In practical terms, Apple is seeking to prevent OpenAI and io from developing AI hardware or other products based on Apple technology that Apple says was taken or exposed. Apple argues that continuing access or use could cause irreparable harm before the court reaches a final decision.

Apple says the investigation has expanded

The latest filing broadens the scope of Apple’s allegations beyond Liu, Tan, and Yu-Ting Peng. Apple says its investigation has identified 11 additional former Apple employees who may have witnessed or participated in the alleged acquisition or use of confidential information.

That figure does not mean Apple has established that all 11 people committed misconduct. Rather, Apple is presenting their possible involvement or knowledge as a reason the court should allow faster discovery and help determine what happened.

The alleged handling of confidential information

Apple alleges that confidential information about unannounced products was discussed, shared, and in at least one instance captured in screenshots before an employee’s interview with OpenAI. Apple also says some Apple-issued devices or data were retained after employees left the company.

Apple’s broader theory is that information from its product and engineering work could have been relevant to OpenAI’s plans for consumer devices, including work associated with io Products, the hardware startup connected to former Apple design chief Jony Ive.

The expedited-discovery request is important because Apple says it does not yet know the full extent of the alleged access, retention, or use. The company is asking for documents and depositions to clarify who handled the information and whether it reached OpenAI or io.

How OpenAI has responded

OpenAI has rejected Apple’s account. Its public response described the allegations as false, “completely without merit,” and “careless, aggressive and oddly personal.” OpenAI says it does not have—and does not want—Apple’s trade secrets.

OpenAI has also argued that Apple’s description of the former employees’ conduct is inaccurate and that the requested injunction is unnecessary. In its legal response, the company defended Liu and Tan and asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit.

A central part of OpenAI’s defense concerns whether the information at issue qualifies as legally protected trade secrets and whether Apple adequately protected it. OpenAI has argued that Apple’s security and employee-offboarding practices weakened the case, while also maintaining that OpenAI did not need Apple’s confidential material for its own work.

What happens next

The immediate dispute is not yet about whether Apple ultimately wins the case. It is about whether the court should speed up discovery and impose restrictions before the underlying allegations are fully tested.

Apple says urgent action is needed to preserve evidence and prevent further use of information it considers confidential. OpenAI says the requests are based on false or overstated claims and would be unnecessary. The court’s decisions on discovery and preliminary relief will determine how quickly the parties must produce evidence and whether OpenAI’s hardware-related work faces interim restrictions.

For now, the most significant development is the escalation from a trade-secrets lawsuit into a fight over both evidence and the ability to continue developing products while the case is pending.

In practical terms, Apple is seeking to prevent OpenAI and io from developing AI hardware or other products based on Apple technology that Apple says was taken or exposed. Apple argues that continuing access or use could cause irreparable harm before the court reaches a final decision.

Apple says the investigation has expanded

The latest filing broadens the scope of Apple’s allegations beyond Liu, Tan, and Yu-Ting Peng. Apple says its investigation has identified 11 additional former Apple employees who may have witnessed or participated in the alleged acquisition or use of confidential information.

That figure does not mean Apple has established that all 11 people committed misconduct. Rather, Apple is presenting their possible involvement or knowledge as a reason the court should allow faster discovery and help determine what happened.

The alleged handling of confidential information

Apple alleges that confidential information about unannounced products was discussed, shared, and in at least one instance captured in screenshots before an employee’s interview with OpenAI. Apple also says some Apple-issued devices or data were retained after employees left the company.

Apple’s broader theory is that information from its product and engineering work could have been relevant to OpenAI’s plans for consumer devices, including work associated with io Products, the hardware startup connected to former Apple design chief Jony Ive.

The expedited-discovery request is important because Apple says it does not yet know the full extent of the alleged access, retention, or use. The company is asking for documents and depositions to clarify who handled the information and whether it reached OpenAI or io.

How OpenAI has responded

OpenAI has rejected Apple’s account. Its public response described the allegations as false, “completely without merit,” and “careless, aggressive and oddly personal.” OpenAI says it does not have—and does not want—Apple’s trade secrets.

OpenAI has also argued that Apple’s description of the former employees’ conduct is inaccurate and that the requested injunction is unnecessary. In its legal response, the company defended Liu and Tan and asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit.

A central part of OpenAI’s defense concerns whether the information at issue qualifies as legally protected trade secrets and whether Apple adequately protected it. OpenAI has argued that Apple’s security and employee-offboarding practices weakened the case, while also maintaining that OpenAI did not need Apple’s confidential material for its own work.

What happens next

The immediate dispute is not yet about whether Apple ultimately wins the case. It is about whether the court should speed up discovery and impose restrictions before the underlying allegations are fully tested.

Apple says urgent action is needed to preserve evidence and prevent further use of information it considers confidential. OpenAI says the requests are based on false or overstated claims and would be unnecessary. The court’s decisions on discovery and preliminary relief will determine how quickly the parties must produce evidence and whether OpenAI’s hardware-related work faces interim restrictions.

For now, the most significant development is the escalation from a trade-secrets lawsuit into a fight over both evidence and the ability to continue developing products while the case is pending.