This page shows the pre-commit working store (the raw extraction under review). This case was committed to OntServe on 2026-07-25 15:23; the committed record differs by design (deduplication, typing, and agent binding are applied at commit). View the committed record
Overview
Provenance Draft

PASS 3: Temporal Dynamics

Case 106: Confidentiality of Competitor Information Submitted to Government Agency

20 entities 5 actions 1 events 8 causal chains 5 temporal relations
Timeline Overview
Action Event 12 sequenced markers
Historical precedent, BER Case No. 82-6
Prior to the engineer's retention in BER Case No. 82-6
Historical precedent, BER Case No. 85-4, after initial review and analysis
Historical precedent, BER Case No. 85-4, after termination by plaintiff's attorney
Following Engineer A's review and analysis in BER Case No. 85-4
Thereafter, following the termination of Engineer A's services in BER Case No. 85-4
Government Employment Acceptance Beginning of Engineer A's tenure with the government agency
Confidential Information Access During Engineer A's tenure with the government agency
Employment Termination End of Engineer A's tenure with the government agency
Competitor Position Acceptance Immediately after ending employment with the government agency
Board Adjudication Decision Time of case adjudication
OWL-Time Temporal Structure 5 relations time: = w3.org/2006/time
Engineer A's access to confidential and proprietary design information (including Company X's) time:intervalDuring Engineer A's employment with the government agency
Engineer A ending employment with the government agency time:intervalBefore Engineer A accepting an engineering position with Company Y
Engineer A's confidentiality duty to Company X time:intervalOverlaps Engineer A's employment with Company Y (post-agency period)
BER precedent cases (Case Nos. 74-2, 82-6, 85-4) time:intervalBefore the Board's decision in the current case
Company X's submission of confidential design information to the agency time:intervalDuring Engineer A's employment with the government agency
Extracted Actions (5)
Volitional professional decisions with intentions and ethical context

Description: Engineer A took a position with a government agency involved in the design and construction of facilities, a role that gave her access to confidential and proprietary design information submitted by companies seeking design approval.

Temporal Marker: Beginning of Engineer A's tenure with the government agency interval

Fluent Transitions:
Initiates (1)
  • Access to Confidential and Proprietary Design Information

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Serve as an engineer for the government agency in facility design review

Foreseen Unintended Effects:

  • Access to confidential and proprietary design information of submitting companies
Required Capabilities:
Facility design and construction engineering
Within Competence: Yes
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • requiresCapability: Facility design and construction engineering
  • initiates: Access to Confidential and Proprietary Design Information
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • description content: Engineer A took a position with a government agency involved in the design and construction of facilities, a role that gave her access to confidential and proprietary design information submitted by companies seeking design approval.
  • hasAgent content: Engineer A
  • temporalMarker content: Beginning of Engineer A's tenure with the government agency
  • eventRoleContext content: Government Agency Engineer
  • hasMentalState content: deliberate
  • intendedOutcome content: Serve as an engineer for the government agency in facility design review
  • foreseenUnintendedEffects content: Access to confidential and proprietary design information of submitting companies
  • textReferences content: Engineer A works for a government agency involved in the design and construction of facilities.; Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information provided by companies seeking approval from the government agency for their facility designs
  • temporalExtent content: interval
  • temporalSequence content: 1
  • withinCompetence assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Action_Government_Employment_Acceptance",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146007+00:00",
  "proeth:description": "Engineer A took a position with a government agency involved in the design and construction of facilities, a role that gave her access to confidential and proprietary design information submitted by companies seeking design approval.",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "facts",
  "proeth:eventRoleContext": "Government Agency Engineer",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Access to confidential and proprietary design information of submitting companies"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "Engineer A",
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:initiates": [
    "Access to Confidential and Proprietary Design Information"
  ],
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Serve as an engineer for the government agency in facility design review",
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Facility design and construction engineering"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalExtent": "interval",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "Beginning of Engineer A\u0027s tenure with the government agency",
  "proeth:temporalSequence": 1,
  "proeth:textReferences": [
    "Engineer A works for a government agency involved in the design and construction of facilities.",
    "Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information provided by companies seeking approval from the government agency for their facility designs"
  ],
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Government Employment Acceptance"
}

Description: Company X, among other companies, submitted confidential and proprietary design information to the government agency in order to obtain approval for its facility designs, entrusting the agency and its engineers with that information.

Temporal Marker: During Engineer A's tenure with the government agency instant

Fluent Transitions:
Initiates (1)
  • Entrustment of Company X Confidential Information

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Obtain government agency approval for facility designs

Foreseen Unintended Effects:

  • Agency personnel gaining access to proprietary design information
Required Capabilities:
Facility design documentation
Within Competence: Yes
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • requiresCapability: Facility design documentation
  • initiates: Entrustment of Company X Confidential Information
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • description content: Company X, among other companies, submitted confidential and proprietary design information to the government agency in order to obtain approval for its facility designs, entrusting the agency and its engineers with that information.
  • hasAgent content: Company X
  • temporalMarker content: During Engineer A's tenure with the government agency
  • eventRoleContext content: Design Submitter
  • hasMentalState content: deliberate
  • intendedOutcome content: Obtain government agency approval for facility designs
  • foreseenUnintendedEffects content: Agency personnel gaining access to proprietary design information
  • textReferences content: Company X is among the companies submitting confidential and proprietary design information.
  • temporalExtent content: instant
  • temporalSequence content: 2
  • withinCompetence assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Action_Confidential_Information_Submission",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146195+00:00",
  "proeth:description": "Company X, among other companies, submitted confidential and proprietary design information to the government agency in order to obtain approval for its facility designs, entrusting the agency and its engineers with that information.",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "facts",
  "proeth:eventRoleContext": "Design Submitter",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Agency personnel gaining access to proprietary design information"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "Company X",
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:initiates": [
    "Entrustment of Company X Confidential Information"
  ],
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Obtain government agency approval for facility designs",
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Facility design documentation"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalExtent": "instant",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "During Engineer A\u0027s tenure with the government agency",
  "proeth:temporalSequence": 2,
  "proeth:textReferences": [
    "Company X is among the companies submitting confidential and proprietary design information."
  ],
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Confidential Information Submission"
}

Description: Engineer A ended her employment with the government agency, closing her tenure during which she had gained access to confidential and proprietary design information including that of Company X.

