• Economic Espionage Act Legislative History

    The Economic Espionage Act

    star rule

    To view a summary chart of cases prosecuted under the Economic Espionage Act,
    18 U.S.C. §§ 1831-9, click on the link below.

    Current table of EEA prosecutions and press releases

     

    1. CCIPS Role in Economic Espionage Act Prosecutions
    2. Sixth Circuit Affirms Convictions and Remands for Resentencing on First Jury Trial Case under the EEA
    3. Link to EEA Section of the Intellectual Property Manual
     

    A. CCIPS Role in Economic Espionage Act Prosecutions

    Pursuant to 28 CFR § 0.64-5, for five years after the enactment of the EEA Act of 1996, all prosecutions brought under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1831 and 1832 required approval by the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, or Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division. The Attorney General has decided to revive the prior approval requirement for initiating prosecutions of foreign economic espionage (pursuant to § 1831). Approval should be obtained from the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, through the Internal Security Section (ISS). The Attorney General has decided not to extend the approval requirement for cases of commercial economic espionage (pursuant to § 1832). However, the Attorney General strongly encourages prosecutors to consult with CCIPS prior to filing charges. In addition, attorneys from CCIPS have and will continue to prosecute EEA cases directly in appropriate circumstances.

    B. Sixth Circuit Affirms Convictions and Remands for Resentencing on First Jury Trial Case under the EEA

    The Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed the convictions of PY and Sally Yang for violating the Economic Espionage Act, and remanded to the trial court for resentencing. The Court held that the District Court erred in departing downward 14 levels based on the supposed overinvolvement of the victim, Avery Dennison, in the criminal case. The Court also vacated the upward departure on the corporate defendant, which was fined $5,000,000, the statutory maximum. The case was prosecuted in 1999 by attorneys in the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section. It was the first jury trial under the Economic Espionage Act. The court opinion is available via the link below.

    C. Link to EEA Section of the Intellectual Property Manual


      Click here for more information on:

    Intellectual Property Policy and Programs
    Intellectual Property Cases
    Prosecuting Intellectual Property Crimes Laws    Economic Espionage Act
    Intellectual Property News
     
     Go to . . . CCIPS home page || Justice Department home page
    Updated page March 22, 2002
    usdoj-crm/mis/jam