David C. Frederick

June 18, 2026 — Six partners at Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, P.L.L.C. have been ranked in the 2026 edition of Chambers USA for their work in antitrust, appellate litigation, general commercial litigation, and telecommunications law. The rankings reflect the firm’s continued strength in handling complex, high-stakes litigation at both the trial and appellate levels. Antitrust: Mainly Plaintiff – District of Columbia Aaron M. Panner has been ranked in the Antitrust: Mainly Plaintiffs category. Kellogg Hansen is among the nation’s premier law firms in the areas of antitrust litigation and enforcement. The firm’s cases have reshaped the substantive and procedural law of antitrust over the last two decades. Appellate Law – Nationwide Two Kellogg Hansen partners — David C. Frederick and Michael K. Kellogg — were ranked in the Chambers USA nationwide category for Appellate Law. The firm’s appellate practice has a longstanding reputation for representing clients in significant matters before the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeals. General Commercial Litigation: The Elite – District of Columbia In the District of Columbia category for General Commercial Litigation, Chambers USA recognized Mark C. Hansen and Derek T. Ho. These attorneys handle a wide range of complex civil litigation matters, including class actions, antitrust disputes, and securities cases, often in cases involving substantial financial or regulatory exposure. Telecom, Broadcast & Satellite Law – District of Columbia Michael K. Kellogg and Scott H. Angstreich were ranked in the District of Columbia category for Telecom, Broadcast & Satellite Law. The firm has long represented clients in the telecommunications sector in regulatory, appellate, and trial court litigation, including disputes involving federal and state communications laws. Commercial Litigation (Boutique) Law Firm of the Year Chambers recognized Kellogg Hansen as a finalist for Commercial Litigation (Boutique) Law Firm of the Year at the Chambers USA Awards on Thursday, June 11, 2026. Chambers USA is an independent legal directory that ranks the leading lawyers and law firms in the United States based on in-depth research and client feedback. View the firm’s Chambers USA profile here...

April 24, 2026—Chief Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby of the D.C. Court of Appeals and Chief Judge Milton C. Lee, Jr., of the D.C. Superior Court have announced the 15th annual Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll, recognizing D.C. Bar members and others authorized to perform pro bono work in the District who completed 50 or more hours of service in the past year. The D.C. Courts have recognized attorneys through the Honor Roll since 2011. In 2025, a record 6,052 attorneys met the 50-hour threshold, with 57% reporting 100 or more hours and qualifying for the High Honor Roll—marking a significant increase from prior years. Honorees represent a broad cross-section of the legal community, spanning more than 180 law firms, solo practices, government agencies, corporations, nonprofits, associations, and academic institutions. Fifteen Kellogg Hansen attorneys earned recognition on the 2025 Honor Roll for providing at least 50 hours of pro bono legal services to those unable to afford counsel. Scott K. Attaway Justin B. Berg * Geoffrey J.H. Block * Mary Charlotte Carroll Abigail E. DeHart David C. Frederick * Jordan R.G. González Anthony R. Guttman Geoffrey M. Klineberg * Spencer R. Lockwood Jahvonta A. Mason Sean P. Quirk * Matthew D. Reade * Derek C. Reinbold * Matthew J. Wilkins *denotes High Honor Roll..

February 3, 2026 — Partner Josh Branson and the Kellogg Hansen team have been spotlighted in Law.com’s Litigator of the Week coverage for their work in long-running Antiterrorism Act litigation arising from terrorist attacks in Iraq. On January 23, 2026, the D.C. Circuit delivered a crucial victory for Gold Star Families and wounded veterans in an important Antiterrorism Act case concerning 2008-era Iraq.  Kellogg Hansen, along with co-counsel Sparacino PLLC, represents the families of nearly 400 Americans who were killed or wounded in Iraq; clients sued five major pharmaceutical and medical equipment companies for allegedly making corrupt payments to the terrorist group responsible for those attacks.  After the district court dismissed the claims, the D.C. Circuit reversed in full.  The next steps should be discovery, summary judgment, and trial. The American Lawyer previously recognized Josh as Litigator of the Week for this case in 2022, when the D.C. Circuit first reversed the dismissal of these claims. Kellogg Hansen has been leading the case since 2017.  During the course of the eight-years-and-counting litigation, more than 20 plaintiffs have died.  The Kellogg Hansen team includes David Frederick, Andrew Goldsmith, and Derek Reinbold. The case and this most recent appellate victory have also drawn attention from leading legal media, including coverage as Ruling of the Week in Original Jurisdiction\'s Judicial Notice and recognition in Law360’s Legal Lions feature. Kellogg Hansen is honored to continue representing the families of Americans injured or killed by terrorist attacks. Atchley v. AstraZeneca UK Ltd., No. 20-7077 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 23, 2026)..