Temporal Marker: End of Engineer A's tenure with the government agency instant

Fluent Transitions:
Initiates (1)
  • Former Employee Status with Continuing Confidentiality Duty
Terminates (1)
  • Access to Confidential and Proprietary Design Information

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Leave government employment to pursue other opportunities

Foreseen Unintended Effects:

  • Continuing duty to protect confidential information gained during her tenure
Within Competence: Yes
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • initiates: Former Employee Status with Continuing Confidentiality Duty
  • terminates: Access to Confidential and Proprietary Design Information
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • description content: Engineer A ended her employment with the government agency, closing her tenure during which she had gained access to confidential and proprietary design information including that of Company X.
  • hasAgent content: Engineer A
  • temporalMarker content: End of Engineer A's tenure with the government agency
  • eventRoleContext content: Government Agency Engineer
  • hasMentalState content: deliberate
  • intendedOutcome content: Leave government employment to pursue other opportunities
  • foreseenUnintendedEffects content: Continuing duty to protect confidential information gained during her tenure
  • textReferences content: Engineer A ends her employment with the government agency
  • temporalExtent content: instant
  • temporalSequence content: 4
  • withinCompetence assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Action_Employment_Termination",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146240+00:00",
  "proeth:description": "Engineer A ended her employment with the government agency, closing her tenure during which she had gained access to confidential and proprietary design information including that of Company X.",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "facts",
  "proeth:eventRoleContext": "Government Agency Engineer",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Continuing duty to protect confidential information gained during her tenure"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "Engineer A",
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:initiates": [
    "Former Employee Status with Continuing Confidentiality Duty"
  ],
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Leave government employment to pursue other opportunities",
  "proeth:temporalExtent": "instant",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "End of Engineer A\u0027s tenure with the government agency",
  "proeth:temporalSequence": 4,
  "proeth:terminates": [
    "Access to Confidential and Proprietary Design Information"
  ],
  "proeth:textReferences": [
    "Engineer A ends her employment with the government agency"
  ],
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Employment Termination"
}

Description: Engineer A accepted an engineering position with Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X, while still holding knowledge of Company X's confidential and proprietary design information from her government tenure.

Temporal Marker: Immediately after ending employment with the government agency instant

Fluent Transitions:
Initiates (2)
  • Employment with Competitor of Company X
  • Ongoing Duty Not to Disclose Company X Information

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Continue her engineering career with Company Y

Foreseen Unintended Effects:

  • Perceived risk of disclosure of Company X's confidential and proprietary design information to a competitor
Guided By Principles:
  • Faithful Agent and Trustee
  • Avoidance of Appearance of Influenced Judgment
Required Capabilities:
Engineering practice Discretion regarding confidential information
Within Competence: Yes
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • guidedByPrinciple: Faithful Agent and Trustee; Avoidance of Appearance of Influenced Judgment
  • requiresCapability: Engineering practice; Discretion regarding confidential information
  • initiates: Employment with Competitor of Company X; Ongoing Duty Not to Disclose Company X Information
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • description content: Engineer A accepted an engineering position with Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X, while still holding knowledge of Company X's confidential and proprietary design information from her government tenure.
  • hasAgent content: Engineer A
  • temporalMarker content: Immediately after ending employment with the government agency
  • eventRoleContext content: Engineer, Company Y
  • hasMentalState content: deliberate
  • intendedOutcome content: Continue her engineering career with Company Y
  • foreseenUnintendedEffects content: Perceived risk of disclosure of Company X's confidential and proprietary design information to a competitor
  • textReferences content: accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a competitor of Company X
  • temporalExtent content: instant
  • temporalSequence content: 5
  • withinCompetence assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Action_Competitor_Position_Acceptance",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146273+00:00",
  "proeth:description": "Engineer A accepted an engineering position with Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X, while still holding knowledge of Company X\u0027s confidential and proprietary design information from her government tenure.",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "facts",
  "proeth:eventRoleContext": "Engineer, Company Y",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Perceived risk of disclosure of Company X\u0027s confidential and proprietary design information to a competitor"
  ],
  "proeth:guidedByPrinciple": [
    "Faithful Agent and Trustee",
    "Avoidance of Appearance of Influenced Judgment"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "Engineer A",
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:initiates": [
    "Employment with Competitor of Company X",
    "Ongoing Duty Not to Disclose Company X Information"
  ],
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Continue her engineering career with Company Y",
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Engineering practice",
    "Discretion regarding confidential information"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalExtent": "instant",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "Immediately after ending employment with the government agency",
  "proeth:temporalSequence": 5,
  "proeth:textReferences": [
    "accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a competitor of Company X"
  ],
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Competitor Position Acceptance"
}

Description: The Board concluded that Engineer A is free to pursue employment with Company Y, provided she does not disclose any confidential and proprietary design information she learned about Company X during her employment with the government agency.

Temporal Marker: Time of case adjudication instant

Fluent Transitions:
Initiates (1)
  • Conditional Permission for Competitor Employment

Mental State: deliberative

Intended Outcome: Balance Engineer A's career mobility against the continuing duty to protect Company X's confidential information

