Score:   1
Docket Number:   D-MA  1:19-cr-10214
Case Name:   USA v. Cheong Yue et al
  Press Releases:
BOSTON – A California man was arrested and charged in an indictment unsealed today in federal court in Boston with illegally exporting cesium atomic clocks to Hong Kong.  

Alex Yun Cheong Yue, 67, of South El Monte, Calif., was indicted on one count of conspiracy to commit export violations, two counts of unlawful exports and attempted exports of U.S. goods to Hong Kong, and one count of smuggling. Yue will appear this afternoon in federal court in Los Angeles. Wai Kay Victor Zee, 56, of Hong Kong, along with his company, Premium Tech Systems, Limited were also charged. The two defendants remain at large in Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China. 

According to the charging document, beginning in December 2015, Yue, Zee, and Premium Tech conspired to procure U.S.-origin cesium atomic clocks and export them to Hong Kong without obtaining the required export licenses. Cesium atomic clocks are used in global positioning system solutions, network timing protocols, encryption programs, and national defense and space applications. They are controlled for export by the U.S. Department of Commerce for national security and anti-terrorism reasons.

To obtain the atomic clocks, Yue allegedly used a fictitious company, “Ecycle Tech International Ltd.,” to purchase them by falsely representing to the U.S. seller that the atomic clocks would be used solely in the United States for cordless phone research and development.  Based on Yue’s false representations, the U.S. seller sold the cesium atomic clocks to Ecycle.  On Feb. 19, 2016, the atomic clocks shipped from the manufacturing facility in Beverly, Mass., to Yue in California. Three days later, on Feb. 22, 2016, Yue reshipped the controlled cesium atomic clocks to Zee at Premium Tech in Hong Kong. Neither Yue, Zee, nor Premium Tech ever applied for or obtained the required export licenses from the U.S. Department of Commerce. On Feb. 24, 2016, Zee confirmed receipt of the cesium atomic clocks in Hong Kong.

In December 2017, Yue allegedly attempted to purchase an additional cesium atomic clock. Prior to the sale, however, the U.S. seller required Yue to provide an end-user statement detailing where and for what the clocks would be used. In April 2018, Yue sent an end-user certificate on Ecycle letterhead stating that the atomic clocks would be used in a calibration lab in California.  It is alleged that in response to further inquiries from the U.S. seller, Yue falsely declared that he was not intending to export the cesium atomic clocks. When the U.S. seller insisted on a site visit to the California location where the atomic clocks would be utilized, Yue abruptly canceled the order. On July 13, 2018, Yue received a refund payment from the U.S. seller. Three days later, on July 16, 2018, Yue sent a wire transfer to Premium Tech’s bank account in Hong Kong with the refunded money. 

The charge of conspiring to commit export violations and unlawfully exporting and attempting to export U.S. goods provides for a sentence of no greater than 20 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $1 million. The charge of smuggling goods from the United States provides for a sentence of no greater than 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000. Sentences are imposed by a federal district court judge based upon the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

United States Attorney Andrew Lelling; William Higgins, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the Department of Commerce, Office of Export Enforcement, Boston Field Office; and Peter C. Fitzhugh, Special Agent in Charge of the Homeland Security Investigations in Boston, made the announcement today. Assistant U.S. Attorney George P. Varghese of Lelling’s National Security Unit is prosecuting the case.

The details contained in the charging documents are allegations. The defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/148bk3I6_gL8BSWU-y_yojFs23iHKbcjlsKlwHm9ck5A
  Last Updated: 2025-03-16 17:45:14 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E