China’s Zhejiang High People’s Court in late December released a list of 8 representative cases of trade secret misappropriation of 2020 and 2021.

1. Nanfang Zhongjin Environment Co., Ltd. (南方中金环境股份有限公司) v. Zhejiang Nanyuan Pump Industry Co., Ltd. (浙江南元泵业有限公司), et al

Case docket no.: （2020）浙01民初287号

Case docket no. transliteration: 287, first instance (初), civil case (民), (2020) Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court (浙01)

Case summary: The court found that defendant Nanyuan infringed the technologies owned by plaintiff Zhongjin to manufacture the SDL 32 series vertical multistage pumps, highly similar to the CDL 32 series pumps manufactured by Zhongjin. The court also found that Nanyuan was incorporated by some former employees of Zhongjin after they quit Zhongjin. The court ordered the defendants to pay the plaintiff 1.1 million yuan ($170,000) in damages in August, 2021.

2. Ningbo Wins Time Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. (宁波永贸时代进出口有限公司) v. Wang

Case docket no.: （2019）浙0212民初11565号

Case docket no. transliteration: 11565, first instance (初), civil case (民), (2019) Yinzhou District People’s Court of Ningbo city (浙0212)

Case summary: The court found that defendant Wang misappropriated the customer data owned by plaintiff Wins Time and sold wax and lights to three clients he dealt with as Wins Time’s former employee. The court also found the products sold by Wang’s company, which he incorporated after quitting Wins Time, were exactly the same as the products sold by his former employer. The court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff 500,000 yuan ($79,000) in damages in February, 2020.

3. Hangzhou Hangcheng Patent Attorneys Office Co., Ltd. (杭州杭诚专利事务所有限公司) v. Jiaxing Yonghang Patent Attorneys Office (嘉兴永航专利代理事务所) and Hou

Case docket no.: （2019）浙01民终4315号

Case docket no. transliteration: 4315, second instance (终), civil case (民), (2019) Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court of Zhejiang province (浙01)

Case summary: The lower court found that defendant Hou misappropriated the customer data owned by plaintiff Hangcheng and provided patenting services for some clients he dealt with as Hangcheng’s former employee. The lower court also found the services provided by Yonghang, which Hou incorporated after quitting Hangcheng, provided highly similar services to what Hangcheng provides. The lower court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff 120,000 yuan ($19,000) in damages. The defendant appealed the case and the appeals court upheld the lower court’s decision in December, 2019.

4. Zhejiang Huazhang Technology Co., Ltd. (浙江华章科技有限公司) v. Jiaxing Ark Green Environmental Protection Equipment Co., Ltd. (嘉兴绿方舟环保技术有限公司) and Tang

Case docket no.: （2020）浙04民终512号

Case docket no. transliteration: 512, second instance (终), civil case (民), (2020) Jiaxing Intermediate People’s Court of Zhejiang province (浙01)

Case summary: The lower court found that defendant Tang abused the customer data owned by plaintiff Huazhang and sold products treating municipal wastewater and sludge to a client he dealt with as Huangzhang’s employee. The lower court also found the products provided by Ark Green, which Tang incorporated during his employment at Huazhang, were similar to what Huazhang provides. The lower court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff 300,000 yuan ($47,000) in damages. The defendant appealed the case and the appeals court upheld the lower court’s decision in September, 2020.

5. Yiwu Weixing Merchandise Co., Ltd. (义乌市微星百货有限公司) v. Yiwu Tuopu Craftwork Co., Ltd. (义乌市拓谱工艺品有限公司), Zhang, and Xiong

Case docket no.: （2019）浙0782民初13094号

Case docket no. transliteration: 13094, first instance (初), civil case (民), (2019) Yiwu People’s Court of Zhejiang province (浙0782)

Case summary: The court found that defendants Zhang and Xiong misappropriated the customer data owned by plaintiff Weixing and sold craftwork to two clients they dealt with as Weixing’s former employees. The lower court also found the products sold by Tuopu, which Zhang and Xiong incorporated after quitting Weixing, were highly similar to what Weixing sells. The court ordered the defendants to pay the plaintiff 120,000 yuan ($19,000) in damages.

6. Ningbo Soundking Group Co., Ltd. (宁波音王集团) v. Zheng and Qiu

Case docket no.: （2021）浙021刑初35号

Case docket no. transliteration: 35, first instance (初), criminal case (刑), (2021) Ningbo Intermediate People’s Court of Zhejiang province (浙02)

Case summary: The court found that defendants Zheng and Qiu misappropriated the patented technologies owned by plaintiff Soundking and produced and sold digital mixing consoles, highly similar to Soundking’s products. The court also found the products sold by the company, which Zheng incorporated in another person’s name after quitting Soundking. The court sentenced defendant Zheng to pay the plaintiff 2 million yuan ($310,000) in damages and 4 years in prison and defendant Qiu to pay the plaintiff 100,000 yuan ($16,000) in damages and 2 years in prison with a probation of 2.5 years.

7. Wenzhou Mingfa Optical Technology Co., Ltd. (温州明发光学科技有限公司) v. Jin

Case docket no.: （2019）浙03刑终424号

Case docket no. transliteration: 424, second instance (终), criminal case (刑), (2019) Wenzhou Intermediate People’s Court of Zhejiang province (浙03)

Case summary: The lower court found that defendant Jin misappropriated the technologies owned by plaintiff Mingfa to produce and sell magnifiers, highly similar to Mingfa’s products. The lower court also found the products were sold by the company, which was incorporated after Jin quit Ming and was actually controlled by him. The lower court sentenced the defendant to pay the plaintiff 700,000 yuan ($110,000) in damages and 1.5 years in prison. The defendant appealed the case and the appeals court upheld the lower court’s decision in September, 2019.

8. Zhejiang Sanquan Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd. (浙江三泉智能科技有限公司) v. Yuyao Administration for Market Regulation of Zhejiang province (余姚市市场监督管理局)

Case docket no.: （2020）浙02行终293号

Case docket no. transliteration: 293, second instance (终), administrative case (行), (2020) Ningbo Intermediate People’s Court of Zhejiang province (浙02)

Case summary: The Ningbo Administration for Market Regulation found that respondent Zhang misappropriated the technologies owned by a third party company to produce and sell intelligent toilets, highly similar to the third party company’s products. The Administration also found the products were sold by Sanquan, which was incorporated by Zhang after quitting the third party company. The Administration fined the respondent 150,000 yuan ($24,000). Defendant Sanquan appealed the case and the appeals court upheld the Administration’s decision in October, 2020.