Kellogg Hansen Partner Alex A. Parkinson Publishes Comprehensive Treatise on Multidistrict Litigation

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)..

The recent ruling by Judge James Boasberg, which found that the FTC failed to demonstrate that Meta illegally monopolized the personal social networking market, marks a landmark moment in modern antitrust litigation. In a recent interview with Global Competition Review, Kellogg Hansen partner Aaron Panner shared his reflections on the five-year journey as outside counsel for Meta. The victory, he notes, was not just a win for the company, but a testament to the evolving nature of Section 2 cases. A Team Effort Under Pressure: Panner emphasized that the \"gratifying\" result was the product of a massive collaborative effort. Led by Mark Hansen, the legal team worked hand-in-hand with Meta’s in-house counsel and executives. This synergy allowed the team to develop the complex facts necessary to navigate a trial of this magnitude. The Weight of Data: Why Meta Won: What resonated most with the court? According to Panner, it came down to \"quantitative evidence of substitution.\" Natural Experiments: Data from events like the TikTok outage provided a real-world look at how users shift their time between apps. Empirical Analysis: Controlled experiments (such as those by Professor List) offered the court concrete proof of a competitive market. Competitive Reality: Documents and testimony showed that Meta’s investment decisions were driven by the need to respond to intense pressure from rivals. The Human Element of the Trial: Beyond the data, Panner highlighted the importance of executive testimony. Working with Meta’s top executives allowed the legal team to translate a \"very complicated\" business into an educational experience for the court. And cross-examination of competitors revealed the \"intense competition\" Meta faces—facts that were ultimately reflected in the competitors\' own internal documents. The Future of Section 2 Cases: The implications of this ruling extend far beyond Meta. Panner predicts that Judge Boasberg’s focus on market definition and empirical evidence will influence how antitrust lawyers develop and try cases for years to come. In an era of \"big tech\" scrutiny, this case reinforces that at the end of the day, hard data and a clear narrative of competitive response remain the strongest defense. Read the full article here (paywall) Read more about Federal Trade Commission v. Meta Platforms, Inc. Case 1:20-cv-03590-JEB here..

January 1, 2026 — Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, P.L.L.C. is pleased to announce that Alejandra Ávila, Travis G. Edwards, Derek Reinbold, and Catherine M. Redlingshafer have been promoted as partners in the firm. Alejandra Ávila represents both plaintiffs and defendants in complex civil litigation at the trial and appellate levels.  She has experience managing all phases of litigation, including conducting pre-suit investigations, drafting pleadings and motions, managing discovery, taking and defending fact and expert depositions, trial preparation, and appeals.   Alejandra’s diverse practice includes antitrust litigation, cross-border disputes, complex commercial cases, and appeals involving constitutional questions of first impression. She also maintains an active pro bono practice and has provided pro bono representation to indigent criminal defendants, individuals facing eviction, asylum seekers, domestic abuse survivors, and non-profit organizations. Alejandra rejoined the firm as of counsel in 2024 following her clerkship with Justice Sonia Sotomayor on the United States Supreme Court. Previously, she was an associate at Kellogg Hansen, where her practice focused on appellate and complex commercial litigation. Before joining the firm, Alejandra was a civil rights attorney at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. In that role, she successfully represented individuals and organizations in a variety of civil rights cases and litigated issues of first impression in a wide range of matters, including voting rights and education law. Alejandra began her career as a law clerk to the Honorable Chief Judge Mary H. Murguia of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the Honorable Micaela Alvarez of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. Alejandra serves on the Executive Board of the Edward Coke Appellate Inn of Court. She was selected as a 2025 finalist for Young Lawyer of the Year in Litigation by the American Law Journal, and she was presented with the Rising Star Award by the Hispanic Bar Association of the District of Columbia in 2021. Travis G. Edwards litigates high-stakes commercial disputes for plaintiffs and defendants in U.S. courts and international arbitral forums. A native Spanish speaker, Travis regularly counsels multinational businesses navigating international regulatory regimes. Travis represents clients in cross-border and domestic litigation with a practice that includes coordinating multi-jurisdictional strategy and litigating complex commercial and financial disputes, including matters involving international trade and litigation finance. He also advises clients in large-scale antitrust matters, including representing opt-out plaintiffs and commercial purchasers in nationwide price-fixing and bid-rigging cases. In these matters, Travis helps clients pursue damages and equitable relief while managing significant operational, commercial, and reputational risk. Travis joined Kellogg Hansen as an associate in 2019.  He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School and served as a law clerk to the Honorable Diana Gribbon Motz on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Baltimore.  While at Harvard, Travis served on the Board of Student Advisers, as a Senior Article Editor & Policy Editor for the Harvard Law & Policy Review, and as a contributor to the Global Anticorruption Blog.  He earned his undergraduate degree in urban studies at Vassar College, graduating with General Honors. Derek Reinbold represents plaintiffs and defendants in civil litigation at the trial and appellate levels.  He litigates cases involving complex issues of personal jurisdiction, preemption, class certification, and other matters. Derek joined Kellogg Hansen as an associate in 2019.  Before joining the firm, he served as a law clerk to the Honorable Sandra L. Lynch on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.  He graduated cum laude from Harvard Law School, where he was a finalist in the Ames Moot Court Competition.  He earned his undergraduate degree in art history, international studies, and political science from Case Western Reserve University, graduating summa cum laude. Cassie Redlingshafer represents both plaintiffs and defendants in complex civil litigation at the trial and appellate levels.  She has experience litigating in federal and state courts across the country, as well as in international arbitration, in a variety of fields including antitrust, intellectual property, and contract disputes. Cassie joined Kellogg Hansen as an associate in 2019.  Prior to joining the firm, she served as a law clerk to the Honorable Charles R. Wilson on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.  Cassie graduated magna cum laude from Notre Dame Law School, where she was Executive Online Editor for the Notre Dame Law Review.  She earned her undergraduate degree in political science and strategic communications from the University of Denver, graduating magna cum laude...

