Dahua Sues Ex-North American President, Says Legal Typo

By Charles Rollet, Published Jun 03, 2020, 10:52am EDT (Info+)

Dahua's former North American President Frank Zhang claims he is owed almost $11 million but Dahua counter-claims it is just a "scrivener's error", i.e., a legal typo. The two sides have been in court for over a year with Dahua saying they have spent over $1.5 million in legal fees.

IPVM Image

****, ** ******, ** *** *** first ** **** ***** ********* *********, e.g., ******* **** *********'* *** *********** **** ****** ****** ***** *****, ********* *** ***, resigned.

**** *** ******** *** **** ***** documents *** **** ****, ********* *********** issues ** *****'* ******* ******. *** documents **** **** ******* **** *****'* North ******* *** ****** ********** ***** and *** ****'* ** ***** *********** competition **** *********.

** **** ****, ** ******* **** case, *********:

  • ***** **** "*********'* *****"
  • ***** ******* $** ******* ***** ******* Fired
  • *** * ****, **** *****
  • ***** **** *****
  • ********* ****** *********** ***********, ************
  • "** *****'** **** ** *********" **** Zhang's ******
  • ***** ****** ************* **** *********
  • ***** ******** **** "***** ***** *** as * *************"
  • ***** ******: *** **** "******'* **** It"
  • ***** ***** ******* *** ****** ********** Sales, ****** *******
  • ***** ***** ** ******** ********* ** NDAA, "***** ****** **********"
  • ***** ******: $** ******* "********** ******** From *******"
  • ***** ********* ** *****'* ******, ***** in ***** ** *****
  • ***** *******, ********** ***** *** ***** $1.5m ***** ****
  • ***** ***** ********* ** ****

Case **********

**** (*****) ***** *** ***** ** Dahua ** **** **** ** ********* of ***** ******** *** ********** ***** on * *****-**** ******** **** ** annual ****** ** $***,***.

*** ** ****** ****, ***** **** it ******** *** ***** ** ********** out ** *** **** ***** ******* on ** "****** ********* *******" *** two ***** **** * $***,*** ****** salary. ** **** ** **** ****, Dahua **** ** *** ****** ******** Zhang ** ** **** ******** $***,*** ** ********* **** ** months, *** ********* ** *** ********.

** ******* ***** ***** ** *** time, ************** ******* *** *********** *** ********* ***, ***** ******** President ***** ****.

Dahua **** "*********'* *****"

*******, *** ****** **** ********* *********, which *** ****** ** *** ******* involved, ******** ***** ** "******* ********* payments" ** $***,*** *** ** ******, i.e. $**,***,*** ** *** ******** ******* below *****:

IPVM Image

*****'* ******* **** **** *** * "scrivener's *****" (************ * ******, *****, ** ******):

IPVM Image

Zhang ******* $** ******* ***** ******* *****

***** *** *** *********** ***** ********* millions ** ******* - *** *** first *** ******, ***** **** *** $42,500 *** ***** ** ********* ******* issue ($***,*** ******* ** **.)

*******, ** ******* **** ***** ******* to **** ***** **** *** ******* position. ***** ******* ***** * ***** $910,000 ********* *******.

*** *****'* ****** ********* ***** *** almost $** ******* ** **** ** possible, ****** *** ****** **** ********* agreement:

IPVM Image

Not * ****, **** *****

*****'* ****** ***** **** *** ****** 2017 ********* ********* "**** *** ******* an ******* ************* ** ******** ***** of *** ****":

IPVM Image

**** *****'* ******* ******* *** **** Zhang *** **** ********* *** **** lower ********* ******** *** **** ******, Zhang's ******* ********* **** "** ******** silent" ** ***** *** ** "********** the *********** ********* ****** ** ******** he ***" ** *****:

IPVM Image

Dahua **** *****

***** *** *** **** ****, **** his ******* ** ******** ******* ***** he *** ******* ** "**********" *** accept * $* ******* ''**** *** payment" ** ******** *** *** ******** legal ****** ******* *****:

