By Fatma Younis
Federal District Judge Leo Sorokin on Wednesday granted a government motion to dismiss all criminal charges against Kseniia Petrova, a Russian-born cancer researcher at Harvard Medical School, who had been indicted for allegedly smuggling frog embryos into the United States.
Charges dismissed without hearing
Petrova faced one count each of concealment of a material fact, false statement, and smuggling goods. She maintained she did not realize the samples needed to be declared and was not attempting to sneak anything into the country.
Background of the case
The case began to unravel in April when a federal judge ruled a customs officer improperly canceled Petrova's visa over the incident. Petrova had been briefly detained by immigration officials and feared deportation to Russia.
Defense arguments
Petrova's lawyers argued the prosecution was selective and vindictive, noting criminal charges were filed only after it appeared she would win her immigration case. They said it was rare for anyone to be charged criminally for such conduct.
Judge's decision
Judge Sorokin, nominated by former President Barack Obama, dismissed the charges without a hearing. One of Petrova's attorneys, Daniel Marx, said the Department of Justice should never have brought the "highly unusual" prosecution against a talented scientist whose handling of inert, non-living, non-toxic frog embryos posed no danger.
Origin of the incident
The incident originated in early 2025 when Petrova returned from France with a package of frog embryo samples obtained from a lab specializing in superfine sections. She was questioned at Boston Logan International Airport.
Government's earlier stance
The Department of Homeland Security previously stated Petrova was lawfully detained after lying to federal officers, and the Trump administration emphasized restoring rule of law to the immigration system.
Prosecution's motion to dismiss
On Tuesday, U.S. Attorney Leah Foley filed a motion to dismiss, writing that resource costs of continuing the prosecution outweighed public interest. She called Petrova's claims of vindictive prosecution meritless but cited an April court ruling granting broad discovery for selective prosecution claims and access to comparable cases and CBP policies as reasons for dismissal.