Obligation Engagement:
Fulfills (1)
  • Nondisclosure of Confidential Information of Former Employer or Client
Guided By Principles:
  • Faithful Agent and Trustee
  • Confidentiality of Client and Employer Information
Required Capabilities:
Ethical review and application of the NSPE Code
Within Competence: Yes
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • fulfillsObligation: Nondisclosure of Confidential Information of Former Employer or Client
  • guidedByPrinciple: Faithful Agent and Trustee; Confidentiality of Client and Employer Information
  • requiresCapability: Ethical review and application of the NSPE Code
  • initiates: Conditional Permission for Competitor Employment
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • description content: The Board concluded that Engineer A is free to pursue employment with Company Y, provided she does not disclose any confidential and proprietary design information she learned about Company X during her employment with the government agency.
  • hasAgent content: NSPE Board of Ethical Review
  • temporalMarker content: Time of case adjudication
  • hasMentalState content: deliberative
  • intendedOutcome content: Balance Engineer A's career mobility against the continuing duty to protect Company X's confidential information
  • textReferences content: the Board must conclude that Engineer A is free to pursue employment with Company Y, provided Engineer A does not disclose any confidential and proprietary design information Engineer A learned about Company X during Engineer A’s employment with the government agency; Engineer A should not be unduly limited or penalized for accepting a position with Company Y, a competitor of Company X.
  • temporalExtent content: instant
  • temporalSequence content: 6
  • withinCompetence assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Action_Board_Adjudication_Decision",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146367+00:00",
  "proeth:description": "The Board concluded that Engineer A is free to pursue employment with Company Y, provided she does not disclose any confidential and proprietary design information she learned about Company X during her employment with the government agency.",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "discussion",
  "proeth:fulfillsObligation": [
    "Nondisclosure of Confidential Information of Former Employer or Client"
  ],
  "proeth:guidedByPrinciple": [
    "Faithful Agent and Trustee",
    "Confidentiality of Client and Employer Information"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "NSPE Board of Ethical Review",
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberative",
  "proeth:initiates": [
    "Conditional Permission for Competitor Employment"
  ],
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Balance Engineer A\u0027s career mobility against the continuing duty to protect Company X\u0027s confidential information",
  "proeth:raisesObligation": [],
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Ethical review and application of the NSPE Code"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalExtent": "instant",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "Time of case adjudication",
  "proeth:temporalSequence": 6,
  "proeth:textReferences": [
    "the Board must conclude that Engineer A is free to pursue employment with Company Y, provided Engineer A does not disclose any confidential and proprietary design information Engineer A learned about Company X during Engineer A\u2019s employment with the government agency",
    "Engineer A should not be unduly limited or penalized for accepting a position with Company Y, a competitor of Company X."
  ],
  "proeth:violatesObligation": [],
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Board Adjudication Decision"
}
Extracted Events (1)
Occurrences that trigger ethical considerations and state changes

Description: During her tenure with the government agency, Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information submitted by companies, including Company X, seeking facility design approval. The access flows from her position under the agency's review process rather than from a discrete deliberate choice to acquire the information.

Temporal Marker: During Engineer A's tenure with the government agency interval

Fluent Transitions:
Initiates (2)
  • Confidential Information Possession State
  • Duty of Trust and Loyalty State

Caused By Action: Action_Government_Employment_Acceptance

Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • causedByAction: http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Action_Government_Employment_Acceptance
  • initiates: Confidential Information Possession State; Duty of Trust and Loyalty State
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • description content: During her tenure with the government agency, Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information submitted by companies, including Company X, seeking facility design approval. The access flows from her position under the agency's review process rather than from a discrete deliberate choice to acquire the information.
  • temporalMarker content: During Engineer A's tenure with the government agency
  • textReferences content: During Engineer A’s tenure with the government agency, Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information provided by companies seeking approval from the government agency for their facility designs.
  • eventType content: automatic
  • temporalExtent content: interval
  • temporalSequence content: 3
  • confidence assessment: 0.9
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Event_Confidential_Information_Access",
  "@type": "proeth:Event",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146452+00:00",
  "proeth:causedByAction": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#Action_Government_Employment_Acceptance",
  "proeth:confidence": "0.9",
  "proeth:description": "During her tenure with the government agency, Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information submitted by companies, including Company X, seeking facility design approval. The access flows from her position under the agency\u0027s review process rather than from a discrete deliberate choice to acquire the information.",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "facts",
  "proeth:eventType": "automatic",
  "proeth:initiates": [
    "Confidential Information Possession State",
    "Duty of Trust and Loyalty State"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalExtent": "interval",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "During Engineer A\u0027s tenure with the government agency",
  "proeth:temporalSequence": 3,
  "proeth:textReferences": [
    "During Engineer A\u2019s tenure with the government agency, Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information provided by companies seeking approval from the government agency for their facility designs."
  ],
  "rdfs:label": "Confidential Information Access"
}
Causal Chains (8)
NESS test analysis: Necessary Element of Sufficient Set

Causal Language: During Engineer A’s tenure with the government agency, Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information provided by companies seeking approval from the government agency for their facility designs.

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Engineer A holding a position at the government agency
  • The agency's role in reviewing and approving facility designs
  • Companies submitting design information to the agency
Sufficient Factors:
  • Employment at the agency combined with the agency's custodianship of submitted proprietary design information
Counterfactual Test: Without accepting the government position, Engineer A would not have had access to Company X's confidential and proprietary design information
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Engineer A
Type: direct
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:
  1. Government Employment Acceptance
    Engineer A takes a position with a government agency involved in design and construction of facilities
  2. Confidential Information Submission
    Company X and other companies submit confidential and proprietary design information seeking approval
  3. Confidential Information Access
    Engineer A, by virtue of her role, receives access to the confidential and proprietary design information
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • cause: Government Employment Acceptance
  • effect: Confidential Information Access
  • responsibleAgent: Engineer A
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • causalLanguage content: During Engineer A’s tenure with the government agency, Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information provided by companies seeking approval from the government agency for their facility designs.
  • necessaryFactors content: Engineer A holding a position at the government agency; The agency's role in reviewing and approving facility designs; Companies submitting design information to the agency
  • sufficientFactors content: Employment at the agency combined with the agency's custodianship of submitted proprietary design information
  • counterfactual content: Without accepting the government position, Engineer A would not have had access to Company X's confidential and proprietary design information
  • agentKnowledge content: Knew the agency was involved in design and construction of facilities and would receive proprietary submissions
  • interveningFactors content: Agency's regulatory approval function requiring proprietary submissions
  • causalSequence content: {'proeth:step': 1, 'proeth:element': 'Government Employment Acceptance', 'proeth:description': 'Engineer A takes a position with a government agency involved in design and construction of facilities'}; {'proeth:step': 2, 'proeth:element': 'Confidential Information Submission', 'proeth:description': 'Company X and other companies submit confidential and proprietary design information seeking approval'}; {'proeth:step': 3, 'proeth:element': 'Confidential Information Access', 'proeth:description': 'Engineer A, by virtue of her role, receives access to the confidential and proprietary design information'}
  • responsibilityType assessment: direct
  • withinAgentControl assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#CausalChain_1",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146515+00:00",
  "proeth:agentKnowledge": "Knew the agency was involved in design and construction of facilities and would receive proprietary submissions",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "During Engineer A\u2019s tenure with the government agency, Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information provided by companies seeking approval from the government agency for their facility designs.",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A takes a position with a government agency involved in design and construction of facilities",
      "proeth:element": "Government Employment Acceptance",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Company X and other companies submit confidential and proprietary design information seeking approval",
      "proeth:element": "Confidential Information Submission",
      "proeth:step": 2
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A, by virtue of her role, receives access to the confidential and proprietary design information",
      "proeth:element": "Confidential Information Access",
      "proeth:step": 3
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Government Employment Acceptance",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Without accepting the government position, Engineer A would not have had access to Company X\u0027s confidential and proprietary design information",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "facts",
  "proeth:effect": "Confidential Information Access",
  "proeth:interveningFactors": [
    "Agency\u0027s regulatory approval function requiring proprietary submissions"
  ],
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Engineer A holding a position at the government agency",
    "The agency\u0027s role in reviewing and approving facility designs",
    "Companies submitting design information to the agency"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "direct",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Engineer A",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Employment at the agency combined with the agency\u0027s custodianship of submitted proprietary design information"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Causal Language: Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information provided by companies seeking approval from the government agency for their facility designs. Company X is among the companies submitting confidential and proprietary design information.