November 6, 2025 — Kellogg Hansen was featured in Law360\'s Legal Lions after the Fourth Circuit ruled for its clients, Cabell County and the City of Huntington, West Virginia, in their appeal following a bellwether trial in the national opioid multidistrict litigation. The Court of Appeals vacated a district court’s judgment for drug distributors AmerisourceBergen Drug Corp., Cardinal Health, Inc., and McKesson Corp. In a published opinion, a three-judge panel held that the conditions caused by overdistribution of opioids may constitute a public nuisance under West Virginia law. The panel also held that the district court misconstrued drug distributors’ obligations under the Controlled Substances Act, which requires them to maintain a system for identifying suspicious opioid orders and reporting those orders to the Drug Enforcement Administration. Cabell County and the City of Huntington, West Virginia, are represented by David C. Frederick, Lillian V. Smith, Ariela M. Migdal, and Matthew N. Drecun of Kellogg Hansen. Huntington is also represented by Louis M. Bograd and Michael J. Quirk of Motley Rice, and Cabell County by Anthony J. Majestro and Christina L. Smith of Powell & Majestro. Read the full story here...

June 18, 2025 — Six partners at Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, P.L.L.C. have been ranked in the 2025 edition of Chambers and Partners USA for their work in appellate litigation, general commercial litigation, and telecommunications law. The rankings reflect the firm’s continued strength in handling complex, high-stakes litigation at both the trial and appellate levels. General Commercial Litigation: The Elite – District of Columbia In the District of Columbia category for General Commercial Litigation, Chambers USA recognized Mark C. Hansen, David C. Frederick, and Derek T. Ho. These attorneys handle a wide range of complex civil litigation matters, including class actions, antitrust disputes, and securities cases, often in cases involving substantial financial or regulatory exposure. Appellate Law – Nationwide Three Kellogg Hansen partners — David C. Frederick, Michael K. Kellogg, and Aaron M. Panner — were ranked in the Chambers USA nationwide category for Appellate Law. The firm’s appellate practice has a longstanding reputation for representing clients in significant matters before the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeals. Telecom, Broadcast & Satellite Law – District of Columbia Michael K. Kellogg and Scott H. Angstreich were ranked in the District of Columbia category for Telecom, Broadcast & Satellite Law. The firm has long represented clients in the telecommunications sector in regulatory, appellate, and trial court litigation, including disputes involving federal and state communications laws. These rankings confirm Kellogg Hansen’s ongoing role as lead counsel in major commercial, regulatory, and appellate matters in Washington, D.C. and nationwide. Chambers USA is an independent legal directory that ranks the leading lawyers and law firms in the United States based on in-depth research and client feedback. Rankings are determined through a rigorous evaluation of attorneys’ legal knowledge, client service, commercial awareness, and track record of success. Recognition in Chambers USA signals a high level of respect from peers and clients and reflects consistent excellence in legal practice. View the firm’s Chambers USA profile here...

April 16, 2024— In a case highlighted by Law360’s Petition Watch, Kellogg Hansen client Living Essentials has asked the Supreme Court to clarify what a private plaintiff must prove to win a “secondary line” price discrimination case under the Robinson-Patman Act.  At trial, Living Essentials persuaded both a jury and the court to reject claims that it had violated the Act by offering Costco lower prices to buy its popular energy shots, 5-hour ENERGY®, than it had offered to certain wholesalers.  The district court explained that the wholesalers could not show they competed with Costco for the same customers, as required by Volvo Trucks North America, Inc. v. Reeder-Simco GMC, Inc., 546 U.S. 164 (2006).  But a fractured panel of the Ninth Circuit, breaking from the decisions of other courts of appeals, held Volvo inapplicable.  The petition urges the Court to grant review because the decision “invites litigation that will punish the price competition that antitrust law aims to encourage.” Living Essentials, LLC and its parent company, Innovation Ventures, LLC, are represented by Kellogg Hansen attorneys David C. Frederick, Daniel G. Bird, Collin R. White, and Kyle C. Bailey. Read more in this report by Law360. ..

May 1, 2023— Twenty-seven Kellogg Hansen attorneys qualified for recognition on the 2022 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll for contributing fifty hours or more of pro bono work to those who cannot afford legal counsel.  Nineteen Kellogg Hansen attorneys also qualified for the High Honor Roll for providing one hundred hours or more of pro bono service.  The District of Columbia Courts have recognized attorneys through the Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll since 2011.  The complete list of 2022 honorees can be found here. Scott K. Attaway* Daniel G. Bird* Daniel V. Dorris Matthew N. Drecun Ryan M. Folio David C. Frederick* D. Chanslor Gallenstein* Dustin G. Graber Kimberly V. Hamlett* Minsuk Han* Ashle Holman* Geoffrey M. Klineberg* Jonathan I. Liebman Eric J. Maier* Samuel A. Martin* Ariela M. Migdal Bradley E. Oppenheimer* Gregory G. Rapawy* Catherine M. Redlingshafer Derek C. Reinbold* Caroline A. Schechinger* Daniel S. Severson* Andrew C. Shen* Julius P. Taranto* Alex P. Treiger* Matthew J. Wilkins*  * denotes High Honor Roll ..

