tCase Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 1 of 28 Presented to the Court by the foreman of the Grand Jury 1n open Court in the presence of the Grand Jury and FILED in the US DISTRICT COURT at Seattle Washington UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff V HUAWEI DEVICE co LTD and HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC Defendants The Grand Jury charges that COUNT 1 KM INDICTMENT Theft of Trade Secrets Conspiracy 1 Beginning at a time unknoWn but no later than in or about June 2012 and continuing until on or about September 2 2014 at Bellevue within the Western District of Washington and elsewhere HUAWEI DEVICE CO LTD HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC and others known and unknown conspired and agreed together to knowingly and without authorization steal appropriate take carry away and conceal trade secrets belonging to T-Mobile and by fraud arti ce and deception obtain trade secrets belonging to T Mobile knowingly and without authorization copy duplicate sketch draw photograph download replicate transmit deliver send communicate and convey trade secrets belonging to T-Mobile and DEVICE CO et a1 - 1 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 2 of 28 knowingly receive buy and possess trade secrets belonging to T-Mobile knowing the same to have been stolen appropriated obtained and converted without authorization intending to convert a trade secret that is related to a product used and intended for use in interstate and foreign commerce to the economic bene t of someone other than T-Mobile and knowing that the offense would injure T-Mobile At all times relevant to this Indictment A T-Mobile and the Tappy Robot System 2 T-Mobile USA Inc T-Mobile or is one of the largest providers of wireless service in the United States T-Mobile is headquartered in Bellevue Washington and is partially owned by Deutsche Telekom a German company T-Mobile as part of its business sells mobile phones that are packaged with wireless service Although T-Mobile provides the wireless service third parties manufacture the phones that T-Mobile sells 3 Inor about 2006 T-Mobile began developing a proprietary robotic phone testing system nicknamed Tappy Testing new phones before they are launched is important to wireless carriers such as T-Mobile This testing identi es software errors and other problems in new phones before they are sold to customers Correcting these errors prior to launching a new phone helps enable T-Mobile and other carriers to avoid damaging their reputation by launching phones in the market that suffer from software bugs or other problems and to avoid the signi cant costs associated with customer returns of defective devices 4 T-Mobile created Tappy to be an innovative way to test phones T-Mobile developed and re ned the Tappy system over several years at signi cant expense to T-Mobile both in terms of actual dollars expended and employee time to develop and re ne the system The Tappy robot is a largely autOInated testing process that tests a phone for an extended period to measure the phone s performance and stability under prolonged usage saving the employee time that would be expended with manual testing DEVICE CO et a1 - 2 UNITEDSTATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 3 of 28 of the phone The Tappy robot performs touches on phones that simulate how people use their phones Tappy tests among other things the responsiveness performance and stability of the phone s user interface Tappy also records and tracks the phone s performance during testing including measuring the battery life expended by particular tasks Tappy s largely automated testing system was unique as compared to the way other wireless carriers tested phones at the time which typically involved software that performed a variety of tests on phones or manually testing phones to approximate how customers would use them 5 Tappy was valuable to T Mobile for several reasons First T-Mobile found that Tappy was an improvement over other testing systems in the market This improvement was re ected in the fact that T-Mobile experienced a signi cant decline in customer returns after Tappy was implemented which reduced costs for T-Mobile Tappy played a part in this decline by catching errors and problems upfront before T Mobile released the phones in the market Second T-Mobile believed that Tappy provided the company with a competitive edge over other wireless carriers none of which used a robotic testing system T-Mobile publicly marketed Tappy as improving phone quality which contributed to the value of the T Mobile brand Third Tappy had significant potential licensing and sales value for T-Mobile Over time T-Mobile received multiple inquiries about licensing or purchasing the Tappy system As the exclusive owner and holder of this technology T-Mobile had the option to sell Tappy for a price that would have been higher than if the system were available from other parties as well In this way Tappy represented a valuable asset that T-Mobile had the option of further monetizing I 6 In recognition of its proprietary value T-Mobile implemented a number of measures to protect the Tappy technology and keep it con dential For example T-Mobile housed its Tappy robots in a secure laboratory at its headquarters that required special badge access to enter The laboratory had security cameras and a security guard posted at the front desk of the building that housed the laboratory T-Mobile patented DEVICE CO et al - 3 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 out ow boom Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 4 of 28 various aspects of Tappy although the system could not be replicated solely from the patent materials T Mobile also kept a secure hold on the details about how Tappy was constructed and declined the offers described above to license or sell the technology to phone manufacturers and other third parties 7 When T-Mobile initially implemented Tappy only T-Mobile employees were allowed to operate the robot Over time T Mobile allowed approved employees from phone suppliers to use Tappy to test phones that were scheduled for release With this expanded access T-Mobile implemented a series of additional measures to safeguard the con dentiality of Tappy and its technology For example T-Mobile set up a separate portion of its laboratory for suppliers to test phones on Tappy T-Mobile also required suppliers to execute nondisclosure and con dentiality agreements before being able to access and operate Tappy These agreements included multiple Con dentiality provisions including provisions barring suppliers employees from attempting to reverse engineer Tappy or take any photographs or videos of the Tappy robots T-Mobile limited access to Tappy to only a select few employees from each supplier these suppliers employees were approved and trained by T-Mobile Mereover T Mobile permitted these employees to access Tappy only from within T-Mobile s secure laboratory only for limited time periods and only to test phones that were scheduled for release and for no other purpose B T Mobile s Business Relationship with Huawei 8 Huawei is a telecommunications company that among other things manufactures and