United States Attorney
Northern District of Illinois
Patrick J. Fitzgerald Federal Building
United States Attorney 219 South Dearborn Street, Fifth Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60604
(312) 353-5300

PRESS CONTACTS:
AUSA Steven Dollear (312) 353-5359
AUSA/PIO Randall Samborn (312)353-5318

CHICAGO-A former software engineer for a telecommunications company based in suburban Chicago was indicted for allegedly stealing business trade secrets and attempting to take the documents with her to China, federal law enforcement officials announced today. The defendant, Hanjuan Jin, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in China, allegedly possessed more than 1,000 electronic and paper proprietary documents when she attempted to travel one-way to China in February 2007. The documents were seized by U.S. customs officials at O'Hare International Airport.

Jin, 37, of Schaumburg, was charged with three counts of theft of trade secrets in an indictment returned yesterday by a federal grand jury in Chicago. The indictment also seeks forfeiture of assorted computer hardware and equipment. The charges were announced today by Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, and Robert D. Grant, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

"We have to be vigilant in preserving the integrity of trade secrets to provide an honest playing field among business competitors, whether foreign or domestic. Trade secrets often are a business's most valuable assets, and protecting them from theft and betrayal is a high priority for law enforcement," Mr. Fitzgerald said.

Jin was released on a $50,000 secured bond after she was arrested on March 7 based on a criminal complaint. She will be arraigned at a later date in U.S. District Court in Chicago.

According to the indictment, Jin began working for the suburban Chicago company, identified only as "Company A," in 1998, and she took a medical leave of absence in February 2006. Between June and November 2006, Jin discussed, negotiated and ultimately accepted employment in China with "Company B," where she was to work on developing communications software. After accepting the job in China, Jin advised Company A on Feb. 23, 2007, that she was ready to end her medical leave and return to work with Company A, without advising that she had accepted employment with Company B.

On Feb. 24, 2007, Jin purchased a one-way ticket to China for a flight scheduled to depart on Feb. 28, 2007.

Jin returned to Company A on Feb. 26, 2007, purportedly to resume full-time work, and was given no assignments on that day. Between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., she allegedly downloaded more than 200 technical documents belonging to Company A on its secure internal computer network. About 9 p.m. that night, she allegedly returned to Company A and downloaded additional documents, as well as removed documents and other materials from the company's offices.

Jin sent her resignation by email to her manager at Company A at approximately 12:15 p.m. on Feb. 27, 2007. About 10 p.m. that night, she allegedly returned to Company A's offices and downloaded numerous additional technical documents.

As she attempted to depart the next day at O'Hare bound for China, authorities seized numerous materials, some of which were marked confidential and proprietary belonging to Company A. Some of the documents provided a detailed description on how Company A provides a specific interstate communication feature that Company A incorporates into its telecommunications products, including the necessary architecture for the feature, and explained how to expand the network for the feature. The complaint affidavit states that Company A had spent hundreds of millions of dollars on research and development for the proprietary information that Jin allegedly possessed without authorization.

The Government is being represented in court by Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Dollear.

If convicted, each count carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The Court, however, would determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed under the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines.

The public is reminded that an indictment contains only charges and is not evidence of guilt. The defendant is presumed innocent and is entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.