January 4, 2022— The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in favor of the families of 395 Americans killed or injured by the terrorist group Jaysh al-Mahdi in Iraq.  In this U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) case against major pharmaceutical and medical-supply corporations, the federal appellate court held that the plaintiffs’ allegations stated a claim under the ATA.  The plaintiffs are more than 1,200 Americans, who were attacked or who had a family member attacked by the terrorist group Jaysh al-Mahdi. Among the plaintiffs are more than 180 families who lost a loved one.  The defendants are the parent companies and/or subsidiaries of AstraZeneca, GE Healthcare, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, and Roche.  The plaintiffs allege that these companies bribed Iraqi terrorists to obtain contracts from Iraq’s terrorist-controlled Ministry of Health, knowingly financing terrorist attacks on Americans. Kellogg Hansen is plaintiffs\' trial and appellate counsel, serving as lead counsel in the courtroom.  Partner Josh Branson argued the appeal for the plaintiffs and was joined on the brief by partners David Frederick and Andrew Goldsmith.  Partners Thomas Schultz and Matthew Duffy and associate Grace Knofczynski have also been instrumental in several stages of the litigation.  The appeal received support from an impressive collection of amici, who were cited by the D.C. Circuit several times in the opinion.  A bipartisan group of eight U.S. Senators, led by Senators Grassley and Blumenthal, submitted a brief explaining why Congress enacted the ATA and describing how Defendants’ arguments defied Congress’s intent.  A group of retired U.S. military commanders also submitted a brief detailing Hezbollah’s role in planning and authorizing Jaysh al-Mahdi’s attacks.  Other effective briefs were authored by Professor Steve Vladeck and other national-security law professors, a group of anti-corruption experts, and the American Association for Justice. The lawsuit follows an extensive investigation by Kellogg Hansen and the Washington, D.C.-based law firm Sparacino PLLC.  Throughout the case, the Sparacino team has been Kellogg Hansen’s partner, serving as lead investigative counsel. Case Caption:  Atchley v. AstraZeneca, No. 20-2077 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 4, 2022). ..

May 20, 2019— Pharmaceutical manufacturers can no longer try to establish preemption based on speculation about what the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would have done in hypothetical situations. In Merck v. Albrecht, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that “a drug manufacturer will not ordinarily be able to show that there is an actual conflict between state and federal law such that it was impossible to comply with both.” The Court held that “clear evidence” preemption requires an FDA action with the force of law that prohibits the manufacturer from adding an adequate warning. Kellogg Hansen partner David Frederick argued the case for the Fosamax plaintiffs. He was joined on the brief by Kellogg Hansen partner Brendan Crimmins and associate Jeremy Newman. Mr. Frederick issued the following statement on the opinion:  “This opinion protects access to justice for injured patients. It reaffirms Wyeth, which ensured patients can hold drug companies accountable when they fail to warn about side effects, and it provides the clarification the Third Circuit requested. Further, the opinion makes clear that preemption can be established only by a formal FDA action prohibiting the manufacturer from changing its warning label to add any adequate warning under state law.”  The Court also held that the “clear evidence” preemption issue is for the judge, not the jury.  Because the Third Circuit had held that a jury should decide the question, the Supreme Court vacated the Third Circuit’s opinion and remanded for the Third Circuit to decide Merck’s preemption defense under the legal standards announced by the Court. The case is Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, No. 17-290 (U.S.). ..

May 13, 2019— The United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of Kellogg Hansen’s clients in one of the most significant victories for private antitrust plaintiffs in the Court’s recent history, Apple Inc. v. Pepper, et al. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court found that iPhone owners may sue Apple as direct purchasers under § 4 of the Clayton Act and Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 720 (1977), for monopolizing the market for iPhone apps.  The Court noted that “[t]he plaintiffs seek to hold retailers to account if the retailers engage in unlawful anticompetitive conduct that harms consumers who purchase from those retailers.  That is why we have antitrust law.”  The ruling affirmed the January 2017 opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which held that “Plaintiffs are direct purchasers from Apple within the meaning of Illinois Brick and therefore have standing.” The Kellogg Hansen team included partners David Frederick, Aaron Panner, and Gregory Rapawy, and associate Benjamin Softness. Mr. Frederick argued on behalf of the consumers before the Supreme Court, and issued the following statement about the opinion: “We’re gratified the Supreme Court today recognized the right of consumers to sue Apple for the damages they sustain from Apple’s monopoly control over the distribution of applications on iPhones. The decision is important for upholding consumer protections against the dangers of monopoly retailers like Apple.  Apple’s monopoly control has distorted the prices for apps and it’s time for that abuse of monopoly power to end.”   The case is Apple Inc. v. Pepper, et al., No. 17-204 (U.S.). ..