Score:   1
Docket Number:   ND-CA  3:18-cr-00527
Case Name:   USA v. Lam et al
  Press Releases:
SAN FRANCISCO – A federal grand jury indicted Xanthe Lam, Allen Lam, John Chan, and James Quach for stealing trade secrets from Genentech and related charges, announced United States Attorney Alex G. Tse and FBI Special Agent in Charge John F. Bennett. The indictment, handed down on October 25, 2018, and unsealed today, alleges that the defendants stole confidential Genentech information to help a company in Taiwan create and sell drugs similar to those that were created by Genentech.

According to the indictment, Xanthe Lam worked for Genentech as a Principal Scientist from 1986 until 2017.  Her husband, Allen Lam, and James Quach, both were former Genentech employees who, along with John Chan, became consultants for JHL Biotech, Inc. JHL is a company based in Zhubei, Taiwan, that develops “biosimilars.” Biosimilars are roughly the equivalent of a “generic” chemical drug, i.e., designed to have properties similar to a biopharmaceutical that previously was approved by a regulatory agency, such as the Food and Drug Administration.  The indictment alleges Xanthe Lam conspired with Allen Lam and John Chan to steal the company’s trade secrets related to biopharmaceuticals Pulmozyme, Rituxan, Herceptin, and Avastin.  Xanthe Lam allegedly downloaded, collected, and transferred to Allen Lam and others at JHL certain confidential Genentech documents relating to the processes by which the company formulated drugs and managed raw materials.  Xanthe Lam also allegedly secretly consulted for JHL while still employed at Genentech.

The indictment also alleges that Xanthe Lam conspired with former Genentech employee James Quach to illegally use her computer credentials.  Specifically, she allowed Quach to gain access to Genentech’s secure document repository and, once he had access to the repository, Quach stole the company’s proprietary manufacturing protocols.   

In sum, the Indictment charges the defendants with the following crimes and, if found guilty, they are subject to the following maximum statutory penalties:

 



Defendant





Age/Residence





Charges





Maximum Penalties





Xanthe Lam





66/ South San Francisco, Calif.





18 U.S.C. §§ 1832(a)(5) – Conspiracy to Commit Theft of Trade Secrets

 

 

18 U.S.C. §§ 1832(a) and 2 – Theft of Trade Secrets, Aid and Abet

 

 

 

18 U.S.C. § 1030(b) – Conspiracy to Commit Computer Fraud and Abuse

 

 

 

18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2)(C) and 2 – Computer Fraud and Abuse, Aid & Abet





Ten years of imprisonment, $250,000 fine, three years of supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture

 

Ten years of imprisonment, $250,000 fine, three years of supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture

 

Five years of imprisonment; $250,000 fine, three years of supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture

 

Five years of imprisonment; $250,000 fine, three years of supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture





Allen Lam





68/ South San Francisco, Calif.





18 U.S.C. §§ 1832(a)(5) – Conspiracy to Commit Theft of Trade Secrets

 

 

18 U.S.C. §§ 1832(a) and 2 – Theft of Trade Secrets, Aid and Abet

 





Ten years of imprisonment, $250,000 fine, three years of supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture

 

Ten years of imprisonment, $250,000 fine, three years of supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture





John Chan





29/ San Francisco, Calif.





18 U.S.C. §§ 1832(a)(5) – Conspiracy to Commit Theft of Trade Secrets

 

 

18 U.S.C. §§ 1832(a) and 2 – Theft of Trade Secrets, Aid and Abet

 





Ten years of imprisonment, $250,000 fine, three years of supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture

 

Ten years of imprisonment, $250,000 fine, three years of supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture





James Quach





58/ Daly City, Calif.





18 U.S.C. § 1030(b) – Conspiracy to Commit Computer Fraud and Abuse

 

 

 

18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2)(C) and 2 – Computer Fraud and Abuse, Aid & Abet





Five years of imprisonment; $250,000 fine, three years of supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture

 

Five years of imprisonment; $250,000 fine, three years of supervised release, $100 special assessment, forfeiture



 

An indictment merely alleges that crimes have been committed, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  In addition, any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court only after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.

The defendants were all arraigned this morning before U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero.  All defendants pleaded not guilty and were released on bond.  Magistrate Judge Spero scheduled the defendants’ next district court appearance for November 13, 2018, before U.S. District Judge William Alsup.  Quach also will appear on November 2, 2018, before Magistrate Judge Spero for identification of counsel.  

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Matthew A. Parrella and Michelle J. Kane are prosecuting the case with the assistance of Elise Etter and Rebecca Shelton.  The prosecution is the result of an investigation by the FBI. 

 

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Iwnvh0r8qga6j4Ee25qw-HfPac6N2ulawfifWlJkzUs
  Last Updated: 2025-03-09 19:24:32 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 title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
Format: A3

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

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE5
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE5
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