David R. Eberhart


Thank you for your interest. Before you communicate with one of our attorneys, please note: Any comments our attorneys share with you are general information and not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship will exist between you or your business and O’Melveny or any of its attorneys unless conflicts have been cleared, our management has given its approval, and an engagement letter has been signed. Meanwhile, you agree: we have no duty to advise you or provide you with legal assistance; you will not divulge any confidences or send any confidential or sensitive information to our attorneys (we are not in a position to keep it confidential and might be required to convey it to our clients); and, you may not use this contact to attempt to disqualify O’Melveny from representing other clients adverse to you or your business. By clicking "accept" you acknowledge receipt and agree to all of the terms of this paragraph and our Disclaimer.


David Eberhart focuses his practice on the representation of technology companies, primarily in intellectual property litigation concerning trade secrets, copyrights, and trademarks. David’s practice also encompasses business torts, contract disputes, and antitrust litigation for technology companies. He has significant experience in all phases of litigation through trial and appeal.

Honors & Awards

  • Recognized by The Best Lawyers in America® for Copyright Law in San Francisco, California (2022)
  • Recommended by The Legal 500 US for his work in Intellectual Property: Trademarks (2021-2020), Trade Secrets (2021-2020, 2009), Copyright (2021-2015, 2013-2010), and Patent Litigation (2016)
  • Recognized by World Trademark Review 1000 – The World’s Leading Trademark Professionals (2021-2020)
  • Recognized by Managing Intellectual Property as an “IP Star” - Trademark & Copyright (2020)


Bar Admissions

  • California

Court Admissions

  • US District Court, Northern, Central, and Eastern Districts of California
  • US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit


  • University of Michigan, J.D., 1992: magna cum laude; Order of the Coif
  • Dartmouth College, A.B., 1989

Professional Activities


  • American Intellectual Property Law Association
  • Federal Circuit Bar Association
  • Bar Association of San Francisco


  • “The Trademarks Law Review,” Law Business Research Ltd.


  • Digital Wire-Frame Models Not Automatically Entitled to Copyright Protection (O’Melveny Copyright, Trademark and Internet Law Alert, June 2008)


  • “Trade Secrets: Defense of Trade Secrets Act,” Federal Circuit Bar Association, 2020 Bench & Bar® Virtual Conference (June 16 to 19, 2020)
  • “Parallel and intersecting: Representing Clients in Simultaneous Criminal and Civil Trade Secrets Proceedings,” The Daily Journal, Trade Secrets Forum (September 19, 2019)
  • Currently lead counsel defending a major consumer electronics company against trade secrets claims alleging that plaintiff’s former Chief Technology Officer, now employed by the defendant, conspired with the defendant to steal plaintiff’s trade secrets, sabotage the company, and raid its core engineering team.
  • Defended electronic design automation software developer in defending technically-intense copyright infringement and breach of contract claims by another software developer; after a hearing on the client’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff agreed to settle and dismiss the case on confidential terms.
  • Stepped in two weeks before trial to act as trial counsel defending against breach of contract and tortious interference claims alleging that defendants undervalued an internet flash sale business to avoid triggering an earnout clause in a merger agreement; after a month-long trial, the jury returned a verdict fully in favor of the defense.
  • Served as lead counsel for a major consumer electronics company in asserting trademark infringement, dilution, and unfair competition claims against a large Internet-based retailer involving a mobile software download service.
  • Defended a major online auction service against claims that it knowingly abetted the sale of counterfeit products in a case that attempts to shift from brand owners to auction sites the responsibility to police trademark infringement. The case was resolved on terms favorable to the client.