OpenAI wants to definitively put an end to its lawsuit against Apple over theft of trade secrets

Between Cupertino and San Francisco, the summer of 2026 will be fought through legal briefs. Since July 10, Apple has been pursuing two of its former executives, Chang Liu and Tang Tan, as well as OpenAI and io Products, the company co-founded by Jony Ive, for misappropriation of trade secrets.trade secrets.This week, the defendants filed their final written salvo: a motion to dismiss "with prejudice", the American formula that definitively closes the door, the equivalent of a lost match with no possibility of a rematch.

A definitive dismissal, nothing less: what OpenAI is seeking

Apple's case alleges that its two former executives took or accessed confidential information after they left. They would also have coached future recruits to circumvent in-house security systems when leaving with documents. The company is simultaneously seeking a preliminary injunction, in order to freeze any use of the disputed information during the proceedings, and an expedited discovery phase to gauge the scope of the alleged misappropriation.

The defendants' response comes down to one line of attack, hammered home since August: Apple would never have completed the chain required by the federal trade secrets law. Precisely identifying the secret, demonstrating that it merits protection, proving the act of misappropriation by each defendant: according to the new brief, none of the three links holds, and the famed secrets remain "vague and catch-all categories". The sharpest jab targets the other side: "legal characterization cannot substitute for missing facts".

OpenAI above all accuses Apple of asking the court to guess.A candidate asked to provide “evidence” would become an alleged recipient of confidential information, a download before the interview would turn into disclosure during the interview, and a simple question about an Apple project would amount to the transmission of secrets. Procedural rules allow reasonable inferences; as the brief notes, they prohibit “speculation taking the place of the missing act of misappropriation”.

Apple had nevertheless counterattacked in mid-August, stating that its complaint identifies specific secrets and specific acts, and accusing the defendants of inventing innocent explanations for facts it never alleged. Two examples add fuel to this tug-of-war: Tang Tan allegedly kept an internal onboarding document to help future hires comply with Apple’s security rules, the defense argues. Chang Liu, meanwhile, allegedly accessed information because former colleagues were asking him for help.

A déjà vu for Apple, and a tight schedule

The Cupertino company knows the drill, having been through it before. In 2022, it sued the fledgling Rivos, accusing it of poaching around forty engineers who left with gigabytes of chip schematics. A judge initially dismissed some of the claims against the company itself before Apple strengthened its complaint. The case ended in early 2024 with a settlement, accompanied by a review of Rivos’s systems to purge confidential data from them. A complaint against Gerard Williams, the former A and M chip architect, had meanwhile been quietly withdrawn in 2023.

The filings are now closed: the motion, opposition, and reply are all in the file ahead of the October 1 hearing. If the judge sides with OpenAI, the case dies without a trial, with no possibility of revival; if the judge sides with Apple, the judicial machinery shifts into high gear, with expedited discovery and injunctive relief front and center, and Jony Ive’s hardware prototypes in the background.

👉🏻 Follow the latest tech news in real time: add 01net to your Google sources and subscribe to our WhatsApp channel.

Source: 9to5mac