By Bonnie Eslinger (January 27, 2026, 10:13 PM EST) — Former Google engineer Linwei Ding’s legal team concluded its defense case on Tuesday, focusing on testimony from a technical expert in a California federal trial. The expert contended that the documents taken by Ding, which pertained to artificial intelligence supercomputers, did not contain sufficient information for competitors to replicate Google’s technology and held minimal value in the marketplace.
Ding is facing charges related to the alleged theft of proprietary materials while preparing to leave Google for a position at a startup specializing in AI. The prosecution argues that Ding’s actions constituted a willful effort to misappropriate valuable intellectual property. Conversely, Ding’s defense claims that the documents in question were not integral to Google’s business operations and could not be utilized by others to gain a competitive edge.
During the proceedings, the defense engaged the expert to emphasize the limitations of the documents’ utility. The expert explained that the materials lacked critical components necessary for the development of advanced AI systems, asserting that the information was largely theoretical and not directly applicable for operational use. This argument aims to undermine the prosecution’s assertion that Ding’s actions represented a serious threat to Google’s market position.
The jury’s evaluation of the expert’s testimony will be pivotal as they consider the implications of the evidence presented. As Ding’s defense team concluded their case, they have positioned their argument around the idea that the prosecution has failed to demonstrate that any actual trade secrets were compromised.
In addition to the technical testimony, the trial has highlighted broader concerns regarding intellectual property in the rapidly evolving field of artificial intelligence. Companies across the tech industry are increasingly vigilant about safeguarding their innovations, as advancements in AI technology often involve substantial investments. The outcome of Ding’s case could set important precedents for how trade secrets are defined and protected, particularly in the context of employee mobility and competitive hiring practices.
The trial’s conclusion is expected to draw significant attention from both legal and tech communities, with many watching closely for its implications on future cases involving intellectual property disputes. As the jury deliberates, the stakes remain high, not only for Ding but also for the broader landscape of AI development and competition.
As the case progresses, the intersection of technology and legal frameworks in the realm of intellectual property rights will continue to evolve, shaping how companies approach innovation and employee transitions in an increasingly competitive market. The trial not only underscores the critical importance of protecting proprietary information but also reflects the challenges that arise as technology advances at a rapid pace.
See also
Class Action Filed Against Musk’s xAI Over Grok’s Nonconsensual Deepfake Scandal
Joseph Gordon-Levitt Champions Key Bill to Regulate ‘Amoral’ AI Companies in Utah
Germany”s National Team Prepares for World Cup Qualifiers with Disco Atmosphere
95% of AI Projects Fail in Companies According to MIT
AI in Food & Beverages Market to Surge from $11.08B to $263.80B by 2032