sells phones to wireless carriers Huawei operates through multiple corporate entities including as HUAWEI DEVICE CO LTD which is located in China and HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC - which operates in the United States with of ces in Bellevue Washington and Plano Texas among other locations HUAWEI CHINA designs and manufactures wireless phones HUAWEI USA sells and distributes Huawei products including wireless phones in the United States HUAWEI USA also assists in the testing of phones by the DEVICE CO et a1 - 4 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553 7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 5 of 28 carriers and facilitating the resolution of issues reported during testing with HUAWEI CHINA 9 In June 2010 Futurewei Technologies Inc d b a Huawei Technologies USA the predecessor corporation of HUAWEI USA entered into a Supply Agreement with T-Mobile to supply wireless phones to T Mobile The terms of this Supply Agreement made it binding upon any successor entities such as HUAWEI USA Under this Supply Agreement HUAWEI predecessor acknowledged that it would be receiving con dential information from T Mobile as part of their business relationship including trade secrets intellectual property and technical information HUAWEI predecessor agreed that such con dential information would remain T Mobile s exclusive property and that it would not use such information except in the performance of its agreement with T-Mobile 10 In 2011 pursuant to this Supply Agreement Huawei began supplying phones to T-Mobile that T Mobile subsequently marketed and sold throughout the United States Prior to this time Huawei had no measurable share of the wireless phone market in the United States the third largest wireless phone market in the world Huawei placed great value on developing its relationship with T-Mobile and viewed that relationship as an important step to gaining a foothold in the United States market 11 In or about August 2012 T Mobile agreed to grant HUAWEI USA engineers access to T Mobile s Tappy robotic testing system for the purpose of testing Huawei phones prior to their release Prior to granting this access T-Mobile required HUAWEI USA to execute two nondisclosure agreements containing multiple con dentiality provisions HUAWEI USA with the knowledge and approval of HUAWEI CHINA executed these two nondisclosure agreements on August 14 2012 and August 16 2012 Under the terms of the agreements HUAWEI USA executed them on behalf of itself its parents and af liates including HUAWEI CHINA In these agreements HUAWEI USA made material promises and representations to T-Mobile including that its employees would not among other things photograph T- Mobile 5 DEVICE CO et al UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUTFE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case DoCument 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 6 of 28 Tappy robotic testing system attempt to copy or discover Tappy s software source codes or trade secrets 0 attempt to reverse-engineer Tappy s software or hardware components or attempt to circumvent any security measures that prevented unauthorized access to Tappy In addition HUAWEI USA represented in the nondisclosure agreements that its employees would access the Tappy system solely for the purpose of testing Huawei phones and for no other purpose and that it would not use T-Mobile s con dential information except in the performance of its agreement with T-Mobile T Mobile relied upon all of the representations made by HUAWEI USA in the nondisclosure agreements in granting HUAWEI employees access to Tappy In mid September 2012 based on the representations made by HUAWEI USA in these agreements T-Mobile began to admit approved HUAWEI USA employees to the Tappy robot laboratory for phone testing I C Huawei s Efforts to Steal Tappy s Technology 12 During in or about 2012 HUAWEI CHINA began developing its own phone testing robot known as XDeviceRobot HUAWEI CHINA intended to use XDeviceRobot in China to test the phones it would supply to T-Mobile and other competing wireless carriers including China Mobile and HUAWEI CHINA was attempting to design its own robotic testing system for multiple reasons First the phones that HUAWEI CHINA supplied to T-Mobile generally were not of high quality and the phones were failing Tappy s testing at a disprOportionate rate compared to other suppliers phones HUAWEI CHINA hoped that it could improve the quality of phones that it supplied to T-Mobile by utilizing its own robot testing earlier in the process While the phones were still under development in China Second HUAWEI CHINA hoped that robotic testing would improve the quality of its phones generally including phones that it supplied to competing wireless carriers including China Mobile and 13 In early May 2012 while the above-referenced nondisclosure agreements were being drafted and negotiated R Y the HUAWEI USA Director of Technical Acceptance inquired on behalf of HUAWEI CHINA whether T-Mobile would be DEVICE CO et a1 - 6 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98 01 206 553-7970 Case Documentl Filed 01 16 19 Page-7 of28 willing to sell or license the Tappy robot system to HUAWEI CHINA T-Mobile declined to do so R Y then communicated to engineers at HUAWEI CHINA that T-Mobile had no plan to sell the robot system to phone manufacturers such as Huawei He further explained that T-Mobile s reasons for this included that it did not want the Tappy technology to be used toiimprove phones that Huawei would supply to T Mobile s competitors such as and it did not want to reveal Tappy s software source code to phone manufacturers such as Huawei 14 After that in 2012 and continuing through May 2013 HUAWEI CHINA with help from HUAWEI USA employees undertook a scheme to steal T Mobile s Tappy technology for use in the development of its XDeviceRobot In furtherance of this scheme and over the course of numerous telephonic and electronic communications HUAWEI CHINA employees who were involved in the development of the XDeviceRobot directed HUAWEI USA employees who had access to Tappy to gather a variety of technical details about Tappy 15 On or about June 30 2012 F W a HUAWEI CHINA engineer working on the XDeviceRobot project convened a conference call with multiple HUAWEI USA and HUAWEI CHINA engineers F W created a list of questions for HUAWEI USA employees to answer about the Tappy robot including requesting photos of the Tappy robot from different angles and detailed technical speci cations of Tappy including component serial numbers camera resolution the sliding speed of the mechanical arm and the method of calculating the user interface response time HUAWEI USA engineer H L in turn posed many of these same questions to T-Mobile engineers In response to these and similar questions T-Mobile employees provided only limited information about Tappy and declined to provide additional information about the technical speci cations of the Tappy system H L and other HUAWEI USA employees informed the HUAWEI CHINA engineers that T-Mobile was unwilling to provide this sort of information due to information security regulations DEVICE CO et al - 7 