In United States v. Jin, the Seventh Circuit recently ruled on several issues illustrating the broad scope of the federal Economic Espionage Act (EEA), namely: (1) The element requiring proof of intent to benefit someone other than the trade secret owner can be met even absent proof of intent to pass on stolen materials; (2) Proof of potential injury to the owner of the trade secret can be based on factors other than traditional competitive harm; and (3) The “independent economic value” prong of the definition of a trade secret can be satisfied even where the value of the information cannot be “monetized.”
