Chinese Efforts To Obstruct Huawei Prosecution Illustrate Hybrid Corporate Espionage Risks
While China's target was the U.S. government in this instance, the defendants' alleged conduct and methodologies illustrate security risks and compliance challenges faced by private U.S. entities and their personnel related to insider threats and corporate espionage.
November 22, 2022 at 10:00 AM
7 minute read
On Oct. 24, 2022, the U.S. Department of Justice announced charges against two Chinese intelligence officers relating to alleged efforts to obstruct the ongoing prosecution of Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. (Huawei) by soliciting sensitive information from U.S. law enforcement. Public filings relating to the case suggest that the scheme involved a hybrid effort in which the intelligence officers were in contact with Chinese officials and Huawei itself. In light of diplomatic tension related to the Huawei prosecution, it is hardly surprising to learn of a Chinese foreign intelligence operation intended to disrupt the case. And while China's target was the U.S. government in this instance, the defendants' alleged conduct and methodologies illustrate security risks and compliance challenges faced by private U.S. entities and their personnel related to insider threats and corporate espionage.
|The Huawei Prosecution
Huawei is a global telecommunications company, based in Guangdong, China, that employs almost 200,000 people in approximately 170 countries. In December 2018, Canadian authorities provisionally arrested Huawei CFO Wanzhou Meng at the United States' request. In January 2019, DOJ unsealed charges against Meng, Huawei, and certain of Huawei's affiliates. DOJ alleged that the defendants committed a host of federal crimes in connection with a scheme to cause international banks to process transactions in violation of U.S. sanctions against Iran by concealing the operations of an alleged Iranian affiliate.
The charges escalated existing tension between the United States and China over international trade and Huawei in particular. Following Meng's arrest in Canada, China blocked certain Canadian exports and arrested two Canadian citizens based on allegations of espionage. In September 2021, Meng entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with DOJ in which she admitted to several of DOJ's central factual allegations about the case. Meng entered into the agreement with U.S. prosecutors from Canada, and the prosecutors permitted her to return to China during the deferment period. Within days of the agreement, China released the detained Canadian citizens.
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 AllAs Trafficking, Hate Crimes Rise in NJ, State's Federal Delegation Must Weigh in On New UN Proposal
4 minute readWhat Went Wrong With Adeel Mangi's Long, Strange Trip Through the Judicial Nomination Process?
6 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
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