Expertise
-
Practice Areas:
- Bar Admissions:
- Education:
- University of Western Ontario (2017) JD
- McMaster University (2014) BEng Mgt (Summa Cum Laude - Thermofluids and Energy Systems)
Details
- Bio
- Cases
- Associations
- Blog Posts
- News & Media
- Publications & Presentations
- Recognition
Jim Lepore
is an associate at Lenczner Slaght.
"Jim is best-in-class for Canadian IP litigation." — Chambers Canada
Jim's focus is advocacy— with a particular interest in intellectual property and commercial litigation. Jim has experience with complex disputes involving companies in the technology, telecommunications and oil and gas sectors. Drawing on his extensive background in engineering, business, and law, he provides creative solutions to legal issues inside and outside of the courtroom.
Prior to joining Lenczner Slaght, Jim summered, articled and practiced at a leading litigation boutique in Toronto.
Jim is a graduate of the University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Law, where he was awarded the WeirFoulds LLP Writing Prize in Intellectual Property, the J.S.D. Tory Writing Prize for excellence in writing and legal research, the Intellectual Property Institute of Canada’s national writing prize and winning prizes in several advocacy competitions. Outside of the classroom, Jim volunteered as a case manager at Western's Business Law Clinic.
Before law school, Jim studied mechanical engineering and management at McMaster University and graduated summa cum laude. His capstone research project was in the field of aero-acoustics, designing a low noise landing gear for a Bombardier private jet.
-
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp et al v JAMP Pharma Corporation
Counsel to JAMP in a NOC action relating to JANUVIA (sitagliptin), a medication used to control high blood sugar in people with type 2 diabetes.
-
Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc et al v JAMP Pharma Corporation
Counsel to JAMP in a NOC action relating to LATUDA (lurasidone), an anti-psychotic medication used to treat bipolar depression and schizophrenia.
-
Copyright counsel to a major news media company in matter relating to unauthorized use of its content to train AI tools.
-
7912854 Canada Inc v Sunprotection Group Inc et al
Counsel to leading window coverings designer and manufacturer, Altex, in a trademark infringement, passing off, false advertising, trade libel and unfair competition action in the Federal Court of Canada.
-
7912854 Canada Inc v Sunprotection Group Inc et al
Counsel to leading window coverings designer and manufacturer, Altex, in a commercial action related to intentional interference with contractual relations, and misappropriation of confidential and proprietary information.
-
Co-counsel to Puma in an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada arising from Caterpillar’s opposition to Puma’s trademark application for PROCAT on the basis that it is confusing with Caterpillar’s registered design trademark (CAT & Triangle Design).
-
James Caruk v Amazon.com Inc et al
Counsel to the Defendants, technology companies (Amazon, Apple, Fox/Tubi) and media production companies, in an action alleging, inter alia, copyright infringement, passing off and misappropriation of personality. This action was dismissed pre-discovery following service of the Defendants’ notice of motion to strike.
-
Fraudulent and Deceptive Web Domains Dispute
Counsel to an infrastructure company related to the takedown and transfer of a fraudulent web domains. Provided strategic advice on intellectual property portfolio and assertion of the same.
-
Songbird Life Science Inc v Hyris Limited
Counsel to Hyris Limited, resisting an application before the Superior Court of Justice seeking injunctive relief. The application related to Canadian distribution of Hyris’s proprietary, COVID-19-specific diagnostic technology, which permitted users to conduct accurate COVID-19 testing “on site”, without the need for a medical laboratory.
-
Counsel to Rovi Guides (a subsidiary of Xperi Holding Corporation) in a patent infringement action involving four patents related to digital entertainment technologies.
-
Canadian Bar Association
-
Ontario Bar Association
-
Intellectual Property Institute of Canada - Internet & Technology Committee (2021-present)
-
Toronto Intellectual Property Group
-
AI in the Courtroom: The Quest for Legal Precedents
The current landscape is inundated with narratives surrounding artificial intelligence and its intersection with the law. From the New York Time’s lawsuit launched against OpenAI in December 2023, to the BC lawyer reprimanded for citing fake AI-generated cases, to the lying Air Canada chatbot, the legal and mainstream media is full of stories of AI or people using AI running up against traditional legal doctrine and practice. Yet, amidst this surge of AI-related incidents, Canada finds itself grappling with more questions than answers.
-
Benjamin Moore: An Opportunity Missed
It has been approximately six months since the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision in Canada (Attorney General) v Benjamin Moore & Co (the “Benjamin Moore Appeal”) was released, yet no practice direction has been issued from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (“CIPO”) to address the decision, and there is no consistency in the way that computer-implemented inventions are being examined. As the patent bar awaits a decision on the leave application to the Supreme Court of Canada, we provide our thoughts on the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision, and the missed opportunity it was.
-
Don’t Make Me Say It a Fourth Time: Federal Court Weighs in (Again) on Patentable Subject Matter
Associate Chief Justice Gagné’s decision in Benjamin Moore & Co v Attorney General of Canada, 2022 FC 923 (“Benjamin Moore”) marks the second time that the Federal Court has had to weigh in to tell the Commissioner that it was not applying the correct test for patentability of computer-implemented inventions. Unlike past decisions (discussed below), the Court in Benjamin Moore, provided instruction on how the Commissioner ought to assess patentability of such inventions. As a top line, these instructions appear to level the playing field – reducing the artificially high standard that computer-implemented inventions face during patent examination.
