FOLLOW US

The Digital Heist: 63 Files in Three Hours

What happened next, according to Apple's forensic analysis, was a sophisticated data exfiltration operation. On June 23, 2025—just three days before his departure—Shi allegedly downloaded 63 files from Apple's secure Box storage system between 9:51 PM and 12:37 AM. The files included:

• Confidential schematics for temperature sensors and ECG functionality
• Internal specifications for PPG (photoplethysmography) sensors that measure heart rate and blood oxygen
• Apple's Silicon Engineering Group documents on proprietary chip technologies
• Product roadmaps for unreleased Apple Watch features

Shi then allegedly organized these stolen files into a folder labeled "苹果相关" ("Apple Related") and transferred them to a USB drive at 1:09 AM on June 25—one day before his departure.

The Cover-Up Attempt

Perhaps most tellingly, Apple's investigation revealed Shi's consciousness of guilt. On June 16, he searched Google for "how to wipe out macbook." On June 23—the same night he allegedly downloaded the files—he searched "Can somebody see if I've opened a file on a shared drive?"

These searches suggest Shi knew exactly what he was doing and was actively trying to cover his tracks, according to legal experts familiar with trade secret cases.

OPPO's Silicon Valley Shell Game

Apple's complaint also sheds light on what it calls a deliberate shell game by OPPO to obscure its U.S. operations. While InnoPeak Technology appears to be a separate California corporation based in Palo Alto, Apple presents extensive evidence that it's simply OPPO's U.S. research arm operating under a different name.

The evidence includes:

• OPPO's own website listing "Silicon Valley" as one of its six global research institutes
• Job postings that refer to InnoPeak as "OPPO US Research Center"
• A building sign at 2479 East Bayshore Road displaying "OPPO" prominently
• Employee LinkedIn profiles identifying themselves as working for "OPPO US Research Center"

This corporate structure matters enormously for jurisdiction and enforcement. If Apple can prove OPPO directly operates in California, it strengthens both the court's authority over the Chinese company and Apple's ability to obtain meaningful relief.

The Legal Battlefield

Apple's legal strategy reveals sophisticated thinking about modern trade secret warfare. The complaint brings claims under both the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) and California contract law, seeking:

1. Immediate injunctive relief to prevent further use or disclosure of Apple's trade secrets
2. Actual damages from lost profits and competitive advantage
3. Disgorgement of profits OPPO gained from the alleged theft
4. Punitive damages for what Apple calls "willful, fraudulent, malicious" conduct
5. Attorney fees under the DTSA's fee-shifting provision

The DTSA claim is particularly powerful because it allows for federal court seizure orders and provides for double damages in cases of willful misappropriation.