David L. Larson focuses his practice on patent and other intellectual property litigation and counseling. He has extensive experience in domestic and international intellectual property disputes involving a wide variety of high-tech areas, including electronics and semiconductors, computer software and network devices, as well as several life science technologies, including hormone synthesis, pharmaceutical ointments, extended release drug delivery systems and antibody therapies. He has represented clients in several federal courts around the country, in the US International Trade Commission (ITC) and in California state courts. His recent patent trials have included significant wins in the District of Delaware, the District of New Jersey, the Northern District of California and the Western District of Wisconsin.
In addition to his patent cases, David has worked on notable cases involving software copyright and trade secrets (including a case that led to a decision establishing the applicability in California’s federal courts of a state statute requiring plaintiffs to identify their alleged trade secrets prior to obtaining discovery). He also was lead trial and appellate counsel in an income tax case that successfully challenged several positions of the Franchise Tax Board regarding California’s “water’s edge” tax legislation, resulting in multi-million dollar refund for the client.
Prior to law school, David earned his bachelor’s degree in chemical engineering from Stanford University and worked as a technical engineer in the Engineering Service Division of the DuPont Company.
Represented Amgen, a leading biotechnology company in the US District Court of Delaware as plaintiff, resulting in (i) a stipulation to infringement, and (ii) rejection by the jury of defendants’ assertions that the antibody patents were invalid
Represented Trend Micro, a major antivirus/security software manufacturer in the US District Court of Delaware in defense against three patents, all of which were found invalid for improperly claiming abstract ideas, and thus, patent-ineligible subject matter
Represented Depomed, a rising specialty pharmaceutical company, as plaintiff, in a trial in the US District Court of New Jersey, resulting in a finding of infringement of all seven asserted patents by a defendant generic drug manufacturer, which led to a subsequent agreement that the defendant would not bring infringing products to market
Represented Qualcomm, a major manufacturer of mobile phone technology in the ITC and US District Court in Northern California in defense against semiconductor packaging patents, resulting in favorable findings that led to dismissal of all claims
Represented Tolmar, Inc., a pharmaceutical manufacturer in a jury trial in a Hatch-Waxman case in the US District Court of Delaware, in defense against patents directed to a therapeutic ointment and its active ingredient, which resulted in a favorable settlement that permitted the client to launch its generic product years before expiration of the asserted patents
Represented Extreme Networks, a designer and manufacturer of network switches and routers in a patent dispute that spanned two jury trials in the US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, resulting in judgment by the jury in favor of the client in both cases
Represented Tercica, a drug manufacturer in a jury trial in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, as plaintiff, in a case involving patents regarding the use of recombinant DNA for protein synthesis, resulting in a favorable jury verdict and subsequent injunction against the infringer
Represented Silicon Image, a leading video chip manufacturer asserting patent claims in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (which upheld a favorable settlement the opposing party tried to disavow), and successfully argued the appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
David has represented numerous pro bono clients during his career, including matters involving victims of fraud and immigration issues
For several years, David has coached a high school mock trial team that has consistently placed in the top 10 schools in California, winning the California State Mock Trial Championship in 2014 and placing second in 2016
Georgetown University Law Center, JD, 1983
Stanford University, BS, Chemical Engineering, 1978
Courts / Agencies
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
US Patent and Trademark Office
Do not send any information or documents that you want to have treated as secret or confidential. Providing information to McDermott via email links on this website or other introductory email communications will not create an attorney-client relationship; will not preclude McDermott from representing any other person or firm in any matter; and will not obligate McDermott to keep confidential the information you provide. McDermott cannot enter into an attorney-client relationship with you until McDermott has determined that doing so will not create a conflict of interest and until you and McDermott have entered into a written agreement or engagement letter that sets forth the terms of our relationship.