IPVM Image

***** ******* *** ***-****** *** ***** action ** ***** ***** *************** ******** *****,***** ** ***** *** ***** *** severance *** ******, **** "****** ** implied ******** ** **** *****" *** to **** *** ******** ****** **** severance ******** ******* *************:

IPVM Image

Documents ****** ***** **********

IPVM Image

** *** ** ****** - *****'******** *** ***- *** ********** ********** *****'* ********* as ***** ******* *********, ****** ** visit *** ** ******. *******, *** negotiation *** *** ** ****. **'* offer ** $***,*** ** ***** ********* was ***** "*********" ** *****, ********* to *****'* ************** ****** * **** **** ***** *******:

IPVM Image

**** **** *** ****** ***** ****'* immediately ******* *** $**.* ******* ********* was **** ***** *** * ******* of *** ****** ***** ** ****, saying "**** *** **** **** ****, if **** ****" *** **** ** the ****, ***** **** ***** "*** to *****" **** ** *** ****:

IPVM Image

Dahua ******** *****

** *****'* ******* **** **** *** a **** ** ** ** ********, then ** *** ****** ********* *****. In *** ****** *****'* *** **** implied *** ***** *** * *********** mistake *** ** ** ****** *** being * ****** ******* *******, ******* "we **** **** *** ****** *******'* native ******** ** *******":

IPVM Image

*****'* *** **** ********* ** ******* the ********* ********* *** **** ******** by *****'* ******* ******* *** * bilingual *******-******** ********:

IPVM Image

"He *****'** **** ** *********" **** *****'* ******

******* ******* ** *****'* ******** ** that *****'* **** *** ******** *** no ***-******* *** *************** ******, ********* to *****'* ******, *** **** **** meant ***** "***** **** **** *** to *********" *** "********** ***** **** the ******" - *** ****** *** the **** *********:

IPVM Image

*****'* **** ********** ********* *** ******** as ******** *** ****** *** ** such **********. *** ****** **** ********* did ******* **** *******, ** ****** by *****'* ************** ***** ** *** *****:

IPVM Image

Zhang ****** ************* **** *********

********* *** ********* ***** ** *** proceedings **** *****'* ***** **** ********* communications ******* ***** *** "*** ** Dahua's ***********" ********* ********* ***** ****** 2017, **** *** ******** ********* ********* was ******:

IPVM Image

*******, *****'* *********** ** **** ***** may **** **** ************* **** *****'* rivals. ***** ************ ******** *** ********, but ********** ***** **** ** *** not ************ **** ********* ***** ****:

IPVM Image

Whistleblower? ***** ******** **** "***** ***** *** ** * *************"

*** ******* ***** ******** *** ********* as ******** ***** ********* *****'* ********* as *********. ** *** ********, ***** considers *** *********** **** ***** "***** act ** * *************" ********* *** "vulnerabilities ** *** ******** ** **********":

IPVM Image

**** ******* *** ****** ** *****'* lawyer ******** ****, *** **** ** in * **** **** ********* ******* as ******** **** ***** *** "*********" of * *********** ***** ******* *** firm, ***** *** *****-******* ****** *********:IPVM Image

**** ***** *** **** *** ******** of ***** ***** * ************* ** what ******** "***************" ***** *** ********* to.

Zhang's *********** *** **** "******'* **** **"

*** ******* **** *****'* *********** *** ********* and ******* ** *** **** ** Dahua ***. ** **** ****, *****'* lawyer ******* **** "*******" ***** ** hire ***** ******* **** "******'* **** it":

IPVM Image

***** ** ** **** ******** ***** this ***** ** *** ***** *******. We ***** **** *** ***** ***** it *** ******** ** ********. **** Wang "******'* **** **" ** ******** in ****'* ************ **** *****, ******, Wang ** *** **** ** ****** of ***** ***** *******.

