Authorities have arrested former Google software engineer Linwei Ding in Newark, California, in a case centered on alleged AI trade secret theft. The US Department of Justice alleges that Ding, a Chinese national, took confidential Google material while secretly working with two China-based companies.
The indictment presents the case as a dispute over some of the technical foundations behind modern AI systems: chips, software, data centers, and the systems that connect them at large scale. Ding faces four counts of federal trade secret theft, with each count carrying a potential sentence of up to 10 years in prison.
What prosecutors say was taken
Ding was hired by Google in 2019 and had access to confidential information about the company’s data centers, according to the indictment. Prosecutors allege that he began uploading hundreds of files into a personal Google Cloud account two years ago.
The material allegedly included information about the architecture and functionality of GPU and TPU chips and systems. It also involved software used by those chips to communicate and execute tasks, along with software that coordinates thousands of chips into a supercomputer used for machine learning and AI technology.
That detail matters because the case is not described as a general leak of workplace documents. The alleged trade secrets were tied to the computing infrastructure that supports advanced AI work, including chip systems and the software layers that make large-scale AI computation possible.
The alleged China-based company ties
Shortly after the alleged copying began, Ding was offered the role of chief technology officer at an early-stage technology company in China that promoted its use of AI technology. The company offered him a monthly salary of about $14,800, plus an annual bonus and company stock.
According to prosecutors, Ding traveled to China, joined investor meetings, and tried to raise capital for that company. Investigators also reviewed surveillance camera footage showing another employee scanning Ding’s name badge at the entrance of the Google building where he worked. Prosecutors say that made it appear he was working from his office while he was actually traveling.
The indictment also says Ding founded and served as chief executive of a separate China-based startup company. That startup aimed to train “large AI models powered by supercomputing chips.” Prosecutors say Ding did not disclose either affiliation to Google.
Google described Ding as a junior employee. He resigned from Google on December 26 of last year.
How investigators say the files moved
The FBI served a search warrant at Ding’s home in January and seized his electronic devices. Authorities later executed an additional warrant for the contents of his personal accounts.
Investigators say they found more than 500 unique files of confidential information allegedly stolen from Google. The indictment describes a process in which Ding copied files into the Apple Notes application on his Google-issued Apple MacBook, converted those Apple Notes into PDF files, and uploaded them to an external account.
Prosecutors allege that this method was used to evade detection. The sequence described in the indictment is central to the case because it ties the alleged transfer of Google information to specific tools, devices, and accounts.
Google and federal officials respond
Google spokesperson José Castañeda told Ars Technica that the company has safeguards intended to prevent theft of confidential commercial information and trade secrets. He said Google found after an investigation that the employee stole numerous documents and quickly referred the matter to law enforcement.
Attorney General Merrick Garland announced the case against the 38-year-old at an American Bar Association conference in San Francisco. The charges are federal trade secret theft counts, and the potential sentence for each count is up to 10 years in prison.
The allegations remain focused on specific claims in the indictment: confidential Google AI infrastructure information, undisclosed work with two China-based companies, and the movement of more than 500 unique files into personal or external accounts. The case now turns on whether prosecutors can prove those claims in court.