This was a very interesting case... It was going to be a slam dunk for Alan Gura.
The case name is Hanson v. DC. The issue arose because Ms Hanson tried to apply to register a Springfield Armory XD-45 Tactical 5" Bi-Tone stainless steel/black handgun and was refused because it was not on the approved list adopted by California. However the Springfield Armory XD-45 Tactical 5" black handgun was on the approved list adopted by California. The only difference between the 2 models is the color.
The problem is the California list, which require the gun mfr to apply ANNUALLY to put a gun on the approved list. The application must be accompanied by a $200 fee, also payable annually. The gun mfgr had not attempted to place the bi tone model on the list and did not pay an application fee for it, so it was not on Californias list.
So essentially, the difference between a gun approved by DC (and California) and a gun which is obviously bad and evil incarnate, comes down to the color scheme adopted.
After Alan filed a motion for summary judgment, DC capitulated and the result is reported in the WaPo.