OpenAI Alleges Employee Who Rejoined Apple Took Unreleased Device Files

The OpenAI defendants in Apple Inc. v. Liu told a federal court on October 14, 2026 that a former OpenAI employee who returned to Apple after six months at OpenAI sent more than a hundred highly confidential files about at least one unreleased OpenAI device to his personal accounts. The defendants asked the court for a case management approach that would let OpenAI investigate the conduct and, if necessary, file and pursue counterclaims arising from it.

Defendants OpenAI Foundation, OpenAI Group PBC, io Products LLC, and Tang Yew Tan submitted the filing as a supplement to the parties’ October 1, 2026 joint case management statement in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, and it was entered on the public docket the same day. The supplement states that it is intended to alert the court to new facts relevant to the discussion of an appropriate case schedule at the October 14, 2026 case management conference.

What the Supplement Alleges

According to the filing, a recent and ongoing forensic investigation arising from the lawsuit revealed that the former employee, who joined OpenAI from Apple, worked at OpenAI for six months, and then returned to Apple, sent the files to his personal accounts. The filing describes the materials as including detailed images of the unreleased device or devices, highly confidential engineering and manufacturing data, supplier information and project files, standards for cosmetic finishes, and reports regarding the coating and sealing of hardware components.

Some of the files were sent just after midnight in Singapore on June 2, 2026, the former employee’s final day at OpenAI, according to the filing. OpenAI also states its understanding that the former employee made a presentation about OpenAI’s product plans to Apple’s senior leadership, including Apple’s vice president of operations in Asia, and that the presentation appears to have happened months ago. In a footnote, the filing asserts that Apple, armed with that information, is making a new push into AI-enabled products, citing Apple’s own October 2026 announcement of its Home Collection smart home accessories and press coverage describing an Apple product called HomeView.

OpenAI’s Concern and Its Request to the Court

In the supplement, the OpenAI defendants state they are “very concerned that its trade secret and confidential information is now circulating inside Apple, where Apple engineers can shape Apple’s upcoming products based on OpenAI’s confidential and innovative work.” OpenAI raised these issues directly with Apple, the filing says, and as of the filing Apple had not provided the assurances OpenAI requested: that Apple is not in possession of, and has not used, OpenAI’s trade secret and confidential information.

The defendants ask for the opportunity at the October 14, 2026 case management conference to discuss a case management approach that will allow OpenAI to investigate the conduct described and, if necessary, file and pursue counterclaims arising out of it.

The Underlying Lawsuit

Apple filed its complaint on July 10, 2026, alleging trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract against Chang Liu, OpenAI Foundation, OpenAI Group PBC, Tang Yew Tan, and io Products LLC, according to the case docket. The case was later reassigned to Judge Edward J. Davila in the court’s San Jose Division.

In the joint case management statement, Apple said it is bringing four claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act, the federal trade secrets statute, against Liu, Tan, OpenAI, and io Products, along with breach-of-contract claims against Liu and Tan for allegedly violating Apple’s Intellectual Property Agreements. Apple’s portion of the statement alleges the defendants misappropriated Apple trade secrets relating to hardware engineering and product design, manufacturing and industrial design, component technologies, testing, validation, and development methodologies, and Apple’s global supply chain, as OpenAI prepares to move into the consumer hardware business and launch its first hardware product.

The defendants’ portion of the statement says OpenAI is developing a new family of devices designed for the AI era, has no need or desire for Apple’s trade secrets, and developed its products independently, with safeguards intended to prevent employees, candidates, and suppliers from bringing another company’s confidential information into OpenAI. In an August 3, 2026 post responding to the suit, OpenAI said Apple’s request for a preliminary injunction was unnecessary because “we do not have, nor want, any of their trade secrets.”

The joint statement records that the defendants had not yet answered Apple’s complaint and reserved the right to bring counterclaims against Apple. The parties exchanged initial disclosures on September 24, 2026. Both sides have requested a jury trial and anticipate 10 to 15 trial days, and the defendants proposed being ready for trial by June 1, 2027, or, on a longer schedule, no later than October 2027.

Apple moved for a preliminary injunction on August 3, 2026, and for expedited discovery on August 4, 2026, and it sought leave to file a supplemental brief supporting the expedited discovery request on August 31, 2026. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint on August 5, 2026. After a September 14, 2026 status conference, the court continued the hearing on those motions and the initial case management conference to October 14, 2026. On October 13, 2026, Judge Davila granted the expedited discovery motion in part, denied it in part, and deferred ruling in part, and vacated the October 14 motion hearing. The case management conference remained on the calendar, and it is the session at which the OpenAI defendants now seek to raise their new allegations.