United States: The Extraterritorial Reach Of U.S. Trade Secret Law

The current extraterritorial reach of U.S. trade secret law may seem ironic given trade secret law's "local" roots. In the United States, common law trade secret principles emerged through a diverse patchwork of state court decisions addressing local commercial disputes. These local common law principles were first distilled in the Restatement of Torts and the Restatement of Unfair Competition and then codified in the  Uniform Trade Secrets Act in 1979. Underscoring the local prerogative of trade secret law, state legislatures modified and tailored the Uniform Trade Secrets Act to reflect their state-specific concerns and needs. For many years, despite a push for national uniformity, a number of states chose not to adopt a statutory scheme at all (some still haven't).

In parallel with these state-specific developments, the "local" nature of business gave way to a national business environment. Because trade secret disputes often involved companies from different states or products distributed in interstate commerce, state courts increasingly applied their state laws to citizens and companies of other states. Likewise, trade secret owners often brought their state law trade secret claims in federal court, rather than state court, under diversity or supplemental jurisdiction theories. Ultimately, a federal statute was passed—the Economic Espionage Act—governing federal criminal actions for trade secret misappropriations. And most recently, this act was amended by the  Defend Trade Secrets Act to give federal courts original jurisdiction over civil causes of action for trade secret misappropriation. While this new federal statutory scheme does not preempt existing state law, it does exemplify that trade secret law has fully evolved from its local origins into a commercial concern of national scope.

A similar pattern now seems to be unfolding on the global stage. Namely, the factual predicates involved in many trade secret disputes—employee mobility, information sharing, business collaborations—often include an international component. Where the facts surrounding a trade secret misappropriation claim transcend international borders, courts struggle with complex jurisdictional and choice of law issues. For instance, where misappropriation occurs outside of the United States, complex questions of personal jurisdiction, extraterritorial reach, and enforceability of the ultimate judgment arise. This article outlines the nature and extent to which United States trade secret law—both before and after the Defend Trade Secrets Act—might apply to trade secret misappropriation that occurs outside of the United States. The complex questions of personal jurisdiction and enforceability of judgments are not addressed here. Rather, the focus centers on the more fundamental question of whether and under what circumstances U.S. law might apply to conduct abroad.

Extraterritorial Application of State Trade Secret Law

U.S. courts in certain jurisdictions have held that state trade secret statutes can have extraterritorial reach. The reasoning is largely grounded in the "tort out / harm in" theory developed through jurisdictional jurisprudence. For instance, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recognized that the "fictional situs" of the harm caused by trade secret misappropriation—irrespective of where that misappropriation occurs—is the residence of the trade secret owner. See, e.g., Horne v. Adolph Coors Co., 684 F.2d 255, 259 (3d Cir. 1982). This recognition of "in state" harm and a policy to protect a state's companies from misappropriation can serve as the rationale for extraterritorial application of a state's trade secret law. A district court in California applied the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act against a Chinese entity under this theory, holding that "California law applies where an out-of-state defendant's conduct causes injury in California. . . . This principle is especially true when the injury involves misappropriation of a trade secret because California has a significant interest in protecting the intellectual property of its citizens and businesses from infringement by foreign defendants." Applied Materials, Inc. v. Advanced Micro-Fabrication Equipment, Inc., No. 5:07-cv-05248-JW (N.D.Cal. February 29, 2008) (citations omitted). On these grounds, the court held that "Plaintiff's allegations state a claim in which California law may be applied extraterritorially." Id.

Importantly, the  Applied Materials case did involve key conduct in the United States. The accused misappropriators were former employees of the plaintiff, a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business in California. And while the accused misappropriators relocated to China to develop a competing company using allegedly misappropriated technology, they learned of the technology in the first instance while working for the plaintiff in the United States. A U.S. court might not be as willing to entertain the extraterritorial application of a state statute in circumstances where all of the conduct at issue occurs abroad (e.g., misappropriation abroad, manufacturing abroad, sales exclusively abroad, etc.). Indeed, where the factual connection to the United States is more tenuous, U.S. courts may choose to apply the law of a foreign jurisdiction instead of U.S. federal or state law. See, e.g., BP Chemicals, Ltd. v. Formosa Chemical & Fibre Corp., 229 F.3d 254, 266-68 (3d Cir. 2000) (applying Taiwanese trade secret law to a dispute between a United Kingdom trade secret owner and a U.S. corporation where the misappropriation occurred in Taiwan).

Extraterritorial Application of U.S. Federal Trade Secret Law in ITC Actions

The U.S. International Trade Commission ("ITC") will broadly apply U.S. federal trade secret law extraterritorially to address misappropriation occurring abroad. Under  19 U.S.C. § 1337 ("Section 337"), the ITC exercises in rem jurisdiction over products that are imported into the United States where there has been an act of unfair competition. Section 337 actions are brought to obtain an exclusion order, blocking further importation of offending products into the United States. The ITC has long held that "[t]here is no question that misappropriation of trade secrets, if established, is an unfair competition or unfair act which falls within the purview of Section 337." Certain Processes for the Manufacture of Skinless Sausage Casings and Resulting Product, Inv. No. 337-TA-148/169, 1984 ITC LEXIS 137, *165-66 (July 31, 1984). And in 2011, the Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC's application of U.S. trade secret law—what the court called "federal common law" and "a single federal standard"—to a dispute in which all of the acts of misappropriation occurred in China. TianRui Grp. Co. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 661 F.3d 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

