D alleges that Wachtell is in violation of the Delaware Rules of Professional Conduct because D is both a current client of Wachtell and a client whom Wachtell has previously represented in matters substantially related to the instant proceedings. Dow argues that Wachtell never took steps to inform D that it was no longer a client following Wachtell's representation of D in 2007 and 2008 in connection with the termination of two D executives and potential defensive measures in response to rumors of a takeover bid. D argues that Wachtell obtained confidential information that will materially advance Rohm and Haas's (P) position in the instant litigation. P claims it should have been clear to D that D was no longer a Wachtell client when the firm appeared opposite D in its representation of P in the negotiations of the initial confidentiality agreement and the merger agreement in mid-2008. P argues that the nature and scope of the prior representation and the current litigation are distinct and that Wachtell received no confidences from D that could be used to P's advantage.