Analysis
A federal judge has ordered OpenAI to turn over hiring and interview records for former Apple employees as part of Apple's trade-secrets lawsuit, filed in July 2026, against the company, TechCrunch reported. Apple alleges a "pattern of theft," claiming former Apple employees who now work at OpenAI downloaded confidential material, including specifications for unannounced technologies and products, onto Apple-owned laptops before leaving, and that OpenAI employees coached prospective hires on what information to bring to their interviews.
What did the judge actually order?
U.S. District Judge Edward Davila ordered OpenAI to produce records from its interviews with former Apple employees who applied for roles in its consumer hardware and robotics groups, including interview checklists, guides and scripts, plus any technical presentations or records showing interview discussions referenced Apple technology. OpenAI has five days to turn over materials it has already collected and 14 days for everything else. Davila also granted Apple access to private LINE messages between named OpenAI employees Chang Liu and Alyssa Peng, and approved depositions of Liu, Peng and OpenAI's chief hardware officer, Tang Yew Tan -- all three former Apple employees.
“That denial isn't final; the judge left Apple room to narrow its requests and refile.”
The ruling wasn't a clean sweep for Apple. Davila denied the company's request for expedited access to specific areas of OpenAI's hardware research, such as metal finishes and power management, and denied a broader request for information about what the three ex-Apple employees created while at OpenAI. That denial isn't final; the judge left Apple room to narrow its requests and refile.
Why this matters beyond the courtroom
OpenAI has been building toward a consumer hardware device since its roughly $6.5 billion acquisition of Jony Ive's design studio, io, and this lawsuit is the clearest sign yet that Apple sees that device as a potential threat to the iPhone, not just a side project. Apple's theory of the case rests less on what OpenAI's hardware actually looks like and more on how specific former employees got hired -- which is exactly the kind of process-based evidence the hiring records are meant to surface. If those records show a pattern of interviewers steering candidates toward disclosing Apple-specific technical details, Apple has a far stronger case than if it has to prove trade-secret misuse in the finished product itself.