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Company X seeking agency approval for its facility designs
  • Submission of proprietary design information to the agency
  • Engineer A employed at the agency during the submission period
Sufficient Factors:
  • Company X's submission combined with Engineer A's employment position granting access
Counterfactual Test: Had Company X not submitted proprietary information to the agency, Engineer A would have had no access to Company X's confidential data
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Company X
Type: indirect
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:
  1. Confidential Information Submission
    Company X submits confidential and proprietary design information seeking approval
  2. Confidential Information Access
    Engineer A gains access to Company X's proprietary information during her tenure
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • cause: Confidential Information Submission
  • effect: Confidential Information Access
  • responsibleAgent: Company X
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • causalLanguage content: Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information provided by companies seeking approval from the government agency for their facility designs. Company X is among the companies submitting confidential and proprietary design information.
  • necessaryFactors content: Company X seeking agency approval for its facility designs; Submission of proprietary design information to the agency; Engineer A employed at the agency during the submission period
  • sufficientFactors content: Company X's submission combined with Engineer A's employment position granting access
  • counterfactual content: Had Company X not submitted proprietary information to the agency, Engineer A would have had no access to Company X's confidential data
  • agentKnowledge content: Knew submission was required to obtain agency approval; entrusted the agency with confidentiality
  • interveningFactors content: Regulatory requirement to submit design information for approval
  • causalSequence content: {'proeth:step': 1, 'proeth:element': 'Confidential Information Submission', 'proeth:description': 'Company X submits confidential and proprietary design information seeking approval'}; {'proeth:step': 2, 'proeth:element': 'Confidential Information Access', 'proeth:description': "Engineer A gains access to Company X's proprietary information during her tenure"}
  • responsibilityType assessment: indirect
  • withinAgentControl assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#CausalChain_2",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146545+00:00",
  "proeth:agentKnowledge": "Knew submission was required to obtain agency approval; entrusted the agency with confidentiality",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "Engineer A receives access to confidential and proprietary design information provided by companies seeking approval from the government agency for their facility designs. Company X is among the companies submitting confidential and proprietary design information.",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Company X submits confidential and proprietary design information seeking approval",
      "proeth:element": "Confidential Information Submission",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A gains access to Company X\u0027s proprietary information during her tenure",
      "proeth:element": "Confidential Information Access",
      "proeth:step": 2
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Confidential Information Submission",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Had Company X not submitted proprietary information to the agency, Engineer A would have had no access to Company X\u0027s confidential data",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "facts",
  "proeth:effect": "Confidential Information Access",
  "proeth:interveningFactors": [
    "Regulatory requirement to submit design information for approval"
  ],
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Company X seeking agency approval for its facility designs",
    "Submission of proprietary design information to the agency",
    "Engineer A employed at the agency during the submission period"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "indirect",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Company X",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Company X\u0027s submission combined with Engineer A\u0027s employment position granting access"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Causal Language: Engineer A ends her employment with the government agency and accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a competitor of Company X.

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Engineer A ending her tenure with the government agency
  • Company Y offering an engineering position
  • Engineer A's decision to accept the offer
Sufficient Factors:
  • Termination of government employment combined with Company Y's offer and Engineer A's acceptance
Counterfactual Test: Had Engineer A remained employed by the government agency, she could not have accepted the position with Company Y
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Engineer A
Type: direct
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:
  1. Employment Termination
    Engineer A ends her employment with the government agency
  2. Competitor Position Acceptance
    Engineer A accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • cause: Employment Termination
  • effect: Competitor Position Acceptance
  • responsibleAgent: Engineer A
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • causalLanguage content: Engineer A ends her employment with the government agency and accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a competitor of Company X.
  • necessaryFactors content: Engineer A ending her tenure with the government agency; Company Y offering an engineering position; Engineer A's decision to accept the offer
  • sufficientFactors content: Termination of government employment combined with Company Y's offer and Engineer A's acceptance
  • counterfactual content: Had Engineer A remained employed by the government agency, she could not have accepted the position with Company Y
  • agentKnowledge content: Knew Company Y was a competitor of Company X and that she had been exposed to Company X's proprietary information
  • interveningFactors content: Company Y's hiring decision
  • causalSequence content: {'proeth:step': 1, 'proeth:element': 'Employment Termination', 'proeth:description': 'Engineer A ends her employment with the government agency'}; {'proeth:step': 2, 'proeth:element': 'Competitor Position Acceptance', 'proeth:description': 'Engineer A accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X'}
  • responsibilityType assessment: direct
  • withinAgentControl assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#CausalChain_3",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146567+00:00",
  "proeth:agentKnowledge": "Knew Company Y was a competitor of Company X and that she had been exposed to Company X\u0027s proprietary information",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "Engineer A ends her employment with the government agency and accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a competitor of Company X.",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A ends her employment with the government agency",
      "proeth:element": "Employment Termination",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X",
      "proeth:element": "Competitor Position Acceptance",
      "proeth:step": 2
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Employment Termination",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Had Engineer A remained employed by the government agency, she could not have accepted the position with Company Y",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "facts",
  "proeth:effect": "Competitor Position Acceptance",
  "proeth:interveningFactors": [
    "Company Y\u0027s hiring decision"
  ],
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Engineer A ending her tenure with the government agency",
    "Company Y offering an engineering position",
    "Engineer A\u0027s decision to accept the offer"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "direct",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Engineer A",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Termination of government employment combined with Company Y\u0027s offer and Engineer A\u0027s acceptance"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Causal Language: In sum, Engineer A’s obligation is linked to her employment with a government agency that was entrusted with Company X’s confidential and proprietary design information.

