Judge grants Apple expedited discovery of OpenAI hiring records; vacates Oct 14 discovery hearing

U.S. District Judge Edward J. Davila on October 13, 2026, granted in part Apple’s motion for expedited discovery in its trade-secrets suit against former employees Chang Liu and Tang Yew Tan, OpenAI Foundation, OpenAI Group PBC, and io Products, according to the court’s order and reporting by 9to5Mac (Marcus Mendes, October 13, 2026) and TechCrunch.

The case is Apple Inc. v. Liu et al., Case No. 5:26-cv-07078-EJD (N.D. Cal., San Jose). Finding the discovery motion suitable for disposition without oral argument under Local Rule 7-1(b), the court also vacated the October 14, 2026 hearing that had been set for argument on that motion. This order addresses expedited discovery only — it is not a ruling on Apple’s pending preliminary-injunction request.

What Apple gets early

Within 14 days of the order — or five days for materials defendants have already collected — defendants must produce, among other items:

• All forensic images defendants have already collected in connection with Apple’s claims, including those examined or relied on by OpenAI’s forensic expert
• Documents used to guide or conduct interviews of Apple candidates for OpenAI’s Consumer Hardware Products Group (including its robotics group), such as checklists, guides, instructions, manuals, and scripts, plus Technical Deep Dive or other technical presentations that summarize interview content or reference Apple technology or parts
• All LINE conversations between Liu and Yu-Ting “Alyssa” Peng since January 1, 2026, including messages cited in prior filings

The court also authorized Apple to depose Liu, Tan, and Peng, plus Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representatives from OpenAI and io Products on at least one approved topic. Those depositions are to occur within 30 days after Apple receives the responses permitted by the order.

What was denied or deferred

Expedited access to OpenAI research and development on metal finishes, power management, and battery functionality for consumer hardware was denied. Those topics go to ordinary merits discovery.

Requests and deposition topics that use the term “Apple Originated Information” were deferred as “amorphous as currently defined.” If Apple wants another crack, it must confer with defendants and submit a narrower definition within five days of the order.

The court also declined Apple’s request to treat the expedited depositions as outside the usual Federal Rule 30 deposition limits, saying it can revisit exceeding those limits later if needed.

Case context

Apple has alleged that Liu and Tan improperly accessed or used confidential Apple information in ways that allegedly aided OpenAI’s consumer-hardware efforts, and that recruitment interviews of Apple employees improperly surfaced Apple technology. Defendants have disputed those claims. Earlier in the case, OpenAI and co-defendants asked the court to strike or disregard new expert declarations Apple filed with its preliminary-injunction reply.

What this does not decide

• Whether Apple is entitled to a preliminary injunction
• Whether trade-secret misappropriation occurred
• Whether Apple’s broader “Apple Originated Information” requests will later be allowed in narrowed form

Sources: Court order — Granting Limited Expedited Discovery (filed Oct. 13, 2026); 9to5Mac — Marcus Mendes (October 13, 2026, ~1:45 p.m. PT); TechCrunch — Sarah Perez (October 13, 2026).