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 8 of 28 16 During August and September 2012 by email and other communications HUAWEI CHINA engineers continued to task HUAWEI USA employees with determining the technical speci cations of the Tappy robot despite having been made aware that T Mobile was unwilling to disclose con dential technical information about Tappy For example in an email sent on September 10 2012 HP HUAWEI Director of Device Testing Management Department stated The main point is to gure out the Tappy Robot s speci cations and functions These are the benchmarks of products developed by ourselves HUAWEI USA employee R Y replied that T-Mobile was unwilling to provide this sort of technical information In emails sent on September 8 and 11 2012 KY explained that T Mobile was unwilling to share the detail of robot tech docs with suppliers such as Huawei and that T-Mobile refused to provide us the details of robot hardware and software speci cations 17 On November 6 2012 HUAWEI CHINA engineer Y sent an email to HUAWEI USA employee R Y stating T his email is just a kindly reminder for the information we need to build our own robot system and kindly feedback the information we need in the attachment Attached to the email was a PowerPoint le requesting information about the technical speci cations of the Tappy robot hardware components and software systems On November 7 2012 R Y forwarded this email to two HUAWEI USA engineers including A X and directed them to provide the requested information to HUAWEI CHINA R Y also assured Y The HUAWEI USA engineers have accessed the T-Mobile robot lab They know how TMO robot work and system info I asked them to write down the info in detail and then send to 18 On November 15 2012 HUAWEI USA engineer A X replied to Y am sorry we can not get more information from TMO and we can t nish the whole PowerPoint as we talk about And as you know we can take some pictures of test procedure and setting Hope it is useful to HQ The following day On November 16 2012 A X sent an email to J Y and other HUAWEI CHINA engineers with multiple DEVICE CO et a1 8 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET Sum 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 9 of 28 unauthorized photos of the Tappy robot and its software interface system that A X had taken inside of the secure T Mobile lab in violation of the nondisclosure agreements HUAWEI USA signed 19 In December 2012 HUAWEI CHINA engineers continued to task the HUAWEI USA employees to provide them with the same technical speci cations and details about Tappy that T-Mobile previously had declined to share with HUAWEI USA and HUAWEI CHINA T-Mobile again refused to provide this information On December 20 2012 R Y informed J Y and other HUAWEI CHINA engineers We got not much information from TMO on these questions that you guys asked Again TMO won t want to share any more information about their robot system with us However we still try to nd more information during our test' in TMO robot lab But it won t expect anytime soon 20 On December 31 2012 Y sent an email to multiple HUAWEI CHINA engineers and HUAWEI USA employees including KY and A X stating We are still working on the Robot system and we had some issues with the system at the moment Y then asked the HUAWEI USA employees detailed information about Tappy including whether the software test scripts were customized per'device about the touch speed of the robot system about how the rubber tip was installed on the robot system and whether there was any air space inside of the tip On January 1 2013 AK replied with answers to some of these questions and attached unauthorized photographs of the Tappy robot system that he had taken inside of the secure'T Mobile lab in Violation of the nondisclosure agreements HUAWEI USA signed 21 On January 5 2013 Y sent another email to HUAWEI USA employees including KY and A X asking them for additional technical information about the Tappy robot system speci cally seeking details about the response time accuracy of mechanical arm That same day A X replied that T-Mobile would not provide that information On January 7 2013 KY sent an email to Y and other HUAWEI CHINA engineers emphasizing Once again we ask TMO any DEVICE CO et a1 9 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 10 of 28 questions about the robot TMO is VERY angry the questions that we asked Sorry we can t deliver any more information to you R Y suggested that HUAWEI CHINA send its own engineer to Seattle to gain direct access to Tappy stating You will learn a lot in knowledge and experience i 22 During March and April 2013 HUAWEI CHINA engineers continued to task HUAWEI USA employees to provide them with the same sorts of technical speci cations and details about Tappy that T Mobile previously had declined to share - For example on or about March 28 2013 F W a HUAWEI CHINA engineer working on the xDeviceRobot project sent an email to HUAWEI USA engineer H L and other HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA employees stating From the results of the recent xDeviceRobot system veri cation there is still a de nite disparity with T-Mobile robot F W tasked H L to obtain and provide information about the Tappy robot arm and end effector tip including its contact hardness contact area and pressure H L replied that HUAWEI CHINA should contact the manufacturer of the Tappy robot arm directly rather than having HUAWEI USA try to get the requested information from T-Mobile H L explained that going through T-Mobile would only back re and that a fter signing a con dentiality agreement at the TMO laboratory the relevance of this information to us was very sensitive 23 By in or about mid-April 2013 HUAWEI CHINA was encountering dif culties with its development of the xDeviceRobot and HUAWEI CHINA engineers continued to direct HUAWEI USA employees to attempt to steal information about Tappy On April 12 2013 HUAWEI CHINA engineer Y sent an email to several HUAWEI CHINA employees including the leader of the XDeviceRobot development team and HUAWEI USA employees including R Y and A X The email tasked the HUAWEI USA employees to provide additional technical information about among i other things Tappy s calibration standards and what tools and software Tappy used to calculate delays during performance testing 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 DEVICE CO et al - 10 I UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ooeqoxm-bwmad Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 11 of 28 24 On April 12 2013 in response to the above-referenced email from J Y HUAWEI USA employee R Y again suggested that HUAWEI CHINA send its own engineer to the United States who could access Tappy directly and thereby surreptitiously learn the information that HUAWEI CHINA was seeking but that T-Mobile had been refusing to provide _ Speci cally R Y stated First of all I am glad that HQ has been continuing to improve HUAWEI robot system Based on the test on T-Mobile phone we do see a big difference of test results between TMO robot and Huawei robot I think we have a lot of work to improve our robot performance The difference between two is not only the hardware but also most importantly the software