Apple, Jon Prosser, and Michael Ramacciotti are trading claims about who is behind the mounting delays in Apple’s trade secret lawsuit, according to a status report filed jointly in late September 2026 in San Francisco federal court. The case, which centers on leaks tied to Apple’s iOS development, has reached an impasse over missing documents, additional deposition demands, and whether the key trade secrets even still qualify as such.
Origins of the Case
The lawsuit began in July 2025, not long after Apple unveiled iOS 26. The company accused Prosser of publishing videos that revealed internal iOS features — including the so-called “Liquid Glass” visual overhaul — and alleged that Ramacciotti had improperly accessed a developer’s device, later showing off unreleased features to Prosser. The latter was allegedly terminated over this access. Prosser initially missed Apple’s deadline to respond to the complaint, prompting a default, but that was later overturned so he could properly contest the allegations. Ramacciotti responded to the complaint and has participated in discovery continuously.
The Bone of Contention: Discovery Disputes
In the joint status report to Judge James Donato, Apple insists that it has been waiting over three months for Prosser to hand over critical documents — including revenue reports for his YouTube channels, relevant communications with third parties, and analytics — that it requested following his deposition. Apple also wants Ramacciotti to update his earlier interrogatory responses and undergo a second deposition to resolve what it sees as inconsistencies between his testimony and Prosser’s.
Ramacciotti has pushed back, stating he is ready to be deposed again — but only after Apple delivers a clear “roadmap to resolution” of what additional information it still requires. He’s also asking the court to set a status conference later in October, to force Apple to either clarify its remaining claims against him or move toward dismissing them or going to trial. Meanwhile, Prosser argues Apple’s requests are no longer valid, claiming that the trade secrets alleged are now public, following Apple’s official release of iOS 26, which includes the Liquid Glass design elements. He maintains he has fulfilled his discovery obligations, and views Apple’s demands for further documents as excessive.
If the court declines Ramacciotti’s request for a conference this month, the parties have proposed filing another joint status update on December 2. Either way, this fight over discovery and status