OCIs Down Air Force Award
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 09.14.09
In L-3 Servs., Inc. (Sept. 3, 2009) the GAO found unreasonable the Air Force's conclusions that the awardee did not have either a "biased ground rules" or "unequal access to information" OCI when the awardee's subcontractor had performed procurement planning services that put it in a position to affect the subsequent competition and that gave the subcontract access to non-public information that potentially conferred an unfair competitive advantage in that subsequent competition. The Air Force had initially gotten it right, determining that the subcontractor was barred from participating in the subsequent procurement, only to reverse that decision, thereby setting the stage for GAO's decision sustaining the protest.
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
