United States v. Shiah
SA CR 06-92 DOC (C.D. Cal.) (2008)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under the Economic Espionage Act, the mere unauthorized taking and possession of files containing trade secrets is insufficient for a criminal conviction; the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant specifically intended to convert the trade secrets for the economic benefit of another.
Facts:
- Tien Shiah, a Product Line Manager at Broadcom Corporation, signed a confidentiality agreement upon his hiring in January 2001.
- In the spring of 2003, after receiving a critical peer review, Shiah began searching for a new job and accepted an offer from Marvell, a Broadcom competitor, on July 21, 2003.
- Starting in July 2003, while still employed at Broadcom, Shiah purchased an external hard drive to create a 'toolkit' of his work, a practice he had followed in previous jobs.
- Between July and his last day on August 8, 2003, Shiah actively requested and gathered numerous documents from colleagues and company servers.
- On August 4, 2003, Shiah performed a wholesale transfer, copying approximately 4,700 files and all his work emails from his Broadcom laptop to the external hard drive.
- During his exit interview, a Broadcom attorney warned Shiah about protecting confidential information but declined to answer his specific questions about what constituted a trade secret and did not ask if he had copied any files.
- While employed at Marvell, Shiah accessed some of the copied Broadcom files on at least five separate occasions.
- Shiah contended that he accessed the files only for non-confidential information, such as organizational chart templates, public market data, and contact names, and relied on his own 'internal filter' to avoid using trade secrets.
Procedural Posture:
- After Tien Shiah's departure, Broadcom Corporation conducted an internal investigation of his computer activity.
- On September 10, 2003, Broadcom submitted a memorandum to the Assistant United States Attorney, alleging a violation of federal law.
- The FBI obtained a search warrant and searched Shiah's apartment on September 26, 2003, seizing an external hard drive and CDs.
- On May 10, 2006, the United States of America (the Government) filed a three-count indictment against Shiah in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California for violations of the Economic Espionage Act.
- Shiah waived his right to a jury trial, and the case proceeded as a bench trial before the district court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a former employee's unauthorized copying and possession of thousands of company files, some containing trade secrets, for the stated purpose of creating a personal 'toolkit' of his work, constitute a criminal violation of the Economic Espionage Act when the government fails to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to use the secret information for a competitor's benefit?
Opinions:
Majority - District Judge David O. Carter
No. A criminal conviction under the Economic Espionage Act requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the defendant's intent to convert trade secrets for the economic benefit of someone other than the owner. While the government proved that Shiah's files contained trade secrets, that Broadcom took reasonable (though barely sufficient) measures to protect them, and that Shiah knowingly and without authorization duplicated and possessed them, it failed to meet its high burden of proving criminal intent. The court found that Shiah's explanation—that he created a comprehensive 'toolkit' of his work and only intended to use non-confidential information—was sufficient to create reasonable doubt. The court noted the lack of direct evidence that Shiah ever used or distributed any of Broadcom's trade secret information for Marvell's benefit, concluding that while his actions were wrong and likely created civil liability, they did not rise to the level of a federal crime.
Analysis:
This case establishes a critical distinction between civil liability and criminal culpability under the Economic Espionage Act (EEA). It underscores that the element of 'intent to convert' is a significant hurdle for prosecutors, as mere possession and even access to misappropriated trade secrets are insufficient for a conviction. The decision serves as a powerful reminder of the high 'beyond a reasonable doubt' standard in criminal law, particularly in white-collar cases where intent can be ambiguous. The court's extensive criticism of Broadcom's lax security and exit interview procedures also provides a practical lesson for corporations on the importance of proactive measures to protect trade secrets, rather than relying on after-the-fact criminal prosecution.
Unlock the full brief for United States v. Shiah