A Jury Convicted the Philips Engineer. The Approach Came as His Plant Was Closing.
- A federal jury in Chicago convicted Chih-Yee Jen, 71, a former Philips Medical Systems engineer, on both counts against him: conspiracy to steal, misappropriate or possess trade secrets, and possession or attempted possession of stolen trade secrets. The Justice Department announced the verdict on 24 August 2026, with sentencing set for 5 January 2027.
- The technology is X-ray tubes used in computed tomography scanners, researched and manufactured at Philips’ facility in Aurora, Illinois and sold under the Dunlee brand. Jen copied proprietary X-ray trade secret information from internal Philips databases and used it in his new work.
- The timing is in the indictment. In 2017, as Philips prepared to close the Aurora facility, China-based Kunshan GuoLi Electronic Technology and its vice president Xiaoqin Du began communicating with Jen about creating a US subsidiary to compete with Philips in developing, manufacturing and selling X-ray tubes. While still employed at Philips, Jen shared confidential documents and recruited multiple Philips engineers to join him.
- Two other former Philips engineers, Fince Tendian, 57, and Vladimir Nevtonenko, 77, pleaded guilty before trial. Du, Kunshan GuoLi and a related company, Kunshan Yiyuan Medical Technology, were also indicted, placed on the court’s Fugitive Calendar and have not been arraigned.
CI read
The lesson is not that an employee copied documents. It is when the approach arrived. Kunshan GuoLi made contact as Philips was winding the plant down, and the closure is what made the team available.
- A site closure is a knowledge event before it is a cost event. The approach came in 2017 as Aurora was being closed. Three engineers aged 71, 57 and 77 held the deepest process knowledge and the least remaining tenure to protect. Restructuring plans need an intellectual property exposure review alongside the severance model.
- This was a team lift, not a leak. Jen recruited multiple Philips engineers to the new subsidiary and 2 of them later pleaded guilty. Protection built around document controls misses this shape entirely, because the asset walked out inside people and the copied files were only the corroboration.
- The beneficiaries sit beyond reach. Kunshan GuoLi, Kunshan Yiyuan and Du remain unarraigned on the Fugitive Calendar. Individuals face sentencing from 1 December, while the entities that received the technology face nothing. That asymmetry is the practical ceiling on criminal enforcement against an offshore acquirer.