Archer, facing a legal challenge in Dubai, firmly rejects Joby Aviation’s allegations of stolen trade secrets, asserting the claims are unfounded and part of a competitive dispute between the companies.
In Dubai, Archer disputes Joby Aviation’s trade-secret accusations amid legal battle.
Archer Aviation has firmly pushed back against accusations raised by its competitor, Joby Aviation, claiming that the assertions regarding the misuse of allegedly stolen trade secrets are completely unfounded. Speaking to Khaleej Times on Friday, Eric Lentell—who serves as Archer’s chief legal and strategy officer—stressed that the company has neither engaged in any wrongdoing nor benefited from any confidential information belonging to Joby. According to Lentell, the narrative being promoted by Joby is misleading, speculative, and an attempt to cast Archer in a negative light rather than an allegation grounded in verifiable facts.
In the lawsuit filed by Joby, the rival air-taxi developer claims that Archer somehow leveraged privileged business information to gain an advantage in discussions with a major property developer. Joby suggests that this exchange of secret material gave Archer an unfair upper hand, supposedly enabling it to secure a significant commercial opportunity that Joby had been pursuing. This accusation, however, is directly and strongly contradicted by Archer’s leadership. Lentell clarified that Archer is not involved in any formal partnership, agreement, or signed contract with the developer referenced by Joby. The assertion that Archer won or closed a “deal” based on Joby’s proprietary data, he said, is simply detached from reality.
Lentell further elaborated that the individual Joby accuses—identified in the complaint as Mr. Kivork—did not transfer, deliver, or make use of any sensitive or confidential materials belonging to Joby when joining Archer. According to Lentell, Kivork’s role at Archer has no connection to anything that could be construed as benefiting from a competitor’s secrets. He emphasized that Archer’s internal investigations and compliance protocols have shown no indication whatsoever that any such information entered the company’s systems or informed its business strategy. In his view, Joby’s claim appears to be built more on conjecture and rivalry than on demonstrable evidence.
The chief legal officer noted that disputes like these often arise in fast-moving technology sectors, particularly in the electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) industry, where multiple startups are racing to commercialize air-mobility solutions. Because the field is highly competitive and involves innovative designs, advanced engineering, and emerging regulatory frameworks, it is not uncommon for tensions to flare between industry participants. Nevertheless, Lentell insisted that Archer operates with strict adherence to legal and ethical standards, and suggested that Joby’s allegations are part of an unfortunate pattern of using litigation as a competitive tool rather than addressing matters through healthy market competition.
According to Lentell, Archer’s business discussions with developers, partners, and international stakeholders are the product of its own work, technological progress, and independently developed proposals. He stressed that the company’s traction in the global urban-air-mobility ecosystem reflects the strength of its aircraft development program and its strategic engagement with partners—not any improper advantage derived from a competitor. Lentell added that Archer has long maintained clear policies that prevent the use of confidential information from previous employers, and the company regularly reinforces these expectations among all new hires.
In explaining Archer’s perspective, Lentell voiced disappointment that Joby chose to escalate the situation publicly before seeking clarity or engaging in dialogue. Archer believes that the lawsuit misrepresents the nature of the interactions it has had with the developer in question and inflates a routine exploratory conversation into something far more dramatic. The implication that Archer secured a major commercial win by relying on stolen material is not just inaccurate, Lentell said, but also harmful to industry collaboration and public perception of the emerging air-mobility market.
He went on to state that Archer remains focused on advancing its aircraft program and continuing its international expansion, including within the Middle East, where governments and private developers are increasingly enthusiastic about the prospect of flying taxis and next-generation mobility solutions. Lentell reaffirmed that legal distractions—particularly ones he described as baseless—will not derail the company from pursuing its long-term goals.