TMO has spend much more money on software than hardware I Once again we can t get any further information about TMO robot system from TMO They have complained to us a lot about this because we asked them too many questions of the robot based on request TMO said to me that if we ask them again such questions they don t allow us to use their robot Labsecurity system by putting camera into the robot Lab I think everyone knows What this means I We can t provide any further information to HQ because we can t get anything from TMO Once again I suggested HQ to send an engineer to TMO for a hands-on experience by playing the robot system I believe this would give HQ robot team a huge benefit in understanding TMO robot system from hardware and software as well as operation 25 On April 12 2013 another HUAWEI USA employee who served as a manager in the Technical Acceptance Department replied to the above email string and explained his understanding of the reasons why T-Mobile considered the Tappy robot to be con dential and proprietary property and was refusing to provide HUAWEI USA and HUAWEI CHINA with the technical Speci cations and details about the robot T-Mobile is clear that those such as Huawei and Samsung are not only supplying TMO but are also supplying their competitors such as Verizon ATT and other carriers 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 DEVICE CO et a1 11 UNITED STATES-ATTORNEY Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 12 of 28 1 If every Vendor is helped to establish TMO testing environment and standards it would certainly also improve the product quality etc of each Vendor s competitors which is equivalent to TMO doing a good deed for the industry 2 TMO took about four years of time and lots of resource optimization to develop the Robot system and it contains intellectual property rights 3 TMO can provide a free testing environment for each Vendor and it can ensure that this system only services TMO products This only enhances the competitiveness of TMO 26 On April 12 2013 the HUAWEI USA Executive Director of Technical Acceptance also replied to the above email string emphasizing that T-Mobile strictly controlled what the Huawei engineers could do in their lab speci cally that they are limited to usage of Tappy and everything else is categorically denied The email went on to state Due to answering headquarters questions our employees have had two complaints raised against them and it was declared that if we inquired again Huawei s credentials for using the TMO Robot Laboratory would end The Executive Director of Technical Acceptance echoing prior suggestions encouraged HUAWEI CHINA to send its own engineer to Seattle to gain direct access to Tappy I D The Thefts During May 2013 27 HUAWEI CHINA decided to send its own engineer to Seattle and designated F W to make the trip On April 17 2013 F W sent an email to the HUAWEI USA Executive Director of Technical Acceptance describing one of the goals of his upcoming trip as For the mechanical arm issues go to the T-Mobile laboratory for reconnaissance and obtain measurement data HUAWEI USA approved the travel and submitted paperwork to obtain a temporary Visa for F W F W arrived in the United States on or about May 11 2013 28 On May 13 2013 HUAWEI USA employees A X and H L improperly abused their badge access to allow F W into the T-Mobile laboratory where the Tappy DEVICE CO et al - 12 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 13 of 28 robot was located A T-Mobile employee discovered that F W was in the laboratory without permission and told him to leave 29 On the following day May 14 2013 F W returned to the T Mobile laboratory again without authorization A X again improperly abused his badge access to allow F W into the laboratory While inside the Tappy robot chamber F W took numerous unauthorized photographs of Tappy and otherwise gathered technical information about the robot for the purpose of helping HUAWEI development of the XDeviceRobot A T-Mobile employee again discovered that F W was in the laboratory without permission and told him to leave 30 On or about May 15 and 16 2013 F W sent a series of emails to numerous employees of HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA including the HUAWEI CHINA Director of Device Testing Management Department and the engineers working on the xDeviceRobot project These emails contained multiple attachments including photographs of the Tappy robot and related testing equipment that F W had taken inside the T-Mobile lab and a document entitled Robot Environmental Information which discussed in detail the mechanical assembly operation and other technical details of the Tappy robot as re ected in the photos and based on observations inside the T-Mobile lab In one of the emails F W stated went once more today to mechanical arm testing laboratory and gained an overall understanding of the test environment I summarized it please take a look referring to the attachments F W further explained that T-Mobile had prohibited him from re-entering the laboratory and that moving forWard HUAWEI USA engineer A X would help you get a deeper understanding of the remaining information 31 In light of misconduct in the laboratory T-Mobile noti ed HUAWEI USA that its access to the Tappy laboratory was suspended and required HUAWEI USA to return all badges that had been issued to HUAWEI USA employees T-Mobile agreed to allow one speci c HUAWEI USA engineer A X continued access DEVICE CO et a1 - 13 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 r lb- 00 43 DJ O Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 14 of 28 to the Tappy laboratory for limited testing related to particular Huawei phones that were already scheduled for upcoming release 32 On May 21 2013 HUAWEI CHINA engineer J Y emailed HUAWEI USA engineer A X copying KY and H L directing him to provide information about the speci cations operations and componentry of the Tappy robot including details about the method of calculating the user interface response time the shape diameter and hardness of the capacitor pen tip the calibration method and process of force control the sensors used to support the robotic arm and main camera and lots of photos and Video of test process On May 22 2013 A X replied by email stating We ll certainly help if we can this period is very sensitive referringto the fact that T-Mobile had restricted HUAWEI access to the Tappy robot lab On May 23 2013 AK replied again and provided some of the information requested in email In response to request for lots of photos and Video of test process A X stated After TMO gives back our badges I ll send it back home No need for home to keep reminding me 33 On or about May 29 2013 a HUAWEI CHINA engineer emailed AK and copied other HUAWEI CHINA engineers who were working on the XDeViceRobot project including J Y and F W The HUAWEI CHINA engineer asked A X to determine the diameter of a part of Tappy s robot arm speci cally the end tip of the conductor stick 34 Later on May 29 2013 A X used his badge to access the T-Mobile Tappy laboratory As he was preparing to leave the laboratory A X surreptitiously placed one of the Tappy robot arms into his laptop bag and secretly removed it