OpenAI has filed a direct response to Apple’s latest forensic evidence in their trade secret lawsuit, arguing that the dispute is fundamentally “a mess of Apple’s own making” and that Apple cannot use its own internal failures to prosecute departing employees for moving to a competitor. In a federal court filing submitted to U.S. District Court in San Jose on August 31, OpenAI pushed back against Apple’s allegations that former Apple VP of product design Tang Tan and former senior electrical engineer Chang Liu orchestrated a scheme to steal confidential hardware information, contending instead that Apple has failed to demonstrate that any trade secrets were actually stolen.
Apple’s Evidence and OpenAI’s Counterargument
Apple’s case hinges on forensic analysis of a MacBook that Liu retained after departing to OpenAI in January 2026. According to Apple’s latest submission, Liu downloaded circuit schematics from Apple in March 2026, two months after leaving the company, and used the schematics to run a simulation via electrical engineering software LTspice, then messaged colleagues describing the work as related to power conversion development.
OpenAI’s response challenges Apple’s characterization of these actions as criminal misappropriation. The company argues that Liu kept the Apple-issued MacBook only to help former colleagues retrieve files or answer technical questions, and that Apple employees repeatedly contacted Liu for support after his departure. Similarly, OpenAI states that Tan returned his Apple prototypes before leaving and retained only non-confidential materials, including a standard departure checklist.
Three Failures in Apple’s Offboarding Practices
OpenAI’s core defense rests on three specific criticisms of Apple’s internal procedures:
- Personal iCloud accounts for work: Apple encourages staff to use personal iCloud accounts to access company documents, blurring the boundary between personal and company data after an employee departs.
- Rushed device return: Apple’s practice of immediately escorting departing employees off-site leaves insufficient time for workers to return devices or transfer files back to the company.
- Post-departure contact: Former team members at Apple repeatedly contact departed employees for assistance, creating an expectation of ongoing access and support.
OpenAI characterized the departures as employees choosing to leave a company it says has been slow to adopt AI for a faster-moving competitor, arguing in court filings that “Apple may not like those choices. But it cannot claim those choices are unlawful, and it cannot use its own sloppy procedures to blame others for its own mess.”
The Broader Talent Migration
The lawsuit sits within a larger pattern of engineering talent movement. OpenAI has hired approximately 400 former Apple employees for its hardware projects, which are being led by Jony Ive, Apple’s former chief design officer. Tan, who spent 24 years at Apple leading iPhone and Apple Watch design, departed in February 2024 to work with Ive before joining OpenAI’s hardware operation.
What Happens Next
Judge Edward J, davila is scheduled to hear arguments in the case on October 1, 2026. The hearing will likely determine whether Apple’s evidence of downloaded schematics and simulation work constitutes actionable trade secret theft or whether OpenAI’s defense, that Apple’s own internal failures created the conditions for this outcome, carries legal weight. The case touches on a fundamental tension in California’s tech labor market: the collision between strict trade secret protections and California’s longstanding restrictions on non-compete clauses that allow worker mobility between competitors. How Davila rules could signal whether major tech employers can effectively constrain departing employees’ access to information, or whether California’s default stance toward free agency will continue to prevail in court. OpenAI’s defense will test that boundary when arguments resume in October.