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Engineer A's exposure to Company X's confidential and proprietary design information
  • The NSPE Code obligation not to disclose confidential information of former employers or public bodies
  • The competitive relationship between Company X and Company Y creating disclosure risk
Sufficient Factors:
  • Prior access to Company X's proprietary information combined with new employment at a direct competitor
Counterfactual Test: Without prior access to Company X's confidential information, the Board would have had no basis to impose the nondisclosure condition; Engineer A's employment with Company Y would raise no ethical constraint
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Engineer A
Type: direct
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:
  1. Confidential Information Access
    Engineer A gains access to Company X's proprietary design information during government tenure
  2. Employment Termination
    Engineer A leaves the government agency while retaining knowledge of Company X's information
  3. Competitor Position Acceptance
    Engineer A joins Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X, creating a potential confidentiality conflict
  4. Board Adjudication Decision
    Board concludes Engineer A may work for Company Y provided she does not disclose Company X's confidential information
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • cause: Confidential Information Access
  • effect: Board Adjudication Decision
  • responsibleAgent: Engineer A
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • causalLanguage content: In sum, Engineer A’s obligation is linked to her employment with a government agency that was entrusted with Company X’s confidential and proprietary design information.
  • necessaryFactors content: Engineer A's exposure to Company X's confidential and proprietary design information; The NSPE Code obligation not to disclose confidential information of former employers or public bodies; The competitive relationship between Company X and Company Y creating disclosure risk
  • sufficientFactors content: Prior access to Company X's proprietary information combined with new employment at a direct competitor
  • counterfactual content: Without prior access to Company X's confidential information, the Board would have had no basis to impose the nondisclosure condition; Engineer A's employment with Company Y would raise no ethical constraint
  • agentKnowledge content: Knew she had received confidential information from Company X during her government tenure
  • interveningFactors content: NSPE Code confidentiality provisions; BER precedents (74-2, 82-6, 85-4)
  • causalSequence content: {'proeth:step': 1, 'proeth:element': 'Confidential Information Access', 'proeth:description': "Engineer A gains access to Company X's proprietary design information during government tenure"}; {'proeth:step': 2, 'proeth:element': 'Employment Termination', 'proeth:description': "Engineer A leaves the government agency while retaining knowledge of Company X's information"}; {'proeth:step': 3, 'proeth:element': 'Competitor Position Acceptance', 'proeth:description': 'Engineer A joins Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X, creating a potential confidentiality conflict'}; {'proeth:step': 4, 'proeth:element': 'Board Adjudication Decision', 'proeth:description': "Board concludes Engineer A may work for Company Y provided she does not disclose Company X's confidential information"}
  • responsibilityType assessment: direct
  • withinAgentControl assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#CausalChain_4",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146591+00:00",
  "proeth:agentKnowledge": "Knew she had received confidential information from Company X during her government tenure",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "In sum, Engineer A\u2019s obligation is linked to her employment with a government agency that was entrusted with Company X\u2019s confidential and proprietary design information.",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A gains access to Company X\u0027s proprietary design information during government tenure",
      "proeth:element": "Confidential Information Access",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A leaves the government agency while retaining knowledge of Company X\u0027s information",
      "proeth:element": "Employment Termination",
      "proeth:step": 2
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A joins Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X, creating a potential confidentiality conflict",
      "proeth:element": "Competitor Position Acceptance",
      "proeth:step": 3
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Board concludes Engineer A may work for Company Y provided she does not disclose Company X\u0027s confidential information",
      "proeth:element": "Board Adjudication Decision",
      "proeth:step": 4
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Confidential Information Access",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Without prior access to Company X\u0027s confidential information, the Board would have had no basis to impose the nondisclosure condition; Engineer A\u0027s employment with Company Y would raise no ethical constraint",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "discussion",
  "proeth:effect": "Board Adjudication Decision",
  "proeth:interveningFactors": [
    "NSPE Code confidentiality provisions",
    "BER precedents (74-2, 82-6, 85-4)"
  ],
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Engineer A\u0027s exposure to Company X\u0027s confidential and proprietary design information",
    "The NSPE Code obligation not to disclose confidential information of former employers or public bodies",
    "The competitive relationship between Company X and Company Y creating disclosure risk"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "direct",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Engineer A",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Prior access to Company X\u0027s proprietary information combined with new employment at a direct competitor"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Causal Language: the Board must conclude that Engineer A is free to pursue employment with Company Y, provided Engineer A does not disclose any confidential and proprietary design information Engineer A learned about Company X during Engineer A’s employment with the government agency.

