Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 08-09-2022

Case Style:

United States of America v. Karim Arabi (Karem), et al.

Case Number:


Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of California (San Diego County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States Attorney’s Office

Defendant's Attorney:

Click Here to Watch How To Find A Lawyer by Kent Morlan

Click Here For The Best San Diego Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory

If no lawyer is listed, call 918-582-6422 and MoreLaw will help you find a lawyer for free.

Description: San Diego, California criminal law lawyer represented defendant charged with fraud.

Charges unsealed today against four individuals, including two San Diego residents, allege that they defrauded a multinational San Diego technology company in its $150 million purchase of a tech start-up controlled by the defendants.

Karim Arabi (“Karim”) and Ali Akbar Shokouhi were arrested today in San Diego, while Sanjiv Taneja was arrested in the Northern District of California. A fourth defendant was arrested in Canada, where she faces proceedings to extradite her to the United States.

All four defendants are named in a superseding indictment, which charges them with fraud and money laundering offenses based on the quartet’s alleged scheme to dupe a San Diego technology company (the “victim company”) into paying $150 million for technology that Karim secretly created and provisionally patented while serving as a vice president of research and development at the victim company. The charges subject the defendants to possible maximum statutory penalties of 20 years in prison; fines of $250,000 or twice the pecuniary gain/loss for the fraud charges or $500,000 for the money laundering charges; and the forfeiture of property which constitutes or is derived from proceeds of the fraud offenses and all property traceable to such property, as well as forfeiture of all property involved in the money laundering offenses.

Per the superseding indictment, as Abreezio LLC’s CEO, Taneja marketed Abreezio LLC’s valuable new microchip technology to the victim company in 2015. Taneja and his associates claimed throughout the marketing process that Abreezio’s valuable new technology was invented by a Canadian graduate student working in an unrelated field. But no one disclosed that Karim—the graduate student’s family member, and a specialist in the same field as Abreezio’s technology, then working at the victim company—was intimately involved in Abreezio’s formation, development and marketing. In truth, per court documents, Karim filed the provisional patents upon which Abreezio’s core technology was based; called and attended key operations meetings among the defendants and other Abreezio principals (but not the purported inventor); and choreographed key steps in the new company’s development—including the selection of Taneja as CEO and picking the name “Abreezio.”

The defendants concealed Karim’s key role in Abreezio from the victim company because, as detailed in the superseding indictment, Karim’s employment agreements provided that his inventions during his employment would belong to his employer, the victim company. By hiding Karim’s participation in Abreezio, the defendants were able to pitch the new company as “an angel-funded Silicon Valley based design IP start-up” entitled to a hefty fee for its valuable technology, while disguising the victim company’s own legal rights to the very same technology.

The indictment alleges that Karim hid his hand in Abreezio, in part, by creating sham email accounts to impersonate the purported inventor. Karim, Taneja and Shokouhi even called Karim by the purported inventor’s name in some of their communications to mask Karim’s role.

Abreezio also relied on Karim to provide important inside information about the victim company’s existing technology, to be used in honing Abreezio’s marketing pitch. In February 2015, per court documents, Taneja emailed Karim asking for insight on the victim company’s “numbers” for comparable technology then in place to identify “the ‘threshold’ we need to cross at [the victim company]” and “help us calibrate our positioning going in[.]”

The defendants also worked to hide Shokouhi’s involvement in Abreezio, per charging documents. Shokouhi had been a vice president at the victim company as recently as 2014, and funded and supported Abreezio’s development via three different entities that he controlled. One of Shokouhi’s companies was never disclosed to the victim company during due diligence, however—an attempt to avoid scrutiny, in part because the victim company had flagged conflict of interest issues with Shokouhi and the undisclosed company the year before the Abreezio sale.

In October 2015, the victim company purchased Abreezio for $150 million. As part of the transaction, the victim company was told that Abreezio was the sole and exclusive owner of its technology, and that everyone involved in the conception and development of Abreezio’s intellectual property had been disclosed. In reality, the defendants had carefully concealed Karim’s role from the victim company. As a result, the victim company paid nearly $92 million to Karim’s family member (the purported inventor), over $10 million to Taneja, and more than $24 million to two entities controlled by Shokouhi.

The indictment also alleges how the defendants laundered the funds they received from the Abreezio purchase, including via foreign real estate purchases and interest-free loans.

“Fraudsters cannot hide behind sophisticated technology or complex schemes,” said U.S. Attorney Randy S. Grossman. “This office will pursue criminals and their laundered, ill-gotten gains whether they are hidden in a mattress or scattered throughout the international financial system. Those who steal from our community will face justice.”

“Corporate fraud is a serious crime with serious consequences, not only hurting the individual organization, but also impacting shareholders, as well as entire communities,” said Acting Special Agent in Charge Thomas Ryan of the FBI’s San Diego Field Office. “Today's arrests confirm that no matter how criminals try to hide, the FBI will work with our law enforcement partners to fully investigate these crimes – we will uncover the truth; we will find the perpetrators; we will pursue justice for the victims.”

“Intellectual property crime threatens our economic wellbeing, and this indictment demonstrates that we will pursue those who attempt to steal and profit from our nation’s innovations,” said Acting Special Agent in Charge Darren Lian of IRS Criminal Investigation’s Los Angeles Field Office. “Schemes like this not only victimize companies, but also impact our U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and our Civil Courts. IRS Criminal Investigation is proud to work with our law enforcement partners to bring these defendants to justice.”

DEFENDANTS Case Number 22-CR-1152-BAS

Karim Arabi Age: 56 San Diego, CA

Sanjiv Taneja Age: 59 Cupertino, CA

Ali Akbar Shokouhi Age: 63 San Diego, CA


Federal Bureau of Investigation

Internal Revenue Services, Criminal Investigation

United States Marshals Service

Outcome: The charges and allegations contained in an indictment are merely accusations, and the defendants are considered innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:


Find a Lawyer


Find a Case