CFC Finds Unreasonable Deviation from Customary Commercial Practices
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.26.11
In U.S. Foodservice, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of Federal Claims, while finding that the Army DLA Troop Support had demonstrated a rational basis for a number of provisions that deviated from standard commercial terms and conditions in the food service industry, nonetheless enjoined the procurement because the solicitation's Most Favored Customer clause, itself a deviation from customary commercial practices, was an "irrational and unreasonable attempt towards pursuing [DLA's] overall goals of increasing transparency and reducing fraud." The court explained that the MFC provision was overbroad and would force offerors to submit and certify a price that would include elements that are "completely untethered from ascertainable or predictable knowledge."
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.15.26
Kansas Federal Court Applies “Selective Enforcement” Theory to Reject DTSA Claim
A Kansas federal court held that inconsistent enforcement of trade secret rights can defeat a claim under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). In Edelman Financial Engines, LLC v. Mariner Wealth Advisors LLC, No. 2:23-cv-02515-HLT (D. Kan. June 5, 2026), the court applied a selective enforcement theory, holding that when a company does not consistently pursue legal remedies against similarly situated former employees, that inconsistency can be affirmative evidence that it failed to protect its trade secrets. While the selective enforcement theory has appeared in academic hypothetical discussions, the decision appears to be one of the clearest judicial applications of a “selective enforcement” theory in a trade secret case.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26