Dahua's ***** ******* *** ****** ********** ***** *******

***** ********* ***** *** ***** ********* figures *** "**** ***** ******* *** Global ********** ***** ******** ********".

*** ******* **** **** **** ******* generated $*** ******* ** ***** *** Dahua ** **** **** ******* ** $78 *******, *.*. * ***** ****** margin ** **%:

IPVM Image

**** ******** ***** ******* ******* *** smaller ******* ******** *** ************ *****(*.*., *********), *** **** ** *****'* business, ************ ** *** ****.

Zhang ***** **** ** ***** ********

***** **** ****** **** ** *** led ** $* ******* "****** ** licensing *********" **** ********, ****** ***** ***********, *** *** *** "****** ********** of ******* ******** ******", ** *********** way ** ******** ******** ************ ******** ****** ***** ********* ***** ******:

IPVM Image

Dahua ***** ** ******** ********* ** ****, "***** ****** **********"

** ********* ****, ** **** ** the ***** ***********, *****'* *** **** asked ***** ** ******** "*** ********* containing **************" ******* ***** *** ***** "third *******" ********* *** ****, ***** had ****** ******* *** ** ****** ***** *******.

*****'* **** **** ***** ******* ***** had "******** **** ********** ******** ** the ************ ** ******* ******* ***/** other ***** ****** **********". * *** weeks *******,******* ** ******** ************** *** ********* ** ********** **** their******* ******** ************ *****.

IPVM Image

***** ************ ******** ** ******** ***** documents, ********** **** **** **** "*** proportional" *** "**********":

IPVM Image

$11 ******* "********** ******** **** *******" **** ***** ******

******** *****, *****'* ******, **** ** the **** **** ******* **** *****'* claims ** **** **** **** ****** $11 ******* **** "********** ******** **** reality":

IPVM Image

Judge ********* ** *****'* ******

*** ***** *** ********* ** *****'* argument, **** ******** ***** ** ************* Judge *** ***** ******* ******* ** January **** *** *****-******* ****** ****** he ******* "******* *********":

IPVM Image

***** ***** ** *** "********** ***** that ***** **** **** ********" ** pay $***,*** ***** *** **** *** "Senior ********* *******" ********** **** *** added ***** ***** *** ************ **** the *********:

IPVM Image

***** **** ***** **** "***** ****** knew" **** ***** *** "****** * mistake" ** *** ********* ********* *** signed ******:

IPVM Image

*udge ***** ** *****'* *****

*******, ** ******** ****, ***** ***** granted *****'* ******* ** ****** *** original ****** **** ********* ************* *** changed *** ******** ** ********** ***** that *** $***,*** ********, *** *******:

IPVM Image

*** ***** **** ***** ******* ***** and *** ***** **** *****'* "****** of ******* ******** ** **** ***** and **** *******" *** ****** ** contract:

IPVM Image

*******, *** ***** ******** *****'* ******* that ***** *** ***** ***** ****.

Dahua ******* ********** ***** *** ***** $*.** ***** ****

** ***** **** ***** ******** "**** to *** ****** **** ** [*** court] ******** ** ***** ***** *******" for *****'* ****** ** **** *****:

IPVM Image

** * ******** **** ********, ***** Zobel ***** **** *****'* *** ****** to ****** ************* ** "************* $*.* million ** ********'* **** *** *****" directly ******* ** **** ****:

IPVM Image

Zhang **** *********

**********, ***** *** ******** *** *********** initial *******, ******* ***** *** *** two ******* ******* ** **** **** at *** ** ***** ******** *****. Both *** *******.

Dahua ******** ** ****: ******* ** ******* *** "*******" ** ******* ******

***** ******** ** ****** *** ******** questions ******* ** **** **** *** to *** ******* *******, *** *** state ** *** "*******" **** *** initial ******:

** *** ********* ******* **** *** district ***** ***** ** *** ***** on *** ****** *** ******* *********, but ** ****** ********* ******* ** the ********** ***** **** ** ****** is ********* *******.

Frank ***** ** ********

**** ****** *** ******* ***** *** we ******** ** ********.

Outlook - ********** ***** ******** *** ****** ** ***** ****** ****

****** **** ********** ******** *** ****** atypical ********** *********** ***** ***, ***** North ******* *** ** ************ *** greatest ******* ***** ***. ************, ********* have ******** **** ****** ********** *** the ********** ***** ** **** (* legal ****) *** *** ****** ***** litigating ** ** ********. ********, *****'* Founder **. ** *** *** ******** with ******* **********, **** ******** *** company's*** ** ******* **,************ *** *******'* ********** ************* ******* **** *******.

** *** ***** ****, ******* *** of ****, ***** ***** ******* *** done ************* **** *********** ** ************ on ******** ****** ****. ***** *** ***** ******* *** be * **** *** ** *************, so **** ** ***** ***** ******* can **** ****** ***** ** ***** cameras, **** *** ****-********** *** ***.

Comments (23)

Somehow this is not at all surprising, given Dahua USA's long standing problems and complications.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

There is absolutely no way the Dahua legal team would make a mistake like that. They even argue about contracts with a comma in the wrong place.

Contracts are prepared by the HR team together with the China based legal team who will then get advice from lawyers in the relevant counties. The contract would the go to someone like Fu for rubber stamping.

Dahua will also negotiate with departing employees to lower the amount of their severance pay. They would even do this with low paid employees so they could save $500

they will use the threat of if you make trouble it will damage your career and also ask people to sign a very strict NDA which makes it almost impossible to say you even worked at Dahua.

I have a lot more to say however I definitely believe Zhang here.

I think the best thing he could do in his appeal is to bring people as witnesses who had dealings with the Dahua legal team. Both employees, outside companies and maybe some ex distributors

Agree: 5
Disagree
Informative: 2
Unhelpful
Funny

So you think Zhang has knowledge on Dahua strengths and weaknesses that is worth $11M to Dahua to keep him quiet?

Agree: 2
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

This was no scrivener error.

Agree: 3
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

So Dahua started him at a salary of $510,000 per year, and then after he failed to meet expectations, they decided to pay him $680,000 per MONTH?

Would it not to be easier, if they felt he was some major threat to the organization, to just stick him in a corner and keep his salary at $510,000? They could even double it, pay him $1M to sit around and do nothing, and still be ahead. Plus, if they felt he was some inherent threat to the company, wouldn't it be better to keep such a person on your payroll and reduce their opportunity and incentive to leak company details?

"Scrivener's Error" is practically Dahua USA's operating principle.

I am expecting to see a picture of Zhang's lawyer on the side of a bus with a motto like "I don't get paid unless you win!".

Agree: 2
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

"Don't let the days go by, glycerine".

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

He would definitely know enough about Dahua to seriously damage their Busines and reputation.

Agree: 3
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny: 2

know enough about Dahua to seriously damage their Busines and reputation.

This is a company who ignored / bragged about being sanctioned for human rights abuses so not sure what would damage their reputation.

The one area I wonder about is what Zhang knows about the backdoor and other various vulnerabilities. If he knew more about them, I could see that being an issue.

Agree: 5
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Hi John,

There is a very big difference between being found out for what they do in China and being found out for what they do outside of China.

Meng Wanzhou is the perfect example of that.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

You mean to tell me these bumbling incompetent clowns running Dahua USA are paid upwards of $700k per year or more to misdirect it’s staff, to carry on the tradition of confused and misleading marketing, and above all peddle an embarrassingly poor product to the masses for pennies on the dollar as we destroy the market in our race to the bottom, and Dahua USA finds itself where it is today?

