Supreme Court Denies Stolt-Nielsen's Certiorari Petition Challenging the DOJ's Decision to Prosecution
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.31.06
The Supreme Court denied Stolt-Nielsen's cert petition challenge the Department of Justice's Antitrust Divisions' decision to prosecution the corporation which had previously been granted immunity exchange for its cooperation in an antitrust investigation. Stolt-Nielsen had initially received leniency in exchange for providing information in the alleged customer allocation and bid-rigging in the liquid-cargo shipping market. The Antitrust Division later decided to lift the immunity when it decided Stolt-Nielsen had not lived up to the immunity agreement. After the Court's decision, Stolt-Nielsen announced that it will file a motion to dismiss the indictment based upon the amnesty agreement, on Nov. 22, in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia.
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
