"National Security" Limits Judicial Review Of CICA Stay Override
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 02.23.05
In Kropp Holdings, Inc. v. U.S. (Jan. 27, 2005), Judge Braden of the Court of Federal Claims held that, once legitimate interests of “national security” have been asserted and established to the court’s satisfaction, the court could stop review of a “best interests” CICA stay override, holding that national security makes it “not necessary” to go further. The Court also held that national security concerns and the context of a CICA stay override justify use of a more deferential standard of review of agency action than in the normal bid protest: whether the plaintiff demonstrated a clear error of judgment.
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
