"The New Contract Is Better" Isn't A Justification
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 08.11.06
The Court of Federal Claims in Advanced Systems Dev., Inc. v. U.S. (July 28, 2006) reinforced that an agency cannot justify the override of a CICA stay while a protest is pending at GAO by packaging reasons that amount to no more than the new contract will be better than the current situation. Moreover, the court rebuffed the agency's attempt to add reasons for the override and make the justification statement an "evolving" document during litigation.
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