Legitimately, if companies like Dahua weren’t so myopic in their hiring practices, they could retain someone for one tenth of what they’re paying the likes of Frank Zhang or Tim Wang, and get ten times the return. For that matter, they would have definitely had a better chance of holding on to the bulk of the quality employees they’ve lost over the course of the last four years.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny: 2

Either Dahua is lying or their Legal and HR team must really suck at drafting contracts.

Agree: 3
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Both scenarios seem equally plausible.

Agree: 5
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful: 1
Funny: 3

As much as I personally loathe dahua & consider them to be the scum of the earth I feel it was almost certainly an honest error. The fact that the total amount $680K matches exactly the stated amount just stated as monthly instead of total paid in monthly installments leads me to believe this.

With this in mind I think Frank Zhang is taking the pi55, however if it causes dahua grief, I like it.

Agree: 2
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny: 1

Probably the same person who translates their GUIs to English....

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny: 9

IPVM is looking into a separate lawsuit filed against Dahua and Lorex by a private citizen in California named Gerald Soo on February 26 of this year. Soo says he bought 5 FLIR security cameras made by Lorex for about $1,000 total from 2015 to early 2018, but later found they were bricked up and inaccessible after FLIR sold Lorex to Dahua.

Soo filed this class action lawsuit on behalf of all people in his situation, claiming total damages "well in excess of $5,000,000". However, he doesn't know who these other people are, saying he "believes that Class Members are so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable".

Last week, Dahua and Lorex filed a motion to dismiss this lawsuit, blaming the brick-up on cloud video surveillance provider OzVision:

IPVM Image

The Northern District of California court will decide whether to dismiss the lawsuit on July 23.

Agree
Disagree
Informative: 3
Unhelpful
Funny

Belated update: last November Gerald Soo dismissed all his claims against Lorex and Dahua, with Dahua consenting. It was dismissed "without prejudice" meaning the plaintiffs can re-file it again later.

IPVM Image

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

I think you will find numerous employees, distributors and customers have sued or were about to sue dahua however the normal course of action For dahua is to negotiate hard then suddenly settle with the strict requirement of a extremely broad NDA being signed.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative: 1
Unhelpful
Funny

Business ethics protocols were executed long ago.

Perhaps now they will not fall on deaf ears. Yes OUR youth need a logic beat down but....shots were fired many years ago.

Stop Chinese Technology cuddled with CCP government and sing along with some true brothas.

COVID FAKE. YOUR FEARS REAL. YOUR LOGIC...USE IT NOW.

Time to heal the mind and stop watching LISTENING to the f*cking INTERNET.

Who is with us?

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful: 1
Funny

I was at Dahua when Frank was in charge and he did a great job, had a good vision and a plan. When they brought in William Chow, the whole company went to hell. The sales team did not appreciate Chows comments about Americans and he had no clue what he was doing. We all left due to this idiot

Looking at what Frank was paid which is mind boggleing, Dahua should have paid us more but were cheap as we built up the USA business. They found any way to not pay us. Tim Wang is a puppet on a string and he did not like Frank because Frank knew what he was doing. I can see that they made a mistake on the document but that just shows how incompetent Dahua is. Wonder how the new American leader feels about that salary they were paying Frank. I am sure The usa guy is not getting that much, but he is getting headaches....

Agree: 3
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny: 3

Would love to talk to you about this. Send me an email: bflam@gordonllp.com

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Update: Dahua_Technology_USA_Inc_v_Zhang__01cae-20-01338__107706591.0

The case is going forward with more litigation, Court of Appeals ruling, conclusion:

The district court's grant of summary judgment in Dahua's favor is vacated, its denial of summary judgment in favor of Zhang is affirmed, and Dahua's cross-appeal is dismissed. We remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

IPVM Image

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Update - the case will go to trial on September 27:

IPVM Image

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Tim Wang "Couldn't Hack It"

Who can’t hack Dahua?

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny: 1
Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts reporting, tutorials and software funded by subscriber's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.
Loading Related Reports