In TianRui, the Federal Circuit acknowledged the longstanding presumption that federal statutes apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Id. at 1328-29. Under the Supreme Court's Morrison decision, this "presumption against extraterritoriality" can be rebutted where a statute gives a clear indication of an extraterritorial application. Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S.Ct. 2869 (2010). In TianRui, the Federal Circuit found that Section 337 applied extraterritorially because (1) the statute's focus on unfair competition and unfair acts "in the importation of articles" demonstrates that Congress was not focused solely on domestic concerns, (2) the application of the statute is not "purely extraterritorial," but rather is properly grounded in domestic activity in that the statute's focus is "on the act of importation and the resulting domestic injury," and (3) the legislative history of Section 337 supports extraterritorial application. TianRui, 661 F.3d at 1328-33.

Accordingly, in situations where the facts support a Section 337 action—including the importation of products and attendant domestic injury— the ITC stands as a powerful option for trade secret owners seeking to apply U.S. trade secret law where the misappropriation occurs abroad.

Extraterritorial Application of the Economic Espionage Act as Amended by the Defend Trade Secrets Act

Congress passed the Economic Espionage Act ("EEA") in 1996, creating a federal criminal cause of action for trade secret misappropriation. In 2016, the EEA was amended by the Defend Trade Secrets Act ("DTSA") to create a federal civil cause of action for trade secret misappropriation.  Section 1837 of the EEA is entitled "[a]pplicability to conduct outside the United States." 18 U.S.C. § 1837. Under this section, both criminal and civil actions are available irrespective of where the trade secret misappropriation occurs as long as either (1) the
offender is a U.S. citizen or corporation or (2) "an act in furtherance of the offense was committed in the United States." Id. Despite the presumption against extraterritorial application of U.S. law, just as with trade secret actions before the ITC under Section 337, courts recognize that the EEA applies extraterritorially. "In enacting the trade secret statutes. . . Congress plainly provided that their terms are applicable to foreign defendants where 'an act in furtherance of the offense was committed in the United States.'" United States v. Kolon Indus., Inc., 926 F.Supp.2d 794, 802 (E.D. Va. 2013).

Although the EEA's extraterritoriality provision has been on the books for over 20 years, there is little case law interpreting the provision or identifying the type of conduct that qualifies as "an act in furtherance of the offense." For instance, it is unclear whether mere economic harm felt in the United States—with all of the activity regarding misappropriation otherwise occurring abroad—would satisfy the "act in furtherance" prong (analogous to certain "tort out / harm in" theories under state law). Likewise, it is unclear whether mere importation of a product made using a trade secret abroad would satisfy the "act in furtherance" prong (analogous to ITC misappropriation actions).

If the legislative history of the DTSA serves as a guide, practitioners might expect to see a broad and liberal interpretation of an "act in furtherance of the offense." Before passing the DTSA, much of the discussion in Congress centered on protecting U.S. businesses from trade secret misappropriation abroad. Indeed,  the Senate Judiciary Committee's Report begins with the recognition that American losses due to trade secret theft exceed $300 billion and 2.1 million jobs annually. S. Rep. 114-220 (2016). The report  concludes with the observation that "[a]s trade secret owners increasingly face threats from both at home and abroad, the bill equips them with the tools they need to effectively protect their intellectual property and ensures continued growth and innovation in the American economy." Id. Congress's desire to protect U.S. business from trade secret theft abroad is also apparent from certain noncodified sections of the DTSA requiring a detailed study and report on "[t]he scope and breadth of the of trade secrets of United States companies occurring outside the United States" and reflecting the "Sense of Congress" that "trade secret the , wherever it occurs, harms the companies that own the trade secrets and the employees of the companies." In light of such provisions, an argument can be made that Congress intended the extraterritorial reach of the EEA to apply broadly.


With increasing globalization—including global distribution and supply chains, offshore manufacturing, international collaborations, technology transfers, and cross-border employee mobility—efforts to apply United States trade secret law to disputes of an international character may be on the rise in the near future. Accordingly, the developing case law addressing extraterritorial application of U.S. trade secret law—whether through state statutes, ITC proceedings, or the newly-enacted civil EEA provisions—promises to raise significant opportunities and considerations for companies wrestling with misappropriation of trade secrets outside of the United States.

Originally printed in IP Watchdog on May 30, 2017.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
27 Jan 2019, Other, Washington, DC, United States

Finnegan is a sponsor of the Association of Corporate Patent Counsel Winter Meeting. Finnegan partner Erika Arner will join the panel discussion “PTAB Review & Litigation.”

27 Jan 2019, Other, Florida, United States

Finnegan is a sponsor of the Association of Corporate Patent Counsel Winter Meeting. Finnegan partner Erika Arner will join the panel discussion “PTAB Review & Litigation.

28 Jan 2019, Other, Washington, DC, United States

Finnegan is a Gold sponsor of IAM Magazine’s second annual Pharma & Biotech IP Summit. Finnegan partner Anthony Tridico will moderate the panel discussion “Overcoming the Barriers to Building a Successful IP Business Strategy.”

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions