Desired Superpower

Desired Superpower

Elemental control [to help with climate change]

Favorite Game



Currently Listening to

Celia Cruz, Sam Cooke, Selena

Favorite Sport

Favorite Sport

Women’s basketball

Quick Facts

If you had a theme song, what would it be?

“Feeling Good” – Nina Simone

Who is your legal hero?

Sonia Sotomayor

If I weren’t a lawyer I'd be

Professional gardener

Curriculum Vitae

NATASHA FERNANDEZ-SILBER is a Partner at Edelson PC. She is based in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Her work focuses on antitrust class actions and other forms of complex litigation. Prior to joining Edelson PC, Natasha was a partner at a boutique antitrust class action firm where she specialized in generic drug suppression cases involving “pay-for-delay” deals and other anticompetitive schemes. She has also represented purchasers of e-cigarettes, textbooks, pesticides, and other consumer products. Previously, Natasha clerked for the Honorable Ann Claire Williams on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. She was also an associate at the law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz where she focused on restructuring and finance matters.

  • Reece v. Altria Group, No. 20-02345 (N.D. Cal.) – Steering Committee member representing direct purchasers of Juul products in suit alleging anticompetitive agreement between Juul and Altria.
  • In re Inclusive Access Course Materials Antitrust Litig., No. 20-02946 (S.D.N.Y.) Appointed Co-Lead Interim Counsel on behalf of college students alleging textbook publishers and retailers conspired to restrict sales of course materials to specific online format to foreclose competition and raise prices.
  • In re Actos Antitrust Litig., No. 15-03278 (S.D.N.Y) – Counsel for direct purchasers in suit alleging Takeda delayed generic competition for diabetes drug by misrepresenting scope of patents listed in Orange Book.
  • In re Ranbaxy Generic Drug Application Antitrust Litig., No. 19-02878 (D. Mass.) – Counsel for direct purchasers in suit alleging Ranbaxy fraudulently obtained tentative ANDA approvals (and first-to-file exclusivities), delaying generic competition in three drug markets.
  • In re Intuniv Antitrust Litig., No. 16-12653 (D. Mass.) – Counsel for direct purchasers in suit alleging reverse payment scheme to monopolize market for ADHD drug.
  • New York, Michigan, Southern District of New York, Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals