An interesting civil action was recently filed in federal court in California by Red Chamber Co. (a world leader in the fishing industry and one of the largest global suppliers of shrimp) against Grupo Profand S.L. (a multinational company headquartered in Spain engaged in the fishing, processing, and commercialization of seafood products).
The complaint begins:
“This case is about economic espionage, corporate subterfuge, and government corruption in Argentina that has resulted and will continue to result in a sever domestic injury suffered in California to one of the largest and most respected family-owned businesses in the United States.”
The complaint begins with the following background and allegations:
“Founded in California more than 50 years ago, Red Chamber Co. is a family-owned business that is a world leader in the fishing industry and one of the largest global suppliers of shrimp. Red Chamber Co. consists of 15 companies that together have a revenue of more than $2 billion annually and employ more than 5,000 people.
Red Chamber Argentina S.A. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Red Chamber Co. Headquartered in the province of Chubut, Argentina within the region of Patagonia, Red Chamber Argentina has supplied California, the United States, and the world market with the highest quality wild and natural seafood from Patagonia for a decade.
In 2013 the Governor of Chubut, Argentina, needed to solve a crisis. A major employer, Alpesca S.A. (“Alpesca”), had gone bankrupt and was abandoning it fishing operations and all of its employees. The government searched for companies to take over Alpesca’s operations but no one was willing to invest the vast resources required to repair the processing plant and reconstruct the ships. Alpesca had ceased its fishing operations and left its ships abandoned on the dock of Puerto Madryn without fuel, safety, or crew. On April 7, 2014, a storm destroyed the ships after they collided with each other and ran aground on the sand. The ships were then looted and vandalized. More than 600 employees of Alpesca lost their jobs. […]
In 2014, during the administration of then-Governor of Chubut Martín Buzzi, officials from the Chubut government travelled to California to visit the headquarters of Red Chamber Co. and learn in detail about the magnitude of its international operations. As a result of Red Chamber Co.’s international prestige, the Chubut government summoned Red Chamber Co. in 2014 to reactivate the expropriated Alpesca fishing plant and the fleet of seven fishing vessels that were semi-sunk and abandoned pursuant to an administrative lease contract with the provincial government (the “Lease Contract”). […]
The Lease Contract that allowed Red Chamber Argentina to refurbish and operate those expropriated Alpesca assets gave it the exclusive option to purchase them upon completion of the judicial expropriation process, which has not yet occurred after more than 11 years.
Grupo Profand S.L. is a multinational company headquartered in Spain that, like Red Chamber, is engaged in the fishing, processing, and commercialization of seafood products. Through at least four domestic subsidiaries headquartered along the East Coast of the United States, Grupo Profand exports its products to, and distributes its products throughout, the United States, including in California, including Argentine Red Shrimp, sold by Stavis Seafoods, Inc., which is headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts. Pesquera Deseado S.A.U. is a subsidiary of Grupo Profand that is headquartered in Argentina. Grupo
Profand and Pesquera Deseado are collectively referred to as “Profand” throughout this Complaint.In February 2025, the Chubut government unilaterally terminated Red Chamber Argentina’s Lease Contract in a wrongful attempt to gain leverage over Red Chamber. Two months later, the Minister of Economy and State Prosecutor of the Chubut government demanded that Red Chamber pay $6.5 million in “B-money”—i.e., a reference to a private, untraceable payment—as a condition to Red Chamber Argentina’s continued operation of the Red Chamber fishing plant and associated assets and Red Chamber’s continued participation in the fishing industry in Patagonia. Red Chamber was offered to present any amendment to the lease contract it wanted as long as the $6.5 million “B-money” payment was made.
After Red Chamber refused to pay that “B-money,” the Chubut government conspired with Profand, which already was doing business in Argentinian Patagonia, to destroy Red Chamber’s fishing business in Patagonia. Specifically, the Chubut government assisted Profand in gaining access to the expropriated fishing plant under false and fraudulent pretenses so that Profand could spy on Red Chamber’s operations, steal Red Chamber’s trade secrets, facilitate Profand’s takeover of the expropriated fishing plant and associated assets, and thereby disrupt Red Chamber’s ability to service its clients in California, the United States, and across the world—all to the financial and reputational detriment of Red Chamber and to the financial benefit of Profand and the government of Chubut.
On September 30, 2025, Grupo Profand publicly stated that through Pesquera Deseado, it signed an agreement with the Chubut government—to take effect on October 1, 2025—to lease Red Chamber’s plant and associated assets, with all payments going to the Chubut treasury rather than Red Chamber.
Through this action, Red Chamber seeks injunctive relief, treble damages, exemplary damages, and reasonable attorney’s fees in connection with Profand’s participation in this brazen and corrupt scheme of economic espionage and corporate subterfuge.”
Elsewhere, the complaint alleges:
At approximately 2:00 p.m. on April 3, 2025, Andres Meiszner, the Minister of Economy and State Prosecutor of the Chubut government, met with Marcelo Mou, the President of Red Chamber Argentina, to discuss the government’s threat of a termination of the Lease Contract. The meeting took place at the Alevar Art Hotel in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
During that meeting, Mr. Meiszner advised Mr. Mou in substance that Red Chamber would need to pay $6.5 million in “B money” if it wanted to continue operating the expropriated Alpesca assets and acquire those assets following completion of the judicial expropriation process. Mr. Meiszner advised that Red Chamber would need to make an upfront payment of $3 million followed by a second payment of $3.5 million upon transfer of the expropriated Alpesca assets to Red Chamber. Mr. Meiszner explained that Red Chamber could amend the contract any way it wanted as long as the “B-money” was paid.
As an arm of Red Chamber Co., Red Chamber Argentina would have violated U.S. law by making any such payments—specifically, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 78dd-1 et seq. (“FCPA”). As its former lawyer, Mr. Arbeletche would have known that it would be illegal for Red Chamber to make such a payment because it is a U.S. based company. He would have also known that companies from other countries might not have the same ethical restrictions.
Based on the foregoing, the only reasonable inference is that the Chubut government terminated the Lease Contract on February 10, 2025, to gain unfair leverage over Red Chamber, to illegally extort $6.5 million from Red Chamber as a condition to the government’s acquiescence in Red Chamber’s continued operation and ultimate acquisition of the expropriated Alpesca assets and Red Chamber’s continued participation in the Patagonia fishing industry, which requires government-issued fishing permits.
In the complaint, Red Chamber asserts that Profand violated the Defend Trade Secrets Act, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and the following causes of action: intentional inference with contract and conspiracy to interfere with contract; intentional interference with prospective economic advantage and conspiracy to interfere with prospective economic advantage; and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage.
