NRO Prohibits Exclusive Teaming Agreements
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.09.04
The National Reconaissance Office has adopted a clause prohibiting offerors on NRO procurements from entering into exclusive teaming agreements, based upon a determination that "such arrangements unduly limit competition." N15.209-70(i), prescribing N52.215-020, "Exclusive Teaming Prohibition (May 2004)." By contrast, having received comments that it could have the effect of impairing legitimate, pro-competitive teaming arrangements, DOD in April 2002 withdrew a proposed DFAR that would have required contracting personnel to refer to the Justice Department exclusive teaming agreements that they considered to be "anti-competitive," finding that there was no demonstrated need for such a regulation.
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
