R-E-V-I-E-W Does Not Spell R-E-L-I-E-F
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.06.04
Rejecting the contention that, after finding arbitrary and capricious conduct by procurement officials, the award must be declared invalid and set aside, the Federal Circuit in PGBA v. U.S. (Nov. 22, 2004) says that a court is to apply the normal balancing of the equities, including the public interest, when deciding whether to grant an injunction after finding for a protester on the merits. Congress only adopted the review provisions of section 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act, the court explained, not its seemingly mandatory relief provisions.
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
