OpenAI Seeks to Block Apple's New Evidence in Trade Secret Suit

OpenAI and other defendants in Apple’s trade secret misappropriation lawsuit have filed a new request with the court, seeking to strike two expert declarations and disregard additional evidence recently submitted by Apple. The legal maneuver aims to limit the scope of materials presented during ongoing deliberations over an injunction.

Background on the Legal Dispute

Apple recently initiated legal proceedings alleging trade secret theft against OpenAI, io Products—owned by former executive Jony Ive—and former employees Chang Liu and Tang Tan. The tech giant accuses its ex-staffers of retaining or accessing confidential device-related information after leaving the company and utilizing it for OpenAI’s consumer hardware efforts.

Specific allegations indicate that Chang Liu reviewed sensitive engineering files post-departure from Apple. Furthermore, the complaint asserts that Tang Tan sought confidential data from Apple employees who were conducting job interviews. In response to these claims, Apple requested a preliminary injunction to prohibit OpenAI and the other defendants from accessing, using, disclosing, or requesting Apple’s confidential information and trade secrets.

According to Apple, this judicial order would prevent further contamination of its trade secrets into OpenAI’s device development processes while the case remains pending.

Apple Submits Extensive Expert Documentation

Last week, as part of the legal arguments supporting its injunction request, Apple filed a reply memorandum backed by five expert declarations totaling 126 pages, along with 13 additional documents. The experts cited include Daniel Ruffman, James Boley, Dr. Ayman Fayed, Dr. Paul Hatch, and Dr. Jud Rang.

In these filings, Apple argued that OpenAI’s objections failed to weaken its trade secret claims. The company pointed to supplementary evidence intended to bolster its accusations against Liu, Tan, OpenAI, and io Products. The expert statements detailed matters such as Apple’s security practices, forensic evidence from Liu’s devices, the value of energy management trade secrets, and the confidentiality of metal finishing operations—two primary categories under dispute in the litigation.

Defendants Challenge Procedural Fairness

OpenAI and the co-defendants responded by accusing Apple of abusing the reply memorandum process to introduce new evidence and expert opinions. They contend that much of this material could have been presented earlier, thereby depriving the defendants of a fair opportunity to respond.

The defense memo states: "Apple provided five new expert declarations totaling 126 pages, plus numerous new attachments... These declarations exceed the scope of Apple’s opening brief and the defendants’ response, and in any event, do not save Apple’s defective application."

The defendants further elaborate that Apple is attempting to reinforce its original request with new materials after reviewing their counter-arguments. They argue that Dr. Rang was retained as a completely new expert to enhance testimony previously offered by Apple, while Dr. Fayed provided opinions that could have been included beforehand.

Additionally, the defense notes that Mr. Boley relied on an investigation conducted only after Apple filed its initial request. They also claim that Mr. Ruffman presented evidence allegedly available to Apple prior to that filing, including some communications involving Liu.