Why Trade-Secret Theft Prosecutions vs. China Are Trending: Lawyers Explain
As U.S. and China trade tensions escalate, the U.S. Department of Justice has been prosecuting trade misappropriation cases more often. “I imagine that some of these cases have been worked on for years now and there was a policy judgment in the Trump administration that we would start prosecuting these cases,” said a trade lawyer and former DOJ prosecutor.
November 09, 2018 at 04:29 PM
6 minute read
A lot can change in three years. Back in 2015, President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping stood in the Rose Garden and announced to the world that they had reached an agreement to end state-sponsored cyberattacks to steal trade secrets.
“The question now is, 'Are words followed by actions?'” Obama said at the time.
That handshake between world economic powerhouses hasn't aged well. The U.S. and China are in the midst of an escalating trade war and the U.S. Department of Justice has been prosecuting trade misappropriation cases against China with notable vigor as of late.
“I wouldn't say the agreement has gone out the window, but this is a sign that the DOJ is going to take matters into its own hands more, rather than try to get cooperation from the Chinese authorities,” said Dana Finberg, a partner at Arent Fox in San Francisco who specializes in trade secret and patent litigation.
In the past few weeks, the U.S. Department of Justice has pursued charges against Chinese hackers and intelligence officers for allegedly swiping jet engine manufacturing trade secrets. The agency secured indictments accusing three former Genentech employees of stealing trade secrets from the biotech company and handing the info to a Taiwanese competitor planning a Hong Kong IPO. Then it charged a Chinese company with stealing trade secrets from semiconductor company Micron Technology Inc.
China has called the accusations baseless while the DOJ has announced its “China Initiative” as part of a “strategic priority of countering Chinese national security threats” and to bolster President Donald Trump's “overall national security strategy.”
“It's the first time you have an initiative within the DOJ focused on a particular country,” Finberg noted.
Now-former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a prepared statement prior to his forced resignation on Nov. 7 that “Chinese economic espionage against the United States has been increasing—and it has been increasing rapidly. Enough is enough. We're not going to take it anymore.”
Sessions' departure isn't expected to alter the DOJ's aggressive pursuit of intellectual property thieves, said Ryan Fayhee, partner and leader of the sanctions, export controls and anti-money laundering practice group at Hughes Hubbard & Reed in Washington, D.C. Before going into private practice, he spent 11 years prosecuting trade secret theft and espionage cases for the DOJ.
“They may, if anything, be increased,” he said, referring to DOJ trade theft prosecutions. “There's no question at all that there is this really intense focus on China intellectual property theft. You also have the CFIUS law that Congress has passed. It's all related. It's all about China.”
|To Prosecute or Not?
Historically, tension has existed within the DOJ between deciding whether to call out trade theft through criminal prosecution or stay quiet and work behind the scenes to exploit the situation and collect counterintelligence by, for instance, flipping the foreign spy to work as a double agent, according to another former DOJ prosecutor, Jonathan Poling. He's a partner in Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld's international trade practice in Washington, D.C.
But that tension seems to be dissipating, which could explain the recent trade theft prosecution actions—and these cases don't come together overnight. The aforementioned jet engine case stretches back to 2010, for example.
“I imagine that some of these cases have been worked on for years now and there was a policy judgment in the Trump administration that we would start prosecuting these cases,” Poling said.
“I think the sense is on these cases that there's really not much to be learned or gained from an intelligence perspective,” he added, “and the need for deterrence outweighs whatever value there is to learn from the intelligence efforts that are occurring through the Chinese to acquire U.S. trade secrets.”
While Fayhee believed the DOJ's recent trade theft prosecutions were an instrument of foreign policy, he stressed that DOJ investigators and prosecutors are motivated by the facts of a case, not politics.
“What's happening though is there are enforcement priorities,” he said. “They have, over the past years, focused on China and I think you're seeing increased resources being devoted to those cases. And that's consistent with U.S. national and foreign policy goals.”
Finberg, the partner at Arent Fox, echoed Fayhee, saying he believed the DOJ's recent actions on alleged Chinese trade theft were “part and parcel of the Trump administration getting tough on China.”
“It's not as if all the sudden the DOJ has started prosecuting trade secret misappropriation,” he added. “But there is no doubt that the amount of publicity these cases are getting and the amount of resources being dedicated to these cases has increased significantly.”
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLowenstein Hires Ex-FTX US General Counsel Ryne Miller to Lead Its Commodities, Derivatives Practice
3 minute readSustainable Packaging Company Packsize Finds New Legal Chief a Perfect Fit
2 minute readLockmaker's Veteran GC Takes Old Job Back After Successor Lasts Just 3 Months
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-59
- 2The American Lawyer Names Industry Award Winners
- 3Regulatory Upheaval Is Coming. How Businesses Prepare and Respond Will Separate Winners and Losers
- 4Cravath Elevates 7 to Partnership, Up From Last Year
- 5Kline & Specter Hit With Lawsuit From Another Former Associate
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250