GAO Sides With COFC In Continued Battle Over Hubzone Set-Aside Priority
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 05.21.10
GAO in DGR Assocs., Inc.(May 14, 2010), relied on "unambiguous" statutory language instead of a contrary 2009 opinion letter from DoJ's Office of Legal Counsel to hold that a procuring agency must first consider whether the conditions for a HUBZone set-aside exist before proceeding with an 8(a) set-aside. With this decision, GAO falls into line with (and cites with approval) the recent Court of Federal Claims decision, Mission Critical Solution v. U.S (Mar. 2, 2010), appeal docketed (Fed. Cir. Apr. 2, 2010), to the effect that set-asides to HUBZone contractors are mandatory whenever the criteria in 15 U.S.C. 657a are met.
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
