J. David Hadden
Partner
Litigation
J. David
Hadden
J. David
Hadden
Partner
Litigation
Dave is a top trial lawyer who is highly sought by the world’s most recognized and innovative companies to help them win complex and high-stakes patent litigation disputes. As one of the most influential patent litigators in the U.S., Dave has repeatedly been honored as one of the top 75 IP litigation attorneys in California by the Daily Journal, and for the third consecutive year in 2023, he was named among the top 2 best performing patent litigators in the country by Patexia. Dave has also been recognized as a leading patent litigator in California by Chambers USA and is routinely honored by IAM Patent 1000, The Legal 500 and Northern California Super Lawyers.
The world’s most innovative companies seek Dave’s advice not only because of his strong command of the law and strategic vision, but also because of his unsurpassed technical expertise. He is a former National Science Foundation Graduate Fellow with an undergraduate degree in physics from Yale University and graduate work in string theory at the world-renowned physics department at Princeton University. He understands most complex technologies with ease and translates them to trial themes that win. He has represented companies in a variety of technologies including cloud computing, natural language processing, machine learning, wearable tech, medical devices, cryptography, telecommunications, database management and business intelligence, e-commerce, and software and hardware design.
“Fenwick sets a gold standard for patent litigation. They understand technology and patent law as well as, or better than, anyone in the industry. They can position a case for trial appropriately, win it at trial for you, defend that win on appeal for you, and maybe get your fees to boot.”
The Legal 500, Client Quote
2022 Edition
Some of Dave’s winning highlights include:
- Winning all of his Federal Circuit appeals for clients including Amazon, Intel, Under Armour, Twitter and Zillow
- A summary judgment in declaratory judgment action against PersonalWeb Technologies on behalf of Amazon and 80+ AWS customers, including Airbnb, Kickstarter, GoPro and Venmo; Federal Circuit affirmed in a precedential opinion that enlarged Kessler preclusion to the benefit of all patent infringement defendants; subsequently won summary judgment of non-infringement on PersonalWeb’s remaining claims followed by $4.8 million in attorney fees and nontaxable costs for Amazon
- A full defense verdict for Amazon in a patent dispute in the Western District of Texas against Freshub, which was seeking $246 million in damages; a jury found that Amazon’s Alexa-powered smart home devices did not infringe patents held by Freshub
- A full defense verdict for Amazon in the Eastern District of Texas against Virginia Innovation Sciences; the jury found no infringement of any asserted claims and concluded that the patents were invalid, which appears to be only the third time following the Federal Circuit’s decision in Berkheimer v. HP that Section 101 eligibility has been tried to a jury
- A full defense jury verdict for Zillow and Adchemy in the Western District of North Carolina against competitor LendingTree; the verdict affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s argument on appeal
- A summary judgment of non-infringement for his client Twitter in a patent infringement action brought by Cooper Notification; the judgment affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s argument on appeal
- A summary judgment of non-infringement for his client Groupon in the Middle District of Florida; the judgment was affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s argument on appeal
- A full defense jury verdict in Delaware for his client Amazon; the verdict affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s argument on appeal
- A winning jury verdict and a $25M jury award for his client Informatica in its patent suit against Business Objects
- A summary judgment of non-infringement followed by $820,000 in attorney’s fees for Voxer in a patent dispute with IPVX Patent Holdings
Some of Dave’s winning highlights include:
- Winning all of his Federal Circuit appeals for clients including Amazon, Intel, Under Armour, Twitter and Zillow
- A summary judgment in declaratory judgment action against PersonalWeb Technologies on behalf of Amazon and 80+ AWS customers, including Airbnb, Kickstarter, GoPro and Venmo; Federal Circuit affirmed in a precedential opinion that enlarged Kessler preclusion to the benefit of all patent infringement defendants; subsequently won summary judgment of non-infringement on PersonalWeb’s remaining claims followed by $4.8 million in attorney fees and nontaxable costs for Amazon
- A full defense verdict for Amazon in a patent dispute in the Western District of Texas against Freshub, which was seeking $246 million in damages; a jury found that Amazon’s Alexa-powered smart home devices did not infringe patents held by Freshub
- A full defense verdict for Amazon in the Eastern District of Texas against Virginia Innovation Sciences; the jury found no infringement of any asserted claims and concluded that the patents were invalid, which appears to be only the third time following the Federal Circuit’s decision in Berkheimer v. HP that Section 101 eligibility has been tried to a jury
- A full defense jury verdict for Zillow and Adchemy in the Western District of North Carolina against competitor LendingTree; the verdict affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s argument on appeal
- A summary judgment of non-infringement for his client Twitter in a patent infringement action brought by Cooper Notification; the judgment affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s argument on appeal
- A summary judgment of non-infringement for his client Groupon in the Middle District of Florida; the judgment was affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s argument on appeal
- A full defense jury verdict in Delaware for his client Amazon; the verdict affirmed by the Federal Circuit following Dave’s argument on appeal
- A winning jury verdict and a $25M jury award for his client Informatica in its patent suit against Business Objects
- A summary judgment of non-infringement followed by $820,000 in attorney’s fees for Voxer in a patent dispute with IPVX Patent Holdings
- Amazon.com
- Box
- Cryptography Research
- Dropbox
- Groupon
- Hewlett-Packard
- Informatica
- Motorola
- Netflix
- VIA Technologies
- Xilinx
- Zillow
- Amazon.com
- Box
- Cryptography Research
- Dropbox
- Groupon
- Hewlett-Packard
- Informatica
- Motorola
- Netflix
- VIA Technologies
- Xilinx
- Zillow
Recognition Recognition Recognition
Recognition Recognition Recognition
Chambers USA
2022 - 2023
Recognized as a leading patent litigator in California with one client sharing Dave is “smart and experienced and understands the technology better than your engineers.”
Patexia
2021 - 2023
- Recognized as the best-performing litigator for defendants (2023)
- Named among the top 2 best-performing patent litigators in the country (representing defendants and plaintiffs) since 2021
- Recognized as the second most active patent litigator (representing defendants) in the U.S. (2022)
IAM Patent 1000
2016 - 2023
Recognized among California’s leading patent litigators, and described as a “tremendous trial lawyer” and “fantastic litigator” who is “distinguished by his combination of trial and technical skill” and “understands how to win.”
The Legal 500
2020 - 2022
Recognized for patent litigation with one client describing him as a "genius" and The Legal 500 describing him as a "great litigation strategist" with a "superior understanding of tech.”
- Daily Journal has consecutively named Dave among the top intellectual property lawyers in California since 2018
- Northern California Super Lawyers has recognized Dave as a top intellectual property litigation attorney since 2011
Chambers USA
2022 - 2023
Recognized as a leading patent litigator in California with one client sharing Dave is “smart and experienced and understands the technology better than your engineers.”
Patexia
2021 - 2023
- Recognized as the best-performing litigator for defendants (2023)
- Named among the top 2 best-performing patent litigators in the country (representing defendants and plaintiffs) since 2021
- Recognized as the second most active patent litigator (representing defendants) in the U.S. (2022)
IAM Patent 1000
2016 - 2023
Recognized among California’s leading patent litigators, and described as a “tremendous trial lawyer” and “fantastic litigator” who is “distinguished by his combination of trial and technical skill” and “understands how to win.”
The Legal 500
2020 - 2022
Recognized for patent litigation with one client describing him as a "genius" and The Legal 500 describing him as a "great litigation strategist" with a "superior understanding of tech.”