-
Summary adjudication can be enticing. In the right circumstances, it saves the parties time and money. Unsurprisingly, there is a growing trend in Canadian intellectual property litigation to use summary adjudication that we have been actively monitoring (see, e.g., our comments here, here, here, here, here and here).
-
As part of our series on summary adjudication, we previously commented on the Federal Court’s recent use of a summary trial to resolve a patent infringement dispute. The abbreviated procedure of a summary trial addresses many of the Federal Court’s traditional concerns with summary judgment (e.g., lacking live evidence).
-
The Federal Court of Appeal has historically held that summary judgment is usually not the preferred means of resolving patent infringement actions. These cases are inherently complex and technical, and usually involve expert evidence. In the Federal Court of Appeal’s view, a trial judge who has had the opportunity to hear all of the evidence live is best suited to resolve these disputes (see Suntec Environmental Inc v Trojan Technologies Inc).
-
The Other Shoe Has Dropped: Summary Judgment in the Federal Court
Patent infringement actions are inherently complex and technical. They often involve complex scientific inquiries and expert evidence. The Federal Court has historically held that summary judgment—which does not include live evidence—is generally not the preferred means of resolving patent infringement actions. Instead, such determinations are best left to a trial judge who has had the opportunity to hear all of the evidence live (e.g., Suntec Environmental Inc v Trojan Technologies Inc).
-
A Decade in the Making: Federal Court Weighs in on Non-patentable Subject Matter
Many know Amazon as the world’s largest online retailer, a mantle it carries, in part, because of just how easy it is to buy about anything. In fact, as many Canadians know, you can buy something on Amazon with as little as “1-Click”.
-
The Times They Are a-Changin’: Summary Judgment in the Federal Court
Patent infringement actions are inherently complex and technical. They often involve complex scientific inquiries and expert evidence. The Federal Court has historically held that summary judgment—which does not include live evidence—is generally not the preferred means of resolving patent infringement actions. Instead, such determinations are best left to a trial judge who has had the opportunity to hear all of the evidence live (e.g. Suntec Environmental Inc v Trojan Technologies Inc).
-
During last year's NBA Finals, Kawhi Leonard was taking on more than the Golden State Warriors. In the middle of the Finals, he filed a lawsuit against the company he formerly endorsed—Nike—in the Southern District of California (original complaint here). At issue was Leonard's "Klaw Logo," which he claimed to have conceived before his contract with Nike. An early sketch of the logo and the design Nike ultimately used are shown side-by-side here.
-
Lenczner Slaght Welcomes Jim Lepore
Canada’s leading litigation firm adds another exceptional litigator to its expert Intellectual Property Group.
-
Lenczner Slaght Advocacy Competition in Legal Ethics and Professionalism 2023
We were proud to continue our sponsorship of Western Law’s annual Legal Ethics and Professionalism moot! Matthew B. Lerner, Sean Lewis, Sean Blakeley, Jim Lepore, and Allison Jandura participated as judges.
-
Non-Infringing Alternatives: Moving Beyond Condemnation to Arrive at Compensation
Jim Lepore's article Non-Infringing Alternatives: Moving Beyond Condemnation to Arrive at Compensation appeared in Volume 33 of Canadian Intellectual Property Review.
-
Selecting and Protecting Inherently Strong Names
Jim Lepore co-authored the article Selecting and Protecting Inherently Strong Name for the Hamilton Law Journal.
-
The Effect of Proximity of the Landing Gear Lights on its Turbulent Wake
Jim Lepore co-authored the article The Effect of Proximity of the Landing Gear Lights on its Turbulent Wake that appeared in Volume 10 of the Journal of Turbulence.
-
Experimental Investigation of Landing Light Orientation on Landing Gear Noise
Jim Lepore co-authored the article Experimental Investigation of Landing Light Orientation on Landing Gear Noise for the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Pressure Vessel and Piping Conference.
-
Stereoscopic PIV Study of a Simplified Landing Gear Model
Jim Lepore co-authored the article Stereoscopic PIV Study of a Simplified Landing Gear Model for the 10th Pacific Symposium on Flow Visualization and Image Processing Conference.
-
Limitations of Only Using a NUANS Search
Jim Lepore co-authored the article Limitations of Only Using a NUANS Search for the Hamilton Law Journal.
-
Canada's IP Writing Challenge (2016)
Intellectual Property Institute of Canada; IP Osgoode
-
First Year Appellate Competition (FYAC) (2015)
Winner
-
Harold G. Fox Intellectual Property Moot (2016)
Honourable Mention - Best Oral Advocate
-
Highest Standing in Process and Substance in IP Litigation (2016)
University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Law
-
J.S.D. Tory Writing Prize (2017)
University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Law
-
Legate & Associates Medical Malpractice Trial Advocacy Moot (2017)
Winner
-
University of Western Ontario Law Alumni Association Scholarship (2014)
University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Law
-
WeirFoulds LLP Writing Prize in Intellectual Property (2016)
University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Law