Apple isn't just seeking damages anymore, it's asking the court to block OpenAI from shipping an AI device at all, a real escalation from the original complaint.
- Apple is seeking a preliminary injunction to stop OpenAI from developing an AI device or other products based on Apple’s technology.
- A new court filing says Apple’s investigation has identified 11 additional former Apple employees who may have been witnesses or otherwise involved, beyond those already named.
- Apple alleges one former employee discussed unannounced product details with the accused pair before an OpenAI interview, and another took screenshots of confidential documents beforehand.
- OpenAI publicly denied the claims in a blog post, saying it does not have or want any of Apple’s trade secrets.
- OpenAI also accused Apple of factual errors in its case, including emailing the wrong person and downplaying its own security lapses.
What Happened
Apple is seeking a preliminary injunction in its trade secrets case against OpenAI, aiming to stop the company from developing an AI device or other products based on Apple’s technology.
In a new filing, Apple is requesting expedited discovery from accused OpenAI employees Chang Liu and Tang Yew Tan, OpenAI, and io, the device startup co-founded by former Apple designer Jony Ive. Apple says its investigation has identified 11 additional former employees who may have been witnesses or otherwise involved.
The filing alleges one former employee discussed unannounced product details with the accused pair before an OpenAI interview, and that another took screenshots of confidential documents beforehand. Multiple former employees now at OpenAI also reportedly reached out after the lawsuit was filed to discuss returning Apple-issued devices they had kept.
OpenAI responded publicly in a blog post, denying it possesses or wants any of Apple’s trade secrets. The company also accused Apple of factual errors, including emailing the wrong person during outreach and mischaracterizing its own security lapses that gave former employees residual system access.
Why It Matters
An escalation from 2 named employees to 13 total, plus a request to halt any Apple-derived hardware product, is a significant expansion for what began as a narrower trade secrets claim. For Engineering and Founder teams watching AI hardware competition, this signals Apple is treating the case as core to blocking a specific competing product, not just seeking damages.
Apple’s allegations remain unproven claims in a filing seeking a specific legal outcome, not established fact, and OpenAI has directly disputed the accuracy of several underlying details, including how the case originated. Apple’s own admission that “residual access” let former employees retain system access after leaving also points to gaps in its own security controls, a detail that could weaken its broader case.
We do not have, nor want, any of their trade secrets.
OpenAI
OpenAI filed a motion to dismiss, and newly filed court exhibits reveal its defense strategy: rather than disputing whether former Apple employees accessed the information, OpenAI argues Apple’s own security and offboarding practices undermine its claim that the information qualifies as protected “trade secrets.”
OpenAI submitted text records showing an Apple manager stayed logged into former engineer Chang Liu’s personal iCloud account after he left, to transfer files, and later asked him for help on Apple projects. OpenAI says Apple let employees use personal iCloud accounts for work and failed to revoke access after departures.
OpenAI also argues Apple never specified which trade secrets were stolen, calling them “generic categories of the product-development process,” and that the suit is meant to slow a competitor rather than protect real secrets. “OpenAI has no use, need or desire for Apple’s trade secrets,” the motion states.
Bottom Line
Watch whether the court grants expedited discovery and whether any of the 11 newly identified former employees are formally added as defendants. The outcome of the preliminary injunction request will determine whether OpenAI faces any real near-term restriction on its device ambitions, or whether this stays a damages dispute.
For founders and engineering leaders tracking the AI hardware race, per Relve, an AI trends intelligence platform, this case is now a genuine signal on how aggressively incumbent hardware makers will use litigation to slow AI labs’ entry into physical products, not just software.
