A company think that the Air Force is wrongfully using some of its trade secrets, but the Air Force says it has a contractual right to do so. So the company files a lawsuit.
You wouldn't think that such a dispute would likely give rise to a profoundly split opinion in the Ninth Circuit, but it does.
Here's a summary of Judge Collins' dissent, which also accurately represents the tenor of the thing:
"The majority affirms the district court’s dismissal of this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, holding that the Contract Disputes Act (“CDA”) “impliedly forbids” Plaintiffs from bringing an APA action in federal district court. But the CDA does not impliedly forbid reliance on the APA where, as here, Plaintiffs’ claims and relief are based, not on a Government contract, but rather on Plaintiffs’ independent statutory rights under the Trade Secrets Act. The majority’s contrary decision misconstrues the CDA, contravenes Ninth Circuit precedent, creates a split with four other circuits, and undermines the ability of contractors to obtain injunctive relief in federal court against Government violation of their statutory rights. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent."