from the laboratory T-Mobile employees discovered the theft later that day and contacted A X A X initially falsely denied taking the robot arm but then later claimed he had found it in his bag A X described the incident a mistake and offered to return the part On the following day May 30 2013 when the T-Mobile lab reopened A X returned the stolen robot arm to T Mobile T-Mobile thereafter revoked access to the laboratory and no longer allowed any HUAWEI USA employees in the facility without an escort DEVICE CO et a1 14 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET Sum 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 15 of 28 '35 During the night of May 29-30 2013 while A X had the stolen robot arm in his possession outside of the T-Mobile laboratory F W took measurements of various aspects of the robot arm including of the end tip of the conductor stick and took photographs of the robot arm Some of the photographs depicted the precise width of certain parts of the robot arm by showing a measuring device next to the parts On or about May 29 30 2013 W sent these photographs as attachments via email to HUAWEI CHINA engineers including Y email contained an explanation of multiple detailed measurements for various parts of the Tappy robot arm including the end tip of the conductor stick and how the various pieces were con gured together email concluded with See pictures for details 36 On or about May 30 2013 A X participated in a conference call with multiple HUAWEI CHINA engineers who were involved with the xDeviceRobot project On or about May 30-31 2013 following up on issues discussed during the conference call A X emailed multiple HUAWEI CHINA engineers reporting the speci c width of the tip of Tappy s conductor stick and that F W had obtained the probe In response one of the HUAWEI CHINA engineers requested that A X obtain a more precise measurement of the conductor stick using a caliper device A X replied that F W had already sent the pictures home E Huawei s Efforts to Cover-up its Thefts 37 T-Mobile- s discovery of the theft of the robot part and unauthorized access of the laboratory caused great and immediate concern for HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA for several reasons First Huawei greatly valued its business relationship with T-Mobile which was Huawei s rst signi cant customer in the United States wireless phone market HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA were concerned that T-Mobile would terminate its relationship with them as a result of the incidents in the laboratory thereby compromising'Huawei s ability to suCcessfully enter the United States wireless phone market Second HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA-were concerned about the potential for federal civil litigation Speci cally HUAWEI CHINA DEVICE CO et a1 - 15 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 j l Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 16 of 28 and HUAWEI USA feared that T Mobile would le a civil lawsuit against them in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington seeking monetary damages and other relief as the result of their theft and related misconduct Third HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA were concerned that T-Mobile would refer the matter to federal law enforcement authorities prompting a Federal grand jury investigation in the Western District of Washington 38 Lastly HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA were concerned about additional harm to Huawei s reputation because the company had already been the subject of negative publicity regarding the company s past practice of misappropriating proprietary business information and technology For example on October 2 2012 the United States House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence issued a public report nding that Huawei posed a potential threat to national security emphasizing among other things the company s pattern of disregard for the intellectual preperty rights of other entities and companies in the United States Moreover the report stated that the Committee s investigation had uncovered information that Huawei may be violating United States laws and very serious allegations of illegal behavior by Huawei all of which the Committee-would be referring to federal authorities for potential investigation In addition Huawei had been the subject of multiple lawsuits that had received negative public attention In 2010 Motorola sued Huawei alleging that it had misappropriated Motorola s proprietary wireless switching technology by acquiring it surreptitiously from Chinese Motorola engineers In 2003 Cisco sued Huawei alleging that Huawei had stolen Cisco s proprietary network router technology and related source code for use in Huawei s own competing routers 39 In light of all of these concerns HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA attempted to af rmatively mislead T-Mobile about What had happened in T Mobile s laboratory To that end HUAWEI USA issued a 23-page Investigation Report authored by its Chief Legal Counsel for Labor and Employment and its Executive Director of Human Resources The report purported to summarize the ndings of an DEVICE CO et a1 - 16 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98 101 206 553-7970 iU Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 17 of 28 internal investigation into the above-described misconduct in the T Mobile laboratory and related activities In June 2013 as part of the internal investigation HUAWEI USA memorialized statements by HUAWEI USA and HUAWEI CHINA employees A X and F W and made them available for interviews with T-Mobile security personnel During these interviews A X and F W made false and misleading statements designed to conceal the full scope of Huawei s misconduct in attempting to steal T-Mobile s technology including the extent to which other HUAWEI USA and HUAWEI CHINA employees were involved and the degree to which the Tappy technology had been compromised 40 In emails sent on July 5 2013 and August 9 2013 the HUAWEI USA Executive Director of Human Resources informed T-Mobile that HUAWEI USA had conducted our internal investigation here in the and also that Huawei HQ China has conducted a thorough investigation The Executive Director represented that the investigations con rmed that A X and F W were two individuals Who acted on their own and who violated our Company s policies and thus they were both terminated for cause 41 HUAWEI USA issued the formal Investigation Report on or about August 13 2013 Shortly thereafter in or about August or September 2013 HUAWEI USA provided T-Mobile with a redacted version of the Investigation Report The Investigation Report contained several false and misleading statements about the events that had transpired The report falsely stated that F W and A X had acted on their own that their actions in May 2013 were isolated incidents and that the two were lacking in their awareness of Huawei s cyber security policies In fact as HUAWEI USA and HUAWEI CHINA both well knew the actions of F W and A X were undertaken at the direction of and in coordination with HUAWEI CHINA employees and were part of a months-long course