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..

November 17, 2025 — Kellogg Hansen of counsel Alejandra Ávila was honored as a finalist for Young Lawyer of the Year (Litigation) at the 2025 American Lawyer Industry Awards. The awards recognize lawyers and firms making exceptional contributions to the legal profession through innovation, leadership, and outstanding results. The Young Lawyer of the Year (Litigation) category honors rising attorneys who have demonstrated remarkable skill and impact in high-stakes litigation early in their careers. Alejandra’s selection reflects her outstanding advocacy and her growing influence in complex civil and appellate litigation. She represents both plaintiffs and defendants across a range of industries and has played key roles in cases involving antitrust, commercial disputes, and appellate matters. Alejandra rejoined Kellogg Hansen in 2024 following her clerkship at the U.S. Supreme Court. She previously clerked for judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, and she maintains an active pro bono practice. More information about The American Lawyer Industry Awards and the full list of finalists can be found here...

November 13, 2025 — The American Antitrust Institute (AAI) has recognized the Innovative Health, LLC v. Biosense Webster, Inc. litigation team with the Outstanding Antitrust Litigation Achievement in Private Law Practice award. This award celebrates exceptional contributions to advancing the enforcement of antitrust laws and promoting competition. Kellogg Hansen served as lead trial counsel, alongside Berger Montague, Jeffrey L. Berhold PC, and Theodora Oringher PC. The case alleged that Biosense Webster, Inc. engaged in a tying arrangement and other exclusionary conduct that foreclosed competition from reprocessors of cardiac catheters. The litigation addressed monopolistic behavior in the aftermarket for reprocessed medical devices—an area rarely litigated all the way to trial under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The case was initially dismissed on summary judgment.  After the Ninth Circuit reversed, the team guided the case through post-remand discovery and trial, ultimately securing a successful jury verdict and $442 million in treble damages, as well as injunctive relief. This outcome represents one of the few successful aftermarket tying verdicts in recent decades and carries significant implications for healthcare competition—reinforcing consumer choice, reducing medical costs, and contributing to the evolving jurisprudence on monopolization and tying in the medical device industry. In addition, Kelley C. Schiffman was honored by AAI for Outstanding Antitrust Litigation Achievement by a Young Lawyer for her contributions to this case. The Kellogg Hansen team included Derek T. Ho, Andrew E. Goldsmith, Kelley C. Schiffman, Rachel Anderson DeLisle, Annamaria M. Morales-Kimball, Matthew D. Reade, and Sean P. Quirk. More information about the AAI Antitrust Enforcement Awards can be found here...