Natalie E. Giotta joined Kellogg Hansen as an associate in 2024.
Most recently, Natalie clerked for the Honorable Judge Theodore D. Chuang of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, 2022-2023, and for the Honorable Judge Lucy H. Koh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2023-2024. She received her B.A. in Political Science from Swarthmore College. She earned her J.D. from Yale Law School, where she was an Articles Editor for the Yale Law & Policy Review.
December 8, 2025 — After years of high-stakes litigation and a multi-week bench trial, on November 18, 2025, Chief Judge James E. Boasberg entered judgment for Meta on the FTC’s Section 2 claim. The Court rejected the FTC’s proposed “personal social networking” market and, based on extensive empirical evidence, found a broader social‑media market that includes TikTok and YouTube. The Court concluded that the FTC failed to prove Meta possesses monopoly power in the relevant market. The Court credited field experiments, natural experiments (including platform outages and a ban on the TikTok app in India), and app usage data showing significant and persistent diversion between Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube. It found convergence across features and user behavior—particularly the shift toward AI-recommended short-form video and private messaging—undercutting the FTC’s effort to distinguish “social networking” from “entertainment.” The Court declined to infer monopoly power from evidence of Meta’s profits and further determined that the FTC had failed to show that the “quality-adjusted” price of Meta’s apps had declined; on the contrary, it found that “Meta’s apps have continuously improved.” And in the relevant market, time‑spent and user metrics show that Meta’s share is well below monopoly thresholds and trending down. The court ordered judgment for Meta, ending the FTC’s case at the liability stage. A large Kellogg Hansen team, led by Mark C. Hansen, served as lead trial counsel for Meta. The lawyers involved at trial included Daniel V. Dorris, Andrew E. Goldsmith, Joseph S. Hall, Jake E. Hartman, Kevin D. Horvitz, Kevin B. Huff, Geoffrey M. Klineberg, Evan T. Leo, Kevin J. Miller, Aaron M. Panner, Alex Parkinson, Ana N. Paul, Leslie V. Pope, Thomas G. Schultz, Lillian V. Smith, Silvija A. Strikis, Ariela M. Migdal, Collin R. White, Justin B. Berg, Geoffrey J.H. Block, Hannah D.C. DePalo, Nataliia Gillespie, Natalie E. Giotta, Jordan R.G. González, Zachary M. Meskell, Diego Negron-Reichard, Aaseesh P. Polavarapu, Catherine M. Redlingshafer, Andrew Skaras, Alex P. Treiger, and Hilary M. Weaver. This case has garnered significant national attention, with coverage in Global Competition Review, Litigator of the Week, Law360’s Legal Lions, and Judicial Notice. These outlets highlighted the complexity of the litigation, the breadth of the economic evidence presented at trial, and the substantial implications of the Court’s decision for antitrust enforcement in digital markets. The recognition across multiple leading publications underscores both the importance of the ruling and the exceptional work of the trial team. Federal Trade Commission v. Meta Platforms, Inc. Case 1:20-cv-03590-JEB..