of conduct to steal unauthorized technical informatiOn about Tappy 42 The Investigation Report also stated that F W took nine photographs in the laboratory a moment of indiscretion The report intentionally omitted the fact that DEVICE COUNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 18 of 28 HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA employees had secretly and deliberately taken unauthorized photographs of Tappy on multiple prior occasions and that HUAWEI CHINA had issued numerous directives to HUAWEI USA to gather technical information about Tappy and photographs of Tappy for the purpose of developing Huawei s own xDeviceRobot 43 The Investigation Report stated that F W sent only four photographs of Tappy to HUAWEI CHINA employees The report intentionally omitted the fact that after being caught in the T Mobile laboratory for the second time F W had circulated to HUAWEI CHINA engineers a six-page report containing technical information about Tappy along with at least seven unauthorized photographs of the robot The report also omitted the fact that even after F W had been barred from reentering the laboratory he designated A X to provide HUAWEI CHINA engineers with a deeper understanding of the remaining information they were attempting to gather about Tappy 44 The Investigation Report stated that after A X had taken the robot part he provided seven measurements of the part to a HUAWEI CHINA robotics engineer during a telephone call The report intentionally omitted that in the days preceding and following his theft of the robot part A X also had exchanged multiple emails with HUAWEI CHINA robotics engineers providing them technical information he had gathered about Tappy The report also omitted that A X had previously taken unauthorized photographs of Tappy and sent the photographs to robotics engineers at HUAWEI CHINA 45 On October 2 2013 T Mobile asked HUAWEI USA to provide them with any and all emails about Tappy that A X and F W had sent to other Huawei employees HUAWEI USA declined to provide any such emails On October 8 2013 as part of HUAWEI and HUAWEI continuing cover-up the HUAWEI USA Executive Director of Human Resources sent an email to T-Mobile stating Based on our ndings there are not a lot of emails corresponding between and and engineers that were related to Tappy One or two of the emails DEVICE CO et a1 - 18 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET Sum 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98 101 206 553 -7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 19 of 28 that remotely mentioned the robot were related to the testing results between Tappy and the Huawei Testing In truth and in fact there were numerous emails between HUAWEI CHINA robotics engineers and A X and F W pertaining to HUAWEI and HUAWEI efforts to steal unauthorized technical information about Tappy 46 On or about May 5 2014 T Mobile sent HUAWEI USA a legal demand letter threatening to le a civil lawsuit against HUAWEI USA unless it paid T-Mobile monetary damages and took other remedial measures as the result of the theft and related misconduct In response in or about May 2014 HUAWEI USA produced the full un- redacted Investigation Report to T Mobile Huawei in-house counsel also wrote letters to T-Mobile claiming that HUAWEI USA and HUAWEI CHINA had been forthright and had cooperated with T Mobile after the events of May 2013 and representing that HUAWEI USA had provided to T-Mobile many documents in regards to our internal investigation The letters from the Huawei attorneys also reiterated the false claim that A X and F W were misguided and had acted on their own without direction or involvement by other HUAWEI USA or HUAWEI CHINA employees 1 47 On July 10 2013 at the same time that HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA were falsely claiming that the conduct of A X and F W was isolated constituted a moment of indiscretion and was contrary to Huawei s corporate polices HUAWEI CHINA launched a formal policy instituting a bonus program to reward employees who stole con dential information from competitors Under the policy HUAWEI CHINA established a formal schedule for revvarding employees for stealing information from competitors based upon the con dential value of the information obtained Employees were directedto post con dential information obtained from other companies on an internal Huawei website or in the case of especially sensitive information to send an email to a special email mailbox A competition management group was tasked with reviewing the submissions and awarding bonuses to the employees who provided the most valuable stolen information Biannual DEVICE CO et al l9 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 20 of 28 awardsalso were made available to the top three regions that provided the most valuable information The policy emphasized that no employees would be punished for taking actions in accordance with the policy I 48 The launch of this HUAWEI CHINA bonus program policy created a problem for HUAWEI USA because it was in the midst of trying to convince T-Mobile that the conduct in the laboratory was the product of rogue employees who acted on their own and contrary to Huawei s policies As a result on July 12 2013 the HUAWEI USA Executive Director of Human Resources sent an email to all HUAWEI USA employees addressing the bonus program The email described the bonus program as I ndicat ing that you are being encouraged and could possibly earn a monetary award for collecting con dential information regarding our competitors and sending it back to The email went on to say H ere in the USA we do not condone nor engage in such activities and such a behavior is expressly prohibited by company policies The email did not state that the bonus program had been suspended by HUAWEI CHINA Rather the email emphasized that in some foreign countries and regions such a directive and award program may be normal and within the usual course of business in that region F Tappy was Protected as a Trade Secret 49 The Tappy robot system technology as further described in paragraphs 3 and 4 above including the information and know-how relating to the design assembly and operating methods of the T-Mobile testing robot the speci cations source code component selection operating instructions and other non-public elements of the robot technology and proprietary combinations and implementations of the robot contained and constituted trade secrets in that T-Mobile took reasonable measures to keep such information secret and the information derived independent economic value actual and potential from not being generally known to and not being readily ascertainable through proper means by another person who could obtain economic value from the disclosure or use of the information I DEVICE CO et a1 - 20 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET Sum 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 21 of 28 G Overt Acts in Furtherance of the Conspiracy 50 During and in furtherance of the conspiracy in Bellevue within the Western District of Washington and elsewhere one or more of the conspirators committed one or more of the following overt acts among others a On or about