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Engineer A's acceptance of a position with Company Y
  • Company Y's status as a direct competitor of Company X
  • The ethical question being presented to the Board for review
Sufficient Factors:
  • Acceptance of employment with a direct competitor by an engineer who previously accessed the competitor's rival's proprietary information
Counterfactual Test: Had Engineer A not accepted the Company Y position, no ethical question about competitor employment and confidentiality would have arisen for the Board to adjudicate
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Engineer A
Type: direct
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:
  1. Competitor Position Acceptance
    Engineer A accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X
  2. Ethical Question Presentation
    The situation raises conflict-of-interest and confidentiality concerns under the NSPE Code
  3. Board Adjudication Decision
    Board holds Engineer A is free to work for Company Y conditioned on nondisclosure of Company X's confidential information
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • cause: Competitor Position Acceptance
  • effect: Board Adjudication Decision
  • responsibleAgent: Engineer A
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • causalLanguage content: the Board must conclude that Engineer A is free to pursue employment with Company Y, provided Engineer A does not disclose any confidential and proprietary design information Engineer A learned about Company X during Engineer A’s employment with the government agency.
  • necessaryFactors content: Engineer A's acceptance of a position with Company Y; Company Y's status as a direct competitor of Company X; The ethical question being presented to the Board for review
  • sufficientFactors content: Acceptance of employment with a direct competitor by an engineer who previously accessed the competitor's rival's proprietary information
  • counterfactual content: Had Engineer A not accepted the Company Y position, no ethical question about competitor employment and confidentiality would have arisen for the Board to adjudicate
  • agentKnowledge content: Knew Company Y was Company X's competitor and that she carried knowledge of Company X's proprietary designs
  • interveningFactors content: Consent from Company X was not a relevant factor since Company Y is a direct competitor; BER precedent framework guiding the analysis
  • causalSequence content: {'proeth:step': 1, 'proeth:element': 'Competitor Position Acceptance', 'proeth:description': 'Engineer A accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X'}; {'proeth:step': 2, 'proeth:element': 'Ethical Question Presentation', 'proeth:description': 'The situation raises conflict-of-interest and confidentiality concerns under the NSPE Code'}; {'proeth:step': 3, 'proeth:element': 'Board Adjudication Decision', 'proeth:description': "Board holds Engineer A is free to work for Company Y conditioned on nondisclosure of Company X's confidential information"}
  • responsibilityType assessment: direct
  • withinAgentControl assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#CausalChain_5",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146610+00:00",
  "proeth:agentKnowledge": "Knew Company Y was Company X\u0027s competitor and that she carried knowledge of Company X\u0027s proprietary designs",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "the Board must conclude that Engineer A is free to pursue employment with Company Y, provided Engineer A does not disclose any confidential and proprietary design information Engineer A learned about Company X during Engineer A\u2019s employment with the government agency.",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A accepts an engineering position with Company Y, a direct competitor of Company X",
      "proeth:element": "Competitor Position Acceptance",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "The situation raises conflict-of-interest and confidentiality concerns under the NSPE Code",
      "proeth:element": "Ethical Question Presentation",
      "proeth:step": 2
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Board holds Engineer A is free to work for Company Y conditioned on nondisclosure of Company X\u0027s confidential information",
      "proeth:element": "Board Adjudication Decision",
      "proeth:step": 3
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Competitor Position Acceptance",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Had Engineer A not accepted the Company Y position, no ethical question about competitor employment and confidentiality would have arisen for the Board to adjudicate",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "discussion",
  "proeth:effect": "Board Adjudication Decision",
  "proeth:interveningFactors": [
    "Consent from Company X was not a relevant factor since Company Y is a direct competitor",
    "BER precedent framework guiding the analysis"
  ],
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Engineer A\u0027s acceptance of a position with Company Y",
    "Company Y\u0027s status as a direct competitor of Company X",
    "The ethical question being presented to the Board for review"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "direct",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Engineer A",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Acceptance of employment with a direct competitor by an engineer who previously accessed the competitor\u0027s rival\u0027s proprietary information"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Causal Language: the Board ruled that where an engineer is retained by the US government to study the causes of a dam failure, it would not be ethical for the engineer to agree to be retained by the contractor involved in the construction of the dam. The contractor had filed a claim against the US government for additional compensation.

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Occurrence of the dam failure
  • US government retaining the engineer to study the failure's causes
  • Contractor's claim against the government creating adverse interests
Sufficient Factors:
  • Dam failure prompting government retention combined with the contractor's subsequent effort to retain the same engineer
Counterfactual Test: Without the dam failure, neither the government's retention of the engineer nor the contractor's adverse retention effort would have occurred
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Engineer in BER Case No. 82-6
Type: direct
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:
  1. Dam Failure
    A dam fails, creating the need for a causal investigation
  2. Government Retention
    The US government retains the engineer to study the causes of the dam failure
  3. Contractor Claim Filing
    The contractor files a claim against the US government for additional compensation
  4. Adverse Party Retention
    The engineer agrees to be retained by the contractor, adverse to his former client
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • cause: Dam Failure
  • effect: Adverse Party Retention
  • responsibleAgent: Engineer in BER Case No. 82-6
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • causalLanguage content: the Board ruled that where an engineer is retained by the US government to study the causes of a dam failure, it would not be ethical for the engineer to agree to be retained by the contractor involved in the construction of the dam. The contractor had filed a claim against the US government for additional compensation.
  • necessaryFactors content: Occurrence of the dam failure; US government retaining the engineer to study the failure's causes; Contractor's claim against the government creating adverse interests
  • sufficientFactors content: Dam failure prompting government retention combined with the contractor's subsequent effort to retain the same engineer
  • counterfactual content: Without the dam failure, neither the government's retention of the engineer nor the contractor's adverse retention effort would have occurred
  • agentKnowledge content: Knew he had been retained by the US government and that the contractor had filed a claim against the government
  • interveningFactors content: Contractor's compensation claim against the US government; Absence of consent from the former client per NSPE Code Section III.4.b.
  • causalSequence content: {'proeth:step': 1, 'proeth:element': 'Dam Failure', 'proeth:description': 'A dam fails, creating the need for a causal investigation'}; {'proeth:step': 2, 'proeth:element': 'Government Retention', 'proeth:description': 'The US government retains the engineer to study the causes of the dam failure'}; {'proeth:step': 3, 'proeth:element': 'Contractor Claim Filing', 'proeth:description': 'The contractor files a claim against the US government for additional compensation'}; {'proeth:step': 4, 'proeth:element': 'Adverse Party Retention', 'proeth:description': 'The engineer agrees to be retained by the contractor, adverse to his former client'}
  • responsibilityType assessment: direct
  • withinAgentControl assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#CausalChain_6",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146629+00:00",
  "proeth:agentKnowledge": "Knew he had been retained by the US government and that the contractor had filed a claim against the government",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "the Board ruled that where an engineer is retained by the US government to study the causes of a dam failure, it would not be ethical for the engineer to agree to be retained by the contractor involved in the construction of the dam. The contractor had filed a claim against the US government for additional compensation.",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "A dam fails, creating the need for a causal investigation",
      "proeth:element": "Dam Failure",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "The US government retains the engineer to study the causes of the dam failure",
      "proeth:element": "Government Retention",
      "proeth:step": 2
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "The contractor files a claim against the US government for additional compensation",
      "proeth:element": "Contractor Claim Filing",
      "proeth:step": 3
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "The engineer agrees to be retained by the contractor, adverse to his former client",
      "proeth:element": "Adverse Party Retention",
      "proeth:step": 4
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Dam Failure",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Without the dam failure, neither the government\u0027s retention of the engineer nor the contractor\u0027s adverse retention effort would have occurred",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "discussion",
  "proeth:effect": "Adverse Party Retention",
  "proeth:interveningFactors": [
    "Contractor\u0027s compensation claim against the US government",
    "Absence of consent from the former client per NSPE Code Section III.4.b."
  ],
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Occurrence of the dam failure",
    "US government retaining the engineer to study the failure\u0027s causes",
    "Contractor\u0027s claim against the government creating adverse interests"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "direct",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Engineer in BER Case No. 82-6",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Dam failure prompting government retention combined with the contractor\u0027s subsequent effort to retain the same engineer"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Causal Language: Following Engineer A’s review and analysis, Engineer A determined that he could not provide an engineering and safety analysis report favorable to the plaintiff... Engineer A’s services were terminated and his fee was paid in full.

