CFIUS Effectively Blocks German Acquisition of U.S. Technology Company

Mar 7, 2017

Reading Time : 2 min

As background, CFIUS is an interagency committee with the authority to review certain foreign investments in the United States for national security considerations. Specifically, CFIUS has the authority to review “covered transactions” that could result in the transfer of control over a U.S. business to a non-U.S. person. The CFIUS review process involves a 30-day review period and then a more in-depth 45-day investigation if CFIUS identifies potential national security concerns. Following its review and/or investigation, CFIUS may require the parties to adopt mitigation measures as a condition to its approval and may also direct parties to withdraw and refile their notice to allow for more time to address potential national security concerns. If these concerns are not addressed, CFIUS may recommend that the President block a pending transaction or unwind a completed transaction.  

After Cree and Infineon reached an agreement to sell Wolfspeed in July 2016, the parties reportedly submitted a joint notice to CFIUS in November 2016. On February 8, 2017, Cree announced that the transaction in its existing form was unlikely to be approved by CFIUS, and the parties indicated that they were considering mitigation measures, including the potential divestiture of some of the Wolfspeed business.  

Although its deliberations are confidential, CFIUS may have had concerns about Wolfspeed’s silicon carbide (“SiC”) technology, which is used in compound semiconductors. In particular, Wolfspeed has developed Radio Frequency (RF) devices that include Gallium Nitride on Silicon Carbide (“GaN-on-SiC”), which is a technology that has reportedly caused CFIUS to recommend blocking other transactions. Wolfspeed has stated that its RF technology is used in electron mobility transistors and monolithic microwave integrated circuits in both civilian and military markets. In April 2016, Wolfspeed’s GaN-on-SiC RF power transistors successfully completed testing for compliance with NASA reliability standards for satellite and space systems, giving its customers, according to Wolfspeed, “the ability to specify [Wolfspeed’s] GaN RF devices in the most critical aerospace, military, and satellite electronics systems.”

On February 16, 2017, Cree announced that the parties were unable to identify mitigation measures to satisfy CFIUS' concerns. Consequently, the parties decided to terminate the transaction, which reportedly triggered a $12.5 million termination fee that Infineon must pay to Cree.

This transaction highlights CFIUS' focus on deals involving sensitive technology, particularly in the semiconductor sector. Since 2016, CFIUS or the President has effectively blocked a number of other transactions in the semiconductor industry involving Chinese buyers, including Aixtron-Fujian Grand Chip, GCS-San’an and Lumileds-GO Scale. With this latest outcome, CFIUS has indicated that these potential national security concerns are not limited to Chinese buyers and can arise in transactions with companies from closely allied countries.

*This blog post was originally on AG Trade Law.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

June 27, 2024

On June 24, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published five new Form 8-K Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DIs) expanding the agency’s interpretations of cybersecurity incident disclosures pursuant to Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. In July 2023, the SEC adopted final rules with respect to cybersecurity incidents that generally require public companies to disclose (i) material cybersecurity incidents within four business days after determining the incident was material and (ii) material information regarding their cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance on an annual basis. We wrote about the final cybersecurity disclosure rules here.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 12, 2024

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted final rules (available here; also see the fact sheet and press release) representing significant changes to  special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies and the disclosure of projections. These rules aim to enhance disclosures, protect investors and align the regulatory framework for SPACs with traditional IPOs. The following summarizes the key aspects of these rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

October 4, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a final rule amending the so-called “Names Rule” (found here) that is “designed to modernize and enhance” protections under Rule 35d-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. The final rule is part of the SEC’s holistic efforts to regulate environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and is the SEC’s latest attempt to curb greenwashing in U.S. capital markets. The amendments require registered investment funds that include ESG factors in their names to place 80% of their assets in investments corresponding to those factors, thereby extending to ESG funds the SEC’s long-standing approach of regulating the names of registered funds to ensure they are marketed to investors truthfully. Fund complexes with more than $1 billion in assets will have two years from the final rule’s effective date (60 days after publication in the Federal Register) to comply, while fund complexes with less than $1 billion in assets will be given a compliance period of 30 months.

Chair Gary Gensler said “[t]he Names Rule reflects a basic idea: A fund’s investment portfolio should match a fund’s advertised investment focus. In essence, if a fund’s name suggests an investment focus, the fund in turn needs to invest shareholders’ dollars in a manner consistent with that investment focus. Otherwise, a fund’s portfolio might be inconsistent with what fund investors desired when selecting a fund based upon its name.” The sole dissenting vote against the rule modification, Commissioner Mark Uyeda, said “[w]ith these amendments, the Commission overemphasizes the importance of a fund’s name, as if to suggest that investors and their financial professionals need not look at the prospectus disclosures.” Commissioner Uyeda also expressed concern that fund investors will bear the increased compliance costs associated with the rule change.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 31, 2023

As discussed in our prior publication (found here), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments on December 14, 2022, regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. On May 25, 2023, the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DIs) relating to the Rule 10b5-1 amendments.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.