Bsfllp Description


Print this page

Nathan A. Holcomb


t: 914.749.8228
f: 914.749.8300
Download vCard

Area of Practice



Harvard Law School, J.D., cum laude, 2006; Notes Chair, Harvard Law Review; Member of Winning Team, Ames Moot Court Competition

Oxford University, D.Phil., Philosophy, 2003

Harvard College, A.B., Philosophy, 1999


Hon. Pamela Ann Rymer, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2006-2007


New York

Nate Holcomb’s main practice area is complex commercial litigation.  Selected current and recent representations include:

  • An international bank in litigation related to the collapse of a mortgage-backed commercial paper facility.
  • A major telecommunications company in litigation against a large investment bank, as well as litigation against another major telecommunications company.
  • A pharmaceutical company and its board members in a federal securities lawsuit and a related shareholder derivative action.
  • A leading credit-rating agency in multiple lawsuits in federal and state courts arising from the 2008 financial crisis.
  • An international bank in a dispute with a former client of its advisory business.
  • A US investment bank in litigation with an international bank arising from a corporate acquisition.
  • Individual corporate executives in employment-related disputes.
  • An asylum applicant on appeal of a removal order to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, as court-appointed pro bono counsel.

Mr. Holcomb clerked for the Honorable Pamela Ann Rymer of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  After his clerkship and prior to joining Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, Mr. Holcomb was an associate at another leading law firm in New York City. 

Selected Professional Awards and Associations

Ninth Circuit Pro Bono Program


Note, Original Meaning and Its Limits, 120 Harv. L. Rev. 1279 (2007)

The Supreme Court, 2004 Term – Leading Cases, 119 Harv. L. Rev. 169, 366 (2005) (comment on Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913 (2005))

Recent Case, 118 Harv. L. Rev. 794 (2004) (comment on United States v. Johnson, 380 F.3d 1013 (7th Cir. 2004))

Related News

The BSF Report: Spring 2013 (03.08.2013)

BSF Wins Dismissal of Complaint against BNP Paribas and Expansion of Case against Bank of America (In The News)