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Engineer A's honest technical review of the case materials
  • Findings suggesting the plaintiff, not the defendant, was at fault
  • Attorney Z's need for a report favorable to the plaintiff
Sufficient Factors:
  • The determination that a favorable report could not be provided, given Attorney Z's litigation objectives
Counterfactual Test: Had the analysis supported the plaintiff's position, Attorney Z would have had no cause to terminate the engineer's services
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Attorney Z
Type: direct
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:
  1. Unfavorable Analysis Determination
    Forensic engineer determines he cannot provide a report favorable to the plaintiff because the plaintiff was at fault
  2. Consulting Services Termination
    Engineer A's services for Attorney Z are terminated and his fee is paid in full
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • cause: Unfavorable Analysis Determination
  • effect: Consulting Services Termination
  • responsibleAgent: Attorney Z
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • causalLanguage content: Following Engineer A’s review and analysis, Engineer A determined that he could not provide an engineering and safety analysis report favorable to the plaintiff... Engineer A’s services were terminated and his fee was paid in full.
  • necessaryFactors content: Engineer A's honest technical review of the case materials; Findings suggesting the plaintiff, not the defendant, was at fault; Attorney Z's need for a report favorable to the plaintiff
  • sufficientFactors content: The determination that a favorable report could not be provided, given Attorney Z's litigation objectives
  • counterfactual content: Had the analysis supported the plaintiff's position, Attorney Z would have had no cause to terminate the engineer's services
  • agentKnowledge content: Knew the engineer's findings could not support the plaintiff's case
  • interveningFactors content: Engineer's professional obligation to render honest analysis
  • causalSequence content: {'proeth:step': 1, 'proeth:element': 'Unfavorable Analysis Determination', 'proeth:description': 'Forensic engineer determines he cannot provide a report favorable to the plaintiff because the plaintiff was at fault'}; {'proeth:step': 2, 'proeth:element': 'Consulting Services Termination', 'proeth:description': "Engineer A's services for Attorney Z are terminated and his fee is paid in full"}
  • responsibilityType assessment: direct
  • withinAgentControl assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#CausalChain_7",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146661+00:00",
  "proeth:agentKnowledge": "Knew the engineer\u0027s findings could not support the plaintiff\u0027s case",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "Following Engineer A\u2019s review and analysis, Engineer A determined that he could not provide an engineering and safety analysis report favorable to the plaintiff... Engineer A\u2019s services were terminated and his fee was paid in full.",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Forensic engineer determines he cannot provide a report favorable to the plaintiff because the plaintiff was at fault",
      "proeth:element": "Unfavorable Analysis Determination",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A\u0027s services for Attorney Z are terminated and his fee is paid in full",
      "proeth:element": "Consulting Services Termination",
      "proeth:step": 2
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Unfavorable Analysis Determination",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Had the analysis supported the plaintiff\u0027s position, Attorney Z would have had no cause to terminate the engineer\u0027s services",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "discussion",
  "proeth:effect": "Consulting Services Termination",
  "proeth:interveningFactors": [
    "Engineer\u0027s professional obligation to render honest analysis"
  ],
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Engineer A\u0027s honest technical review of the case materials",
    "Findings suggesting the plaintiff, not the defendant, was at fault",
    "Attorney Z\u0027s need for a report favorable to the plaintiff"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "direct",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Attorney Z",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "The determination that a favorable report could not be provided, given Attorney Z\u0027s litigation objectives"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Causal Language: Thereafter, Attorney X, representing the defendant in the case, learned of the circumstances relating to Engineer A’s unwillingness to provide a report in support of Attorney Z’s case and sought to retain Engineer A to provide an independent and separate engineering and safety analysis report. Engineer A agreed to provide the report.

