Nathaniel C. Giddings
Nathaniel’s practice focuses on antitrust, consumer, and financial services law. Since joining the firm in 2011, Nathaniel has litigated all aspects of party and non-party discovery; briefed class certification, summary judgment, motions to dismiss, and other motions; successfully presenting myriad discovery and dispositive motions in federal district court; and briefed and argued numerous issues in the United States Courts of Appeals. Nathaniel also has experience taking cases to trial.
Nathaniel’s representative clients include the following:
- Businesses allegedly harmed by anticompetitive acts in the financial, pharmaceutical, and agricultural markets;
- Consumers allegedly harmed by a retail price maintenance scheme on disposable contact lenses;
- An institutional investor allegedly harmed by market manipulation;
- Consumers asserting statutory and constitutional law claims against a private toll road operator;
- Local governments challenging the constitutionality of a federal law;
- Officers of a technology start-up in a copyright dispute; and
- Recording artists alleging underpayment of music royalties from their record labels.
Nathaniel’s work for these clients, among others, has contributed to the recovery of billions of dollars in compensation.
- In re Contact Lens Antitrust Litigation – Nathaniel currently represents classes of consumers who purchased certain disposable contact lenses. The classes allege that the four leading contact lens manufacturers conspired among themselves and others to adopt, implement, and enforce resale price maintenance policies, which they called “Unilateral Pricing Policies” or “UPPs,” on these contact lenses.
- In re Foreign Exchange Benchmarks Rates Antitrust Litigation – Nathaniel represents market participants in the foreign exchange market against international banks alleged to have fixed the price of foreign exchange instruments.
- In re Libor-Based Financial Instruments Antitrust Litigation – Nathaniel currently represents a class of “over-the-counter” purchasers of certain financial instruments linked to LIBOR. The plaintiffs allege that the banks setting this rate conspired with one another to suppress the LIBOR during the global financial crisis, which resulted in the purchasers receiving less money on their investments than they would have absent the conspiracy.
- In re Cedar Shake & Shingle Antitrust Litigation – Nathaniel currently represents a putative class of direct purchasers of certain cedar shakes and shingles. The plaintiff alleges that the manufacturers conspired with one another and their trade association to artificially inflate the price of cedar shakes and shingles.
Financial Services and Securities
- MTB Investment Partners, LP v. Siemens Hearing Instruments, Inc. – Nathaniel represented sellers of HearUSA stock who alleged that the defendant artificially depressed the price of the stock in order to acquire the company at below market price.
Deceptive Business Practices and Consumer Protection
- Brown v. Transurban USA, Inc. – Nathaniel represented users of high-occupancy tolls lanes (so-called “HOT lanes”) in Virginia that were assessed significant fines without being provided with adequate notice from the private toll road operator
- Nathaniel is a member of The Sedona Conference, Working Group 1 (Electronic Document Retention and Production)
What Others Say
- Nathaniel has been recognized by DC Super Lawyers as a “Rising Star” in Antitrust Litigation since 2014.
The George Washington University Law School, J.D., 2011
Michigan State University, James Madison College of Public Affairs, B.A., Political Theory and Constitutional Democracy, 2008
District of Columbia
U.S.D.C., District of Columbia
U.S.D.C., Northern District of Illinois
U.S.C.A., Second Circuit
U.S.C.A., Sixth Circuit
U.S.C.A., Ninth Circuit
Affiliations & Memberships
The Sedona Conference, Working Group 1 (Electronic Document Retention and Production)
American Bar Association
- Section of Antitrust Law
- Young Lawyers Division
Young Lawyer Representative, Books and Treatises Committee of the ABA Section of Antitrust Law (2016-2017)
Senior Production Editor, George Washington Journal of Energy and Environmental Law (2010- 2011)
Jeannine Kenney, Nathaniel C. Giddings, and Theodore DiSalvo, Hindsight Proportionality is an Illogical and Meaningless Idea, Law 360 (July 23, 2019)
Nathaniel C. Giddings & Aaron Patton, Social Media and Antitrust: A Discovery Primer, Antitrust Magazine (Summer 2018).
Nathaniel C. Giddings, Note, Go Offshore Young Man! The Categorical Exclusion Solution to Offshore Wind Farm Development on the Outer Continental Shelf, 2 Geo. Wash. J. Energy & Envtl. L. 75 (2011).
Nathaniel C. Giddings & Laurie Ristino, Proposal: A Uniform Act for Wind Rights, 8 A.B.A. Sec. Env’t Energy & Resources Newsl. 1 (2011).