OpenAI Ordered to Hand Apple Hiring Records in Secrets Case

Apple has won an early round in its trade secrets fight with OpenAI. A federal judge has ordered OpenAI to quickly hand over hiring materials tied to interviews with former Apple employees. This gives the iPhone maker a first look at how OpenAI recruited for its hardware ambitions.

The ruling does not decide the case. But it shapes what Apple can see, and how soon, in a lawsuit it filed in July. The dispute centers on people who moved from Apple to OpenAI.

What the court ordered

U.S. District Judge Edward Davila agreed with Apple that some evidence should be produced on an expedited schedule. The order focuses on OpenAI's interviews with former Apple staff who applied to its consumer hardware and robotics groups. Those groups are working ahead of what is widely rumored to be OpenAI's first hardware device.

The documents Apple can now request include:

1. Interview materials. Checklists, guides, instructions, manuals and scripts used in the hiring process.
2. Technical presentations connected to those interviews.
3. Records of interview discussions that referenced Apple technology or components.

OpenAI has five days to turn over anything it has already collected. It has 14 days for the remaining materials covered by the request.

The judge also opened access to private messages sent on LINE, a messaging app, between individuals named in the case. Those include two OpenAI employees, Chang Liu and Alyssa Peng.

Three depositions approved

Davila approved depositions for Liu and Peng. A deposition is sworn, out-of-court testimony collected as evidence before a trial. A third person will also be questioned: Tang Yew Tan, OpenAI's chief hardware officer. All three previously worked at Apple.

Having a senior hardware executive in the deposition list is notable. It means the questioning will reach beyond individual engineers into the leadership of OpenAI's device effort.

What Apple did not get

Apple did not get everything it asked for. The judge rejected its request for fast-tracked access to OpenAI's research and development in specific areas, such as metal finishes and power management.

He also turned down several broader discovery requests. Discovery is the pretrial phase where each side can demand evidence from the other. The rejected requests covered OpenAI's hardware research in general and information about what former Apple employees built after joining OpenAI.

Those refusals are not final. The judge left room for Apple to narrow its requests and try again.

Apple's allegations

Apple's complaint describes what it calls a pattern of theft. It says former employees used Apple laptops to download confidential material. According to the lawsuit, that material included files on unannounced technologies, features and products. Apple says these covered technical specifications, engineering presentations and proprietary project data.

Apple also claims that former employees already at OpenAI coached others who were thinking about leaving Apple. That coaching allegedly included advice on which information to bring to their interviews. The lawsuit contains further allegations as well.

These are Apple's claims. The court has not ruled on whether they are true.

Why hardware raises the stakes

The background is OpenAI's push into consumer devices. The company is developing a hardware product that could one day compete with the iPhone, or with smartphones more broadly. That depends on whether an AI-first device becomes central to how people use software and services.

That puts the two companies on a possible collision course. Apple has spent years building the hardware and design talent that OpenAI now appears to be recruiting. Apple has also been adjusting its own platforms for the AI era, recently tightening macOS permissions over risks from AI agents.

Our Take

The judge's split decision is a sign of where the case may go. He let Apple examine the hiring process: the scripts, the interview notes, the private messages and the people involved. He has so far kept Apple away from OpenAI's wider hardware research. This suggests the court wants to test the specific recruiting allegations first, rather than give a rival broad visibility into OpenAI's product work.

For readers who follow the AI industry, the case points to a growing tension. AI labs are moving into physical products, and that means competing for the hardware engineers who used to work mainly at companies like Apple. Talent moving between rivals is normal in tech. But when the work involves unannounced devices, how companies interview and onboard new hires can become legal evidence.

The timing also matters for OpenAI. The company already faces scrutiny on several fronts, from questions about its revenue to concerns about its internal culture raised by a departing safety lead. A drawn-out legal fight over its hardware team adds another source of pressure as the device effort moves forward.

It is worth watching three things next. First, what the interview materials and LINE messages actually show once Apple reviews them. Second, whether the depositions, especially Tang Yew Tan's, widen the case. Third, whether Apple returns with narrower requests that the judge accepts. Any of these could shape whether the dispute moves toward trial or settlement, and whether it affects the timeline of OpenAI's first device. None of that is certain at this stage.