Ryan Hayward represents businesses and individuals in high-stakes disputes and litigation. Ryan focuses on complex business disputes, intellectual property litigation, the representation of individuals, and white collar matters. He has represented clients before the United States District Courts, the United States Court of Appeals, the California state courts, and in numerous disputes outside of court. He counts among his current and former clients Google, Meta, Comcast, Twitter, and Sutter Health.
Ryan also has significant experience representing startups in bet-the-company disputes. He draws on his first-hand experience co-founding a Series B-stage technology company prior to his legal career, as well as serving as a product marketing manager—and, later, in-house counsel—for Google. Ryan is currently representing clients in matters concerning claimed breaches of contract, as well as patents, trade secrets, copyrights, and more.
In his pro bono practice, Ryan has, among other things, successfully litigated to advance the rights of individuals with disabilities. Ryan also currently serves on the board of directors for the AIDS Legal Referral Panel, which provides legal services to those living with HIV/AIDS in the San Francisco Bay Area.
After law school, Ryan served as a law clerk to Judge Christopher F. Droney of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and Judge John Z. Lee of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
California ex rel. Duncan et al. v. Sutter Health et al.
We represented Sutter Health in defeating a qui tam action alleging violation of California's Insurance Frauds Prevention Act in a case related to charges for health care services. Following a seven-week bench trial, we obtained a complete victory. The judge ruled that there was no fraud, that Sutter charged for recovery room care that was “medically ordered, appropriate, and supervised,” and that Sutter’s charges were consistent with standard industry billing practices.
Plaintiff v. Software Startup
We successfully defended a startup in a trade secret case alleging that it used proprietary information to develop software that would compete with its much larger incumbent rival, fending off a preliminary injunction that would have forced our client to remove its product from the market just as it was launching.
Promptu v. Comcast Cable Communications
In the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, we successfully defended Comcast against patent infringement and state-law contract and tort claims brought by Promptu targeting Comcast’s voice recognition and control technology. Following a Markman hearing that resulted in favorable claim constructions across the board, we secured a stipulation of non-infringement and dismissal with prejudice of the remaining claims.
02/26/2025
The Daily Journal has named Keker, Van Nest & Peters's trial win for Sutter Health among the 2024 Top Verdicts in California. Read more
02/18/2025
Keker, Van Nest & Peters partners Bob Van Nest, Sharif Jacob, Sophie Hood and Ryan Wong reflect on the firm’s biggest trial wins which earned its place among Law360’s 2024 Trials Groups of the Year. Read more
06/20/2024
A California state judge has handed Sutter Health a win following a weeks-long bench trial last year over a whistleblower's claims that the nonprofit hospital network violated the state's insurance fraud prevention statutes. Read more
01/30/2024
Keker, Van Nest & Peters, representing cities and counties across the nation, filed an amicus curiae brief urging the federal circuit to support transgender veterans' access to gender-confirmation surgery. Read more
Evaluating the “Imminence” of a Cyber Attack for Purposes of Anticipatory Self-Defense, 117 Colum. Law Rev. 399 (2017)