A federal judge has granted most of Apple's request for early discovery in its trade secrets lawsuit against OpenAI, the AI hardware startup io Products and two former Apple employees, according to a report from 9to5Mac on the October 13 ruling.
What the case is about
Apple filed the suit around July 10, 2026. It names former employees Chang Liu and Tang Tan, along with OpenAI and io Products. Apple alleges that the two ex-employees improperly accessed or used confidential information about Apple's products and technologies to help OpenAI's consumer hardware effort, and that information was also obtained from Apple employees during recruiting interviews. Apple also asked for a preliminary injunction to keep the alleged trade secrets out of the defendants' hardware development while the case proceeds.
OpenAI opposed Apple's request for expedited discovery, arguing it was overly broad and that ordinary discovery was about to begin. Apple renewed the request in late August.
What the judge ordered
According to the report, Judge Edward Davila agreed to much of what Apple asked for. The defendants must produce forensic images already collected in connection with Apple's claims, documents used to guide interviews of Apple candidates for OpenAI's Consumer Hardware Products Group, records summarizing those interviews, and certain LINE messages between Liu and Yu-Ting "Alyssa" Peng dating from January 1, 2026.
The order also authorizes early depositions of Liu, Tan and Peng, as well as corporate representatives of OpenAI and io Products. It sets deadlines for the document production and the depositions, and addresses whether those expedited depositions count toward federal discovery limits.
What was not granted
The judge denied, for now, Apple's request for early access to OpenAI's research and development documents on metal finishes, power management and battery functionality. Those materials will be handled through regular discovery instead. A ruling on requests involving what Apple calls "Apple Originated Information" was postponed because the judge found the definition too vague as currently written. Apple has five days to confer with the defendants and propose a narrower definition.
What it means
The ruling is a procedural step rather than a decision on the merits: no court has found that any trade secrets were misappropriated, and the allegations remain unproven. The early document production and depositions will, however, give Apple a first look at evidence that would otherwise have come later in the case. We have not seen a public statement from the defendants on the order, and we will update this story if one appears.
0 comments