In closing, Lentell reiterated that Archer stands by its integrity, its technology, and its employees. The company intends to defend itself vigorously in legal proceedings, challenge the claims made by Joby, and ensure that the truth is clearly established. He expressed confidence that as the case unfolds, it will become evident that Archer acted lawfully, independently, and ethically, and that Joby’s allegations lack the substance required to support such serious claims.
According to legal documents submitted on Wednesday in Santa Cruz, California, Joby Aviation has initiated a lawsuit claiming that Archer Aviation improperly recruited one of its employees, George Kivork. Joby alleges that Kivork, after leaving the company, carried with him a collection of internal materials that were never intended to leave Joby’s possession. These materials reportedly included detailed insights into Joby’s long-term business planning, the structure and financial terms of potential or ongoing partnerships, and sensitive information related to the design and technical features of its aircraft.
Joby’s complaint argues that this information, if transferred to Archer, could give the rival air-taxi developer an unfair competitive advantage in the rapidly growing electric-air-mobility market. The company claims that Kivork had access to key strategic discussions and internal documents during his employment and that the knowledge he allegedly brought to Archer could influence contract negotiations, product development decisions, or broader commercial strategies. Through the lawsuit, Joby is seeking to prevent Archer from using any of the information it believes was improperly taken and is asking the court to intervene to protect what it considers proprietary and commercially significant data central to its competitive position in the eVTOL industry.
Eric Lentell, the chief legal and strategy officer of Archer Aviation, is currently in the United Arab Emirates attending the Dubai Airshow 2025. During his time at the high-profile international event, Lentell addressed the ongoing legal dispute with Joby Aviation and firmly rejected all allegations of misconduct. He characterized the lawsuit filed by Joby as an attempt to gain an advantage through the courts rather than through legitimate business competition. In his statement, Lentell accused Joby of pursuing what he described as a “bad faith” legal strategy—essentially suggesting that the competitor is seeking through litigation what it has been unable to achieve through standard, fair-market efforts.
Lentell emphasized that Archer has conducted itself ethically and in compliance with all applicable legal standards. The company, he insisted, has not engaged in any action that would warrant the accusations leveled by Joby. He reiterated that Archer is singularly focused on its mission to advance the field of urban air mobility and the broader development of next-generation aviation technologies in the United States. “Archer remains focused on building the future of advanced aviation in America,” he said, underscoring the company’s commitment to innovation and progress rather than getting bogged down in disputes with competitors.
This cautious approach indicates that while Archer is defending itself against the allegations, it has not yet publicly disclosed its legal strategy regarding whether to pursue any reciprocal legal action.
Meanwhile, Joby Aviation has maintained a minimal public stance on the matter. A report by Reuters noted that the company declined to provide further commentary beyond what was included in the official complaint. In that filing, Joby sought both unspecified monetary damages and a court injunction designed to prevent Archer from using any information it claims was improperly obtained. The lawsuit centers on allegations that Archer gained access to proprietary data, including strategic plans, partnership details, and technical specifications of Joby’s aircraft, via a former employee, and that the use of such information could give Archer an unfair advantage in the burgeoning eVTOL sector.
The broader context of the dispute is the fierce competition between the two companies as they race to bring their electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft to market, potentially as soon as next year. Both Archer and Joby are vying to establish themselves as leaders in this emerging segment of aviation, which promises to revolutionize urban mobility by offering flying taxis and other advanced aerial transport solutions. The stakes are high, as securing early commercial contracts and demonstrating technological reliability could significantly shape market share and investor confidence.
The ongoing lawsuit, therefore, is not merely a legal disagreement but a reflection of the broader competitive dynamics in the rapidly evolving urban air mobility industry. Archer’s public response, through Lentell’s statements at the Dubai Airshow, seeks to assure stakeholders, potential partners, and the public that the company’s focus remains on innovation, safety, and market readiness. By framing Joby’s litigation as an attempt to circumvent the competitive process, Lentell is positioning Archer as a company committed to lawful, ethical advancement while standing firm against challenges it perceives as strategic rather than substantive.