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Attorney X learning of the circumstances of Engineer A's termination
  • Attorney X's belief that Engineer A's report would favor the defendant
  • Engineer A's agreement to be retained
Sufficient Factors:
  • Attorney X's knowledge of the favorable circumstances combined with Engineer A's willingness to accept the retention
Counterfactual Test: Had Attorney X not learned of the termination circumstances, he would not have sought Engineer A specifically; the Board noted 'the real reason for the defendant’s attorney’s hiring Engineering A was that the attorney believed Engineer A would provide a report that would be favorable to the attorney’s client'
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Engineer A (forensic engineer in BER Case No. 85-4)
Type: shared
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:
  1. Consulting Services Termination
    Engineer A's services for the plaintiff's attorney are terminated after his unfavorable determination
  2. Opposing Counsel Discovery
    Attorney X, representing the defendant, learns of the circumstances of Engineer A's termination
  3. Opposing Party Engagement
    Attorney X retains Engineer A, and Engineer A agrees to provide a 'separate and independent' report
  4. Board Ethical Finding
    The Board decides Engineer A's actions were not ethical because he could not 'blot all' prior confidential information from his mind
Field classification (triples vs literals)
Relations (structural triples)
  • cause: Opposing Counsel Discovery
  • effect: Opposing Party Engagement
  • responsibleAgent: Engineer A (forensic engineer in BER Case No. 85-4)
Literal extractions (kept for synthesis)
  • causalLanguage content: Thereafter, Attorney X, representing the defendant in the case, learned of the circumstances relating to Engineer A’s unwillingness to provide a report in support of Attorney Z’s case and sought to retain Engineer A to provide an independent and separate engineering and safety analysis report. Engineer A agreed to provide the report.
  • necessaryFactors content: Attorney X learning of the circumstances of Engineer A's termination; Attorney X's belief that Engineer A's report would favor the defendant; Engineer A's agreement to be retained
  • sufficientFactors content: Attorney X's knowledge of the favorable circumstances combined with Engineer A's willingness to accept the retention
  • counterfactual content: Had Attorney X not learned of the termination circumstances, he would not have sought Engineer A specifically; the Board noted 'the real reason for the defendant’s attorney’s hiring Engineering A was that the attorney believed Engineer A would provide a report that would be favorable to the attorney’s client'
  • agentKnowledge content: Had to have been aware of the reasons why his services were being retained by virtue of the sequence of events
  • interveningFactors content: Attorney X's strategic solicitation; Access to plaintiff's confidential information from the prior engagement
  • causalSequence content: {'proeth:step': 1, 'proeth:element': 'Consulting Services Termination', 'proeth:description': "Engineer A's services for the plaintiff's attorney are terminated after his unfavorable determination"}; {'proeth:step': 2, 'proeth:element': 'Opposing Counsel Discovery', 'proeth:description': "Attorney X, representing the defendant, learns of the circumstances of Engineer A's termination"}; {'proeth:step': 3, 'proeth:element': 'Opposing Party Engagement', 'proeth:description': "Attorney X retains Engineer A, and Engineer A agrees to provide a 'separate and independent' report"}; {'proeth:step': 4, 'proeth:element': 'Board Ethical Finding', 'proeth:description': "The Board decides Engineer A's actions were not ethical because he could not 'blot all' prior confidential information from his mind"}
  • responsibilityType assessment: shared
  • withinAgentControl assessment: True
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/106#CausalChain_8",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "generatedAtTime": "2026-07-14T04:24:44.146688+00:00",
  "proeth:agentKnowledge": "Had to have been aware of the reasons why his services were being retained by virtue of the sequence of events",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "Thereafter, Attorney X, representing the defendant in the case, learned of the circumstances relating to Engineer A\u2019s unwillingness to provide a report in support of Attorney Z\u2019s case and sought to retain Engineer A to provide an independent and separate engineering and safety analysis report. Engineer A agreed to provide the report.",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A\u0027s services for the plaintiff\u0027s attorney are terminated after his unfavorable determination",
      "proeth:element": "Consulting Services Termination",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Attorney X, representing the defendant, learns of the circumstances of Engineer A\u0027s termination",
      "proeth:element": "Opposing Counsel Discovery",
      "proeth:step": 2
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Attorney X retains Engineer A, and Engineer A agrees to provide a \u0027separate and independent\u0027 report",
      "proeth:element": "Opposing Party Engagement",
      "proeth:step": 3
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "The Board decides Engineer A\u0027s actions were not ethical because he could not \u0027blot all\u0027 prior confidential information from his mind",
      "proeth:element": "Board Ethical Finding",
      "proeth:step": 4
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Opposing Counsel Discovery",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Had Attorney X not learned of the termination circumstances, he would not have sought Engineer A specifically; the Board noted \u0027the real reason for the defendant\u2019s attorney\u2019s hiring Engineering A was that the attorney believed Engineer A would provide a report that would be favorable to the attorney\u2019s client\u0027",
  "proeth:discoveredInSection": "discussion",
  "proeth:effect": "Opposing Party Engagement",
  "proeth:interveningFactors": [
    "Attorney X\u0027s strategic solicitation",
    "Access to plaintiff\u0027s confidential information from the prior engagement"
  ],
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Attorney X learning of the circumstances of Engineer A\u0027s termination",
    "Attorney X\u0027s belief that Engineer A\u0027s report would favor the defendant",
    "Engineer A\u0027s agreement to be retained"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "shared",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Engineer A (forensic engineer in BER Case No. 85-4)",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Attorney X\u0027s knowledge of the favorable circumstances combined with Engineer A\u0027s willingness to accept the retention"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}
Allen Temporal Relations (5)
Interval algebra relationships with OWL-Time standard properties
From Entity Allen Relation To Entity OWL-Time Property Evidence
Engineer A's access to confidential and proprietary design information (including Company X's) during
Entity1 occurs entirely within the duration of Entity2 		Engineer A's employment with the government agency time:intervalDuring
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalDuring 		During Engineer A's tenure with the government agency, Engineer A receives access to confidential an... [more]
Engineer A ending employment with the government agency before
Entity1 is before Entity2 		Engineer A accepting an engineering position with Company Y time:intervalBefore
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalBefore 		Engineer A ends her employment with the government agency and accepts an engineering position with C... [more]
Engineer A's confidentiality duty to Company X overlaps
Entity1 starts before Entity2 and ends during Entity2 		Engineer A's employment with Company Y (post-agency period) time:intervalOverlaps
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalOverlaps 		the engineer still has an ethical obligation to that client to protect certain confidential informat... [more]
BER precedent cases (Case Nos. 74-2, 82-6, 85-4) before
Entity1 is before Entity2 		the Board's decision in the current case time:intervalBefore
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalBefore 		The aforementioned cases represent the longstanding BER positions... Shifting to the facts in the cu... [more]
Company X's submission of confidential design information to the agency during
Entity1 occurs entirely within the duration of Entity2 		Engineer A's employment with the government agency time:intervalDuring
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#intervalDuring 		Company X is among the companies submitting confidential and proprietary design information... Durin... [more]
About Allen Relations & OWL-Time

Allen's Interval Algebra provides 13 basic temporal relations between intervals. These relations are mapped to OWL-Time standard properties for interoperability with Semantic Web temporal reasoning systems and SPARQL queries.

Each relation includes both a ProEthica custom property and a time:* OWL-Time property for maximum compatibility.

Back to Extraction Continue to Step 4

© Licensed under the GNU GPL v3