuit
    • Federal Circuit
  • Extern to the Hon. Joyce L. Kennard:
    • California Supreme Court, 2006
  • Listed as a Best Lawyers in America Edition: 2021 and 2022 for Intellectual Property Litigation
  • Rising Star by Law360, which honors “the top legal talent under 40.”
  • Advisory Board Member, Emerging Technologies Chair, San Francisco Intellectual Property Association, 2020-2021
  • Member, Bar Association of San Francisco