Summary
In this milestone 20th episode of the Reasonable Measures Podcast, Tim Londergan and Chris Buntel dive into one of the most consequential questions in modern trade secret law: how far the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) can reach beyond U.S. borders.
The conversation centers on the ongoing Xcoal case, where a Japanese employee working entirely abroad allegedly downloaded sensitive business information from a U.S.-based company’s servers. Despite never setting foot in the United States, the defendant now faces a trade secret lawsuit in a Pennsylvania federal court. Tim and Chris unpack why the case survived a motion to dismiss and what that says about jurisdiction under DTSA.
They broaden the discussion with comparisons to the Motorola v. Hytera case and a Canadian DTSA action involving remote employees, highlighting how even minimal U.S. contact—such as accessing U.S. servers or attending a single meeting—can be enough to pull foreign actors into U.S. courts.
The episode closes with practical guidance for companies operating internationally, including server placement strategies, remote employee policies, and ways trade secret owners can proactively strengthen jurisdictional ties to the U.S. As Tim and Chris make clear, DTSA’s reach is expanding, and companies should plan accordingly.
Takeaways
DTSA can apply to conduct that occurs entirely outside the United States when there is even minimal U.S. contact.
Accessing or downloading data from U.S.-based servers may be enough to establish jurisdiction under DTSA.
Physical presence in the U.S. is not required for a foreign defendant to be sued in federal court.
Cases like Xcoal, Motorola v. Hytera, and Canadian DTSA actions show courts are increasingly comfortable with extraterritorial reach.
Remote employees outside the U.S. are not beyond the reach of U.S. trade secret law.
Companies can strengthen DTSA protection through thoughtful server strategy, mirrored data, and intentional U.S. touchpoints.
From a trade secret owner’s perspective, these developments are largely good news.
Transcript
Tim (00:13)
And we’re back. It’s taken a little while to get to 20, Chris, but here we are. How are you doing?
Chris Buntel (00:21)
It’s good to be here at 20. I remember when we started at one.
Tim (00:27)
It’s a big day in the world of Tangibly. All right, today we’re talking about extraterritorial reach. Say that three times fast. We might need a better term for it. We’re looking at how far DTSA can really go, starting with the Xcoal case involving a Japanese defendant.
Chris Buntel (01:13)
This is a great set of cases because it really asks the question: how far can DTSA reach? Is it local, national, global, or something close to universal?
Tim (01:31)
Quick pause for new listeners. Chris, can you remind everyone what DTSA is?
Chris Buntel (01:40)
Sure. DTSA is the Defend Trade Secrets Act, a U.S. federal statute that allows trade secret misappropriation claims to be brought in federal court. It’s about ten years old and has completely transformed trade secret litigation.
Tim (02:04)
Amen.
Chris Buntel (02:06)
In this case, a Japanese employee worked remotely for a Pennsylvania company. He lived and worked entirely in Japan and never entered the U.S. for at least two years. Before leaving, he downloaded a large volume of company files and then went to work for another Pennsylvania company.
Tim (02:50)
And instead of suing him in Japan, the company sued him in Pennsylvania federal court.
Chris Buntel (03:04)
Exactly. The defendant moved to dismiss, arguing the court had no jurisdiction because he was in Japan the entire time. But the court disagreed, largely because the data was accessed from U.S.-based servers.
Tim (03:57)
What kind of information was allegedly taken?
Chris Buntel (03:57)
Business information. He wasn’t an engineer or scientist. He was a marketing manager for a Japanese subsidiary of the U.S. parent company.
Tim (05:01)
And the new employer wasn’t named as a defendant.
Chris Buntel (05:31)
Right. Possibly because they didn’t use the information or didn’t know about it. If they had, they likely would have been included.
Tim (06:25)
But the case survived the motion to dismiss.
Chris Buntel (06:23)
Correct.
Tim (06:25)
Which makes this another strong example of DTSA’s reach when there’s even a sliver of U.S. contact.
Chris Buntel (06:53)
Motorola v. Hytera is the clearest example. Massive damages, clear misconduct, and international defendants. But Xcoal reinforces that the threshold for U.S. contact can be very small.
Tim (07:49)
What about the Canadian case?
Chris Buntel (08:46)
That one involved meetings in the U.S., which made jurisdiction more obvious. But again, it shows how easy it can be to pull foreign actors into U.S. court.
Tim (09:22)
And in Xcoal, the only U.S. contact was accessing a U.S. server.
Chris Buntel (09:47)
That’s it. No travel. Just downloading data from the U.S. And that was enough.
Tim (10:29)
So hypothetically, if the data had only been stored in Japan, maybe the outcome changes.
Chris Buntel (10:39)
Maybe. But in Motorola there were mirrored servers abroad, and that was still enough. My guess is jurisdiction would still be found.
Tim (11:09)
This raises practical guidance for companies. Server strategy matters.
Chris Buntel (13:05)
Absolutely. You can also bring key employees to the U.S. periodically. Anything that makes jurisdiction easier for courts helps trade secret owners.
Tim (13:53)
Weekly Zoom calls probably aren’t enough yet, but who knows.
Chris Buntel (14:00)
It hasn’t been tested, but it feels weaker than server access or physical presence.
Tim (14:14)
Bottom line?
Chris Buntel (14:31)
For trade secret owners, these cases are very good news.
Tim (14:31)
Agreed. Episode 20 in the bag. Internationally. We’ll talk soon.
Chris Buntel (14:42)
You’ve got to say extraterritorial three times fast. Podcast number 20 is done.
If you want, I can also
• tighten this transcript for publishing
• create short social clips or pull quotes
• write show notes for Spotify and Apple
• draft a LinkedIn post announcing Episode 20
Just say the word.
Here’s a clean, YouTube-ready description you can paste directly:
How far does U.S. trade secret law really reach?
In Episode 20 of the Reasonable Measures Podcast, Tim Londergan and Chris Buntel explore the expanding extraterritorial reach of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) and what it means for companies with global teams and remote employees.
The discussion centers on the ongoing Xcoal case, where a Japanese employee working entirely abroad allegedly downloaded sensitive business information from U.S.-based servers and now faces a trade secret lawsuit in Pennsylvania federal court. Despite never setting foot in the United States, the case survived a motion to dismiss—raising important questions about jurisdiction, server access, and international enforcement.
Tim and Chris also compare Xcoal to other landmark cases, including Motorola v. Hytera and a Canadian DTSA action, showing how minimal U.S. contact can be enough to bring foreign actors into U.S. courts. The episode closes with practical guidance for trade secret owners on server strategy, remote work policies, and how to strengthen DTSA protections in a global economy.
Key topics covered:
• DTSA and extraterritorial jurisdiction
• Trade secrets and remote employees
• U.S. server access and legal exposure
• Lessons from Motorola v. Hytera
• Practical strategies for global companies
