1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Nathanial J. Wood

Nathanial J. Wood

Partner | He/Him/His

Overview

Nathanial Wood is a partner in Crowell & Moring's Litigation Group in the firm's Los Angeles office. His practice focuses on the litigation of complex commercial matters, including privacy and cybersecurity and class actions. Nathanial has substantial experience representing clients at all phases of the litigation process, from pre-litigation counseling through trial and appeals.

Prior to joining Crowell & Moring, Nathanial was an associate at the San Francisco firm of Folger Levin & Kahn LLP. Prior to law school, he worked for the California State Water Resources Control Board.

Career & Education

|
    • University of California, Davis, B.A., B.S., with Honors, 1999
    • University of Southern California, Gould School of Law, J.D., Order of the Coif, 2002
    • University of California, Davis, B.A., B.S., with Honors, 1999
    • University of Southern California, Gould School of Law, J.D., Order of the Coif, 2002
    • California
    • U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
    • California
    • U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California

Nathanial's Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.30.21

U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Class Action Award Against TransUnion, Finds Statutory Violation Without Concrete Harm Not Sufficient to Establish Standing

On June 25, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a Ninth Circuit decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, which affirmed a class action award of approximately $40 million in statutory and punitive damages to a class of 8,185 individuals against TransUnion for alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). In TransUnion, the Court affirmed and strengthened its recent decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, a case which also involved an alleged violation of the FCRA, in which the Court held that mere procedural violations of a statute do not confer Article III standing.  Applying those principles, the Court held that 6,332 of the putative class members did not have standing to bring a suit for damages against TransUnion because they failed to demonstrate that they suffered a concrete harm as a result of TransUnion’s decision to place an Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) Alert on their credit files indicating that the plaintiffs’ names were a potential match to OFAC’s list of terrorists, drug traffickers, and other serious criminals. Given that the plaintiffs’ claims were largely based on a specific provision of the FCRA requiring consumer reporting agencies to “follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy” in consumer reports, this decision not only creates an additional obstacle for class action plaintiffs attempting to enforce federal statutes, but it also calls into question Congress’s ability to establish causes of action for procedural violations. ...

Representative Matters

  • Defended national hotel chain in class action alleging violation of data protection statute as a result of a malware intrusion. Obtained voluntary dismissal of all claims with prejudice without payment to plaintiff or the putative class.
  • Defended major academic medical center in complex class actions alleging violations of privacy and consumer laws as a result of a cyberattack on its computer network potentially affecting over 4.5 million individuals.
  • Defended research university from claims for allegedly permitting unauthorized access to proprietary data.
  • Defended military contractor and employee against claims of trade secret misappropriation based on allegedly wrongful acquisition of corporate data.
  • Defended major national health plan in class actions in federal and state court alleging violation of medical privacy laws arising out of a data security incident affecting over two million plan members. Obtained favorable settlement after the consolidated class action complaint was dismissed.
  • Defended international car rental company in class action alleging statutory violations arising out of rental pricing notification practices. Obtained voluntary dismissal of class claims and favorable settlement on an individual basis without need for class certification proceedings.
  • Defended major government contractor in litigation alleging violations of the False Claims Act. Client prevailed on all claims at trial.
  • Represented major home appliances manufacturer in antitrust action against foreign supplier of electronics in federal price-fixing litigation.
  • Represented public university in an action seeking to halt a multimillion dollar development on university property. Defeated at trial plaintiff’s efforts to block the development and successfully defended the trial court’s ruling on appeal.
  • Represented several former partners of a law firm sued for breach of fiduciary duty by their former firm. Obtained decision in favor of the partners following a six week bench trial.

Nathanial's Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.30.21

U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Class Action Award Against TransUnion, Finds Statutory Violation Without Concrete Harm Not Sufficient to Establish Standing

On June 25, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a Ninth Circuit decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, which affirmed a class action award of approximately $40 million in statutory and punitive damages to a class of 8,185 individuals against TransUnion for alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). In TransUnion, the Court affirmed and strengthened its recent decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, a case which also involved an alleged violation of the FCRA, in which the Court held that mere procedural violations of a statute do not confer Article III standing.  Applying those principles, the Court held that 6,332 of the putative class members did not have standing to bring a suit for damages against TransUnion because they failed to demonstrate that they suffered a concrete harm as a result of TransUnion’s decision to place an Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) Alert on their credit files indicating that the plaintiffs’ names were a potential match to OFAC’s list of terrorists, drug traffickers, and other serious criminals. Given that the plaintiffs’ claims were largely based on a specific provision of the FCRA requiring consumer reporting agencies to “follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy” in consumer reports, this decision not only creates an additional obstacle for class action plaintiffs attempting to enforce federal statutes, but it also calls into question Congress’s ability to establish causes of action for procedural violations. ...

|

Nathanial's Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.30.21

U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Class Action Award Against TransUnion, Finds Statutory Violation Without Concrete Harm Not Sufficient to Establish Standing

On June 25, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a Ninth Circuit decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, which affirmed a class action award of approximately $40 million in statutory and punitive damages to a class of 8,185 individuals against TransUnion for alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). In TransUnion, the Court affirmed and strengthened its recent decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, a case which also involved an alleged violation of the FCRA, in which the Court held that mere procedural violations of a statute do not confer Article III standing.  Applying those principles, the Court held that 6,332 of the putative class members did not have standing to bring a suit for damages against TransUnion because they failed to demonstrate that they suffered a concrete harm as a result of TransUnion’s decision to place an Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) Alert on their credit files indicating that the plaintiffs’ names were a potential match to OFAC’s list of terrorists, drug traffickers, and other serious criminals. Given that the plaintiffs’ claims were largely based on a specific provision of the FCRA requiring consumer reporting agencies to “follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy” in consumer reports, this decision not only creates an additional obstacle for class action plaintiffs attempting to enforce federal statutes, but it also calls into question Congress’s ability to establish causes of action for procedural violations. ...