OPEN

About

David entered the patent profession in 1999, after more than a decade conducting scientific research in electron microscopy and semiconductor processing at industrial, government and university laboratories, principally in the U.S.

After graduating from law school in New York, David studied Spanish in Mexico and clerked for Judge (now Associate Justice) Samuel A. Alito, Jr. at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Newark, New Jersey.

David has extensive experience, obtained at major U.S. and European firms, with patent drafting, U.S. and international patent prosecution, U.S. patent litigation, drafting U.S. non-infringement opinions and advising on licensing and other patent-related agreements.

David has worked with startups and multinational clients, in sectors ranging from advanced laboratory instruments to semiconductor manufacturing to construction materials.

David’s clients appreciate his understanding of the many challenges facing businesses, and  his attention to detail combined with an ability to convey complex technical and  legal issues clearly and, above all, concisely.

Education

  • B.Sc. in physics from Bristol University (1983)
  • Ph.D in materials science and engineering from the University of Birmingham (1988)
  • J.D. from Benjamin Cardozo School of Law (2002)

Experience

  • Electron microscopes and other laboratory instruments
  • Semiconductor manufacturing
  • Home construction materials
  • Metal industries

Memberships

  • U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
  • New York state and federal courts

Articles

U.S. matters: Divided Infringement of U.S. Patents: Risks and Opportunities

A finding of liability for direct patent infringement in the U.S. is typically based on the infringing actions of a single entity, either a natural or legal person. However, under the doctrine of “divided infringement” (sometimes referred to as “joint infringement”), a single entity can perform fewer than every step […]

U.S. matters: U.S. first-to-invent prior art: Forgotten but not gone

It has been more than a decade since, to the relief of many, particularly outside the U.S., the America Invents Act (“AIA”) retired the intricate and somewhat idiosyncratic “first-to-invent” definitions of prior art provided in pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) to (g), for determining novelty, and, as modified in pre-AIA […]

U.S. matters: Loper Bright and convulsive shocks to U.S. patent practice

The Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright The U.S. Supreme Court, by design or otherwise, tends to release its most consequential and controversial decisions immediately before its summer recess. True to form, on 28 June 2024, in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court overruled its 1984 decision in […]

U.S. matters: The Value of U.S. Legal Opinions on patent non-infringement/invalidity

Though there is no longer an affirmative duty to seek the opinion of U.S. patent counsel after being put on notice of possible infringement of a U.S. patent (35 U.S.C. § 298), a written opinion of counsel regarding non-infringement/invalidity can still be helpful, not only for purposes of risk assessment […]