September 10 2012 HR the HUAWEI CHINA Director of Device Testing Management Department sent an email directing HUAWEI USA employees to gure out the Tappy Robot s speci cations and functions for the unauthorized purpose of furthering HUAWEI XDeviceRobot program b On or about November 16 2012 HUAWEI USA engineer A X sent an email to HUAWEI CHINA engineers containing multiple unauthorized photos of the Tappy robot and its software interface system that A X had taken inside of the secure T-Mobile lab in Violation of the nondisclosure agreements HUAWEI USA had signed c On or about January 1 2013 HUAWEI USA engineer A X sent an email to HUAWEI CHINA engineers containing con dential technical information about the Tappy robot and multiple unauthorized photos of the robot and its software interface system that A X had taken inside of the secure T Mobile lab in violation of the nondisclosure agreements HUAWEI USA had signed 1 On or about April 12 2013 R Y the HUAWEI USA Director of Technical Acceptance sent an email to HUAWEI CHINA employees stating that HUAWEI USA had been unable to obtain the con dential technical information about Tappy that HUAWEI CHINA had been asking for and suggesting that HUAWEI CHINA should send its own engineer to the United States who could access Tappy directly and thereby surreptitiously learn the information that HUAWEI CHINA was seeking e 'On or about May 13 2013 F W acting on behalf of HUAWEI CHINA entered the T Mobile robot laboratory without authorization for the purpose of obtaining technical information about the Tappy technology for the unauthorized purpose of furthering HUAWEI robot program DEVICE CO et a1 - 21 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 22 of 28 On or about May 14 2013 F W acting on behalf of HUAWEI CHINA entered the T Mobile robot laboratory without authorization for the purpose of obtaining technical information about the Tappy technology as well as taking unauthorized photographs of a Tappy robot for the unauthorized purpose of furthering HUAWEI robot program g On or about May 29 2013 A X acting on behalf of HUAWEI USA and at the direction of HUAWEI CHINA entered the T Mobile robot laboratory for the purpose of stealing a Tappy robot part without authorization for the unauthorized purpose of furthering HUAWEI robot program h On or around August 13 2013 HUAWEI USA generated an Investigation Report to provide to T-Mobile as part of HUAWEI and I HUAWEI efforts to conceal the conspiracy including the extent to which the Tappy technology already had been compromised I i On or around October 8 2013 the HUAWEI USA Executive Director of Human Resources emailed T-Mobile misrepresenting the-extent of email communications between A X F W and HUAWEI CHINA engineers that were related to Tappy as part of HUAWEI and HUAWEI efforts to conceal the conspiracy including the extent to which the appy technology already had been compromised A I All in violation of Title 18 United States Code Sections 1832 a 1 and COUNT 2 Attempted Theft of Trade Secrets 51 Paragraphs 2 through 49 above are incorporated herein 52 Between on or about April 12 2013 and on or about May 31 2013 at Bellevue within the Western District of Washington and elsewhere HUAWEI DEVICE co LTD and HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC attempted to DEVICE CO et a1 - 22 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET Sum 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case DocUment 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 23 of 28 knowingly and without authorization steal appropriate take carry away and conceal trade secrets belonging to T-Mobile and by fraud arti ce and deception obtain trade secrets belonging to T-Mobile knowingly and without authorization copy duplicate sketch draw photograph download replicate transmit deliver send communicate and convey trade secrets belonging to T-Mobile and knowingly receive buy and possess trade secrets belonging to T-Mobile knowing the same to have been stolen appropriated obtained - and converted without authorization intending to convert a trade secret that is related to a product used and intended for use in interstate and foreign commerce to the economic bene t of sOmeone other than T Mobile and knowing that the offense would injure T-Mobile All in violation of Title 18 United States Code Section COUNTS 3-9 Wire Fraud 53 Paragraphs 2 through 49 above are incorporated herein A The Scheme and Arti ce to Defraud 54 Beginning at a time unknown but no later than in or about June 2012 and continuing until on or about September 2 2014 at Bellevue within the Western District of Washington and elsewhere HUAWEI DEVICE CO LTD and HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC devised and intended to devise ascheme-and arti ce to defraud and to obtain property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses representations promises and the concealment of material facts 55 The essence of the scheme and arti ce to defraud was for HUAWEI DEVICE co LTD and HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC through their employees to access the Tappy robot laboratory for the unauthorized purpose of secretly obtaining technical information about the Tappy robot on the false pretense and representation that only authorized activity would be conducted in the laboratory DEVICE CO et a1 23 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 24 of 28 B Manner and Means of the Scheme and Artifice'to Defraud 56 It was part of the scheme and arti ce to defraud that HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC on behalf of itself and HUAWEI DEVICE CO - LTD represented to T Mobile in the aforementioned nondisclosure agreements that they would conduct only authorized activity within the Tappy robot laboratory while intending that their employees would obtain con dential technical information about the Tappy technology for the unauthorized purpose of furthering HUAWEI XDevieeRobot program i 57 It was part of the scheme and arti ce to defraud that HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA through their employees represented to T-Mobile that they would conduct only authorized activity within the Tappy robot laboratory and abide by the restrictions in the aforementioned nondisclosure agreements each time one of their employees'used a T-Mobile-issued access badge to gain entry to the laboratory 58 It was part of the scheme and arti ce to defraud that HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA used the limited access granted by T-Mobile to the Tappy robotic testing system to gather unauthorized con dential technical inforrnation about Tappy for the purpose of furthering the development of Huawei s xDeviceRobot contrary to the promises and representations made by HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA to T-Mobile as described in paragraphs 56 and 57 59 It was part of the scheme and arti ce to defraud that HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA used the limited access granted by T Mobile to the Tappy robotic testing system to take unauthorized photographs of Tappy for the purpose of furthering the development of Huawei s xDeViceRobot contrary to the promises and representations made by HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA to T-Mobile as described in paragraphs 56 and 57 60 i It was part of the scheme and arti ce to defraud that HUAWEI CHINA sent an employee to the United States in order to conduct reconnaissance on T-Mobile s Tappy technology for the purpose of furthering the development of Huawei s IN DEVICE CO et a1 24 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET Sum 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 i a v d r t I l I l r l l r t Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 25 of 28 xDeviceRobot contrary to the promises and representations made by HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA to T-Mobile as described in paragraphs 56 and 57 61 It was part of the scheme and arti ce to defraud that HUAWEI USA and HUAWEI CHINA stole measured and photographed a Tappy robot part for the purpose of furthering the development of Huawei s xDeviceRobot contrary to the promises and representations made by HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA to T Mobile as described in paragraphs 56 and 57 62 It was part of the scheme and arti ce to defraud that HUAWEI CHINA and HUAWEI USA attempted to mislead T Mobile through the Investigation Report concealing the scope of their misconduct in attempting to steal T-Mobile s technology including the extent to which the technology had been compromised C 63 Execution of the Scheme and Arti ce to Defraud On or about the dates set forth below at Bellevue within the Western District of Washington and elsewhere HUAWEI DEVICE CO LTD and HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC having devised the above-described scheme and arti ce for the purpose of executing this scheme and arti ce did knowingly transmit and cause to be transmitted by wire communication in interstate and foreign commerce writings signs signals pietures and sounds to wit Count Date Sender Wire Transmission 3 April 12 2013 HUAWEI USA Email from the Western District of Washington to China discussing obtaining unauthorized technical information about Tappy May 15 2013 HUAWEI CHINA Email from the Western District of Washington to China containing and discussing unauthorized photographs and other technical information DEVICE CO et a1 - 25 gathered about Tappy UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET Sons 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 r l r n r t I l r r n i t Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 26 of 28 5 May 16 2013 HUAWEI CHINA Email from the Western District of Washington to China containing and discussing unauthorized photographs and other technical information gathered about Tappy 6 May 23 2013 HUAWEI USA Email from the Western District of Washington to China containing and discussing unauthorized technical information gathered about Tappy and discussing additional information to be gathered 7 May 29-30 2013 HUAWEI CHINA Email from the Western District of Washington to China containing photographs measurements and other unauthorized technical I information gathered about Tappy 8 May 30 3 1 2013 HUAWEI USA Email from the Western District of Washington to China containing and discussing unauthorized technical information gathered about Tappy 9 October 8 2013 HUAWEI USA Email from Texas to the - Western District of Washington regarding the Investigation Report All in Violation of Title 18 United States Code Sections 1343 and 2 COUNT 10 Obstruction of Justice 64 Paragraphs 2 through 49 above are incorporated herein 65 Beginning on or about June 1 2013 and continuing through on or after September 2 2014 at Bellevue within the Western District of Washington and elsewhere HUAWEI DEVICE CO LTD and HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC attempted DEVICE CO et al 26 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 ooqoxm-Iswmwocooqoxm-wat to Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 27 of 28 to corruptly obstruct in uence and impede an of cial proceeding that is the proceedings in -M0bile USA Inc v Huawei Device USA Inc C14-1351RAJ in the United States District Court for the Western District 'of Washington and Federal grand jury proceedings in the Western District of Washington concerning HUAWEI DEVICE CO LTD and HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC All in violation of Title 18 United States Code Sections 1512 c 2 and 2 ASSET FORFEITURE ALLEGATION 66 The allegations contained in Counts 1-9 of this Indictment are hereby realleged and incorporated by reference for the purpose of alleging forfeiture pursuant to Title 18 United States Code Section 2323 b Title 18 United States Code Section and Title 28 United States Code Section 2461 c Counts 1-2 67 Pursuant to Title 18 United States Code Section 2323 b 1 upon conviction of any of the offenses alleged in Counts 1-2 of this Indictment the defendants HUAWEI DEVICE CO LTD and HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC shall forfeit to the United States 1 any prOperty used or intended to be used in any manner or part to- commit or facilitate the commiSsion of the offense and 2 any property constituting or derived from any proceeds obtained directly or indirectly as a result of the commission of the offense including but not limited to a judgment for a- sum of money representing the property described in this paragraph Counts 3-9 68 Pursuant to Title 18 United States Code Sections and Title 28 United States Code Section 2461 c upon conviction of any of the offenses alleged in Counts 3-9 of this Indictment the defendants HUAWEI DEVICE CO LTD and HUAWEI DEVICE USA INC shall forfeit to the United States any property real or personal which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to the offense including but not limited to a judgment for a sum of money representing the property described in this paragraph i DEVICE CO et al - 27 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET SUITE 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970 t h h il ll il r l CNM-kaNr lo 17 18 OOxlONUl-hw l l Case Document 1 Filed 01 16 19 Page 28 of 28 omission of the defendants without dif culty - A ANNETTE L S- United States tto WK 7 TODD Assistant United States Attorney THOMAS M WOODS Assistant United States Attorney DEVICE COthe above described forfeitable property as a result of any act or a cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence b has been transferred or sold to or deposited with a third party c has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the Court 1 has been substantially diminished in value or e has been commingled withother property which cannot be divided it is the intent of the United States pursuant to Title 18 United States Code Section 2323 b 2 Title 21 United States Code Section 853 p and Title 28 United States Code Section 2461 0 to seek the forfeiture of any other property of the defendants up to the value of the above-described forfeitable propertyi A TRUE BILL DATED 6 Twwy 2016 Signature of foreperson redacted pursuant to the policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States FOREPERSON UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET Sum 5220 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98101 206 553-7970