Pfizer employee “vaccine stolen” secrets’

Pfizer blamed a departure employee of manufacture off with a huge treasure of confidential documents, including trade secrets related to its Covid-19 vaccine and other drugs, and then attempt an elaborate coverageup.

The big pharmaceutical company threw a suit against the staff, identified as Chun Xiao Li, earlier this week, claiming that she “Loaded over 12,000 files – included scores of Pfizer confidential documents – from its Pfizer-issued laptop to a personal Google Drive account “ in in late October, and then he transferred those files to her private device.

“Because of the simple number of documents that Ms. Li stole, Pfizer has yet to understand the full scope of trade-secret and confidential information in her possession” the company said, adding that while Li now owns “Thousands” of documents potentially related to numerous Pfizer vaccines “, the cause is concentrated on Covid-19 immunization and monoclonal antibody therapies.

Given her role and responsibilities as Associate Director of Statistics, Ms. Li had access to highly confidential, proprietary and trade-secret information related to numerous vaccines and drugs, including the Covid-19 vaccine .

Read more


Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna raking in $ 1,000 each second from the Covid-19 vaccine - research


Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna raking in $ 1,000 each second from the Covid-19 vaccine – research

Pfizer also claims that Li worked with up to five unidentified co-conspirators, and even went so far as to provide a “bait laptop” mislead the security of the company team, letting them believe it was the device used to extract files. However, Pfizer said “Forensic analysis” confirmed it was not the same laptop, and that Li – o one of his accomplices – “likely remains in possession of the current computer which contains those 12,000 files. “

Upon discovering the document theft, the company claimed to have conducted a review of Li’s email, file access And web activities on his company-issued laptop, discovering that it had been in discussions with rival pharmaceutical company, Xencor, about a job opportunity. Earlier this month, as Pfizer continued its investigation, Li informed superiors that he was leaving the company, but did not disclose any reason for in by doing so, including any job offers at Xencor, notwithstanding the fact I had already was hired there, and it was set to begin work on November 29.

As Li is still thought to possess a great treasure of the company trade secrets, Pfizer argued that it would be “Unfair to allow Ms. Li and anyone else with who he might work with in concert a trade on The successes of Pfizer e experience, is in Xencor than elsewhere, taking advantage of the numerous Pfizer confidential documents that she took without permission and refuses to return “, and therefore is looking for a restraining order to exclude her from using the material for “its purposes”.

READ ALSO: Pfizer co-developer says The Covid vaccination will be annual

Despite these allegations, Li insisted that he had provided everything information requested by Pfizer and collaborated with his investigation, according to the court filing, that also noticed that Li has declined further meetings with the company due to unspecified “Health problems.”

Do you think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Read More: World News

Source RT News.

Denial of any Responsibility!
AsumeTech is a News Source that Publishes News from its Editorial Team and the Automatic News Aggregation around the News Media. The Content is aggregated from RT News; each piece of Content includes the hyperlink to its Source. We have just rearranged that in our platform for Educational Purposes only. All the Copyrights and Trademarks belong to their Rightful Owners and all Materials to their Authors. If you do not want us to publish your materials on our Website, please get in touch with us by email – [email protected]; we will remove the Content from our Website.

Follow AsumeTech on

More From Category

More Stories Today

Leave a Reply