About David L.
David L. Hayes built a technical foundation long before he entered law school. He earned a B.S. in electrical engineering from Rice University in 1978 and followed that with an M.S.E.E. from Stanford in 1980. He then turned to the law, completing a J.D. at Harvard Law School in 1984. The sequence of degrees shaped the kinds of questions he would later take up: legal problems that require a close reading of circuits and code as well as statutes and precedent.
His admissions reflect that dual trajectory. Hayes is admitted to practice in California and in the District of Columbia. He is registered before the United States Patent and Trademark Office and is admitted to appear before the U.S. Supreme Court. Those credentials allow him to work on matters that move between administrative proceedings and federal courts.
Hayes practices at Fenwick & West LLP. At the firm he has worked on patent matters for clients in technology fields. His background in electrical engineering gives him an unusual fluency when handling technical testimony, claim drafting and infringement analysis. He takes complex technical descriptions and translates them into arguments that judges and examiners can follow.
His work spans patent prosecution and patent litigation. He has been involved in contested proceedings before the USPTO as well as contested matters in court. The scope of those matters mirrors the trajectory of modern technology disputes: issues about claim scope, prior art, inventorship and enforceability. He also advises on clearance and portfolio strategy when clients are building or defending positions in hardware and software markets.
Colleagues describe him as deliberate in preparing technical records and clear in explaining tradeoffs to clients. He tends to favor pragmatic solutions when possible, but he will press legal positions when the facts demand it. The combination of an engineer's attention to detail and a lawyer's attention to precedent guides how he frames arguments and evaluates risk.
Outside of cases, his academic background informs how he approaches claim drafting. Understanding the underlying science reduces the chance that claims will be drafted too narrowly or too broadly. That practical concern—making sure intellectual property actually covers what a client builds—runs through his written work and client counseling.
He is admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court, in California and the District of Columbia, and he is registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. He practices at Fenwick & West LLP and focuses on patent counseling, prosecution and litigation.
