HomeHome Gibson Dunn LoginLogin
PracticesPractices LawyersLawyers OfficesOffices DiversityDiversity Our StoryOur Story Pro BonoPro Bono CareersCareers Firms NewsFirms News Firms NewsPublications

Matthew D. McGill

 
Home > Lawyers > Matthew D. McGill
Matthew D. McGillMatthew D. McGill
Partner
T: +1 202.887.3680
F: +1 202.530.9662
1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036-5306
USA

Matthew D. McGill is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.  He practices in the firm’s Litigation Department and its Appellate and Constitutional Law and Intellectual Property practice groups.

Mr. McGill recently was named a national Rising Star by Law360, which identified him as one of 10 appellate lawyers under 40 to watch.   Since joining the firm in 2004, he has participated in sixteen cases before the Supreme Court of the United States, drafting winning briefs in eleven of those cases.  Those eleven Supreme Court victories, which span a wide range of substantive areas of law, include several of the biggest come-from-behind legal victories for businesses of the last decade:

  • Hollingsworth v. Perry (2013) – This “historic” decision (Washington Post) secured the right of same-sex couples in California to marry.  The Supreme Court’s decision followed a landmark trial that had invalidated California’s voter-enacted ban on same-sex marriage, Proposition 8, for violating the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantees of due process and equal protection of the laws.
  • Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) – Hailed by the New York Times as a “doctrinal earthquake,” this decision overruled two Supreme Court precedents and established the First Amendment right of corporations to spend general treasury funds on speech activities to influence the outcomes of elections.
  • Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council (2009) – After both environmentalists and the Solicitor General urged the Supreme Court to decline review, the Court reversed a Ninth Circuit decision that invalidated a critical Clean Water Act permit and jeopardized mine operator Coeur Alaska’s $330,000,000 investment in an Alaskan gold mine.
  • Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc. (2008) – This decision, which, as the New York Times reported, has had “huge implications for the health care-technology industry,” held that federal law preempts many state-law product liability claims against medical devices manufacturers, foreclosing scores of product liability cases across the country. 
  • Microsoft Corporation v. AT&T Corp. (2007) – This case reversed a Federal Circuit decision that had vastly increased certain defendants’ damages exposure in patent infringement cases by extending U.S. patent law to reach software developers’ foreign sales.  The victory, New York Times observed, has “save[d] [Microsoft] billions of dollars.”

Outside the Supreme Court, Mr. McGill’s practice focuses on cases involving novel and complex questions of federal law, often in high-profile litigation against governmental entities.  For example, he currently represents creditors of the Republic of Argentina in several cases raising questions under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.  Similarly, he represents Perry Capital in its challenge to the federal government’s ongoing seizure of profits from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  And he successfully defended The Boeing Company against charges brought by the National Labor Relations Board arising out of Boeing’s decision to open a manufacturing facility in South Carolina. 

In the intellectual property area, Mr. McGill regularly participates in significant copyright and patent cases before the Supreme Court and the court of appeals.  In the patent area, he represented Microsoft in Microsoft v. AT&T, and more recently in Microsoft v. i4i, which addressed the standard of proof for patent invalidity.  He has filed amicus curiae briefs on behalf of clients in cases such as Mayo Collective Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Global-Tech Appliances v. SEB, Bilski v. Kappos, KSR International v. Teleflex, and eBay v. MercExchange.  And he advises a range of companies on legal issues in high-stakes patent infringement cases.  In the copyright field, Mr. McGill recently represented publisher John Wiley & Sons in its Supreme Court case concerning the first sale doctrine, and he currently represents Viacom in its landmark copyright infringement action against YouTube. 

Mr. McGill also maintains an active pro bono practice.  He currently represents the plaintiffs in Bostic v. Rainey, a federal constitutional challenge to Virginia’s statutory and constitutional provisions that prohibit same-sex couples from marrying.  Previously, he briefed and argued a case in the Supreme Court of Virginia on behalf of the adoptive family of a 4-year-old girl and won a unanimous ruling affirming the adoption.  In 2008, he successfully defended Senator John McCain in cases contending that Senator McCain was not a “natural-born citizen” and therefore was ineligible to be President.

Prior to joining Gibson Dunn, Mr. McGill served as a Bristow Fellow in the Office of the Solicitor General at the U.S. Department of Justice.  He clerked for the Hon. Joseph M. McLaughlin of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the Hon. John G. Roberts, Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Mr. McGill earned a Bachelor of Arts degree, magna cum laude, from Dartmouth College in 1996.  In 2000, he graduated from Stanford Law School, where he was elected to the Order of the Coif.  Mr. McGill is licensed to practice in New York and the District of Columbia and he has been admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the United States, the United States Courts of Appeals for the First, Second, Third, Fifth, Ninth, Eleventh, District of Columbia, and Federal Circuits, and the United States District Courts for the District of Columbia and the Southern District of New York.
News Search
Lawyers Entire Site
Submit
Site Map Attorney Advertisement Legal Notices Safe Harbor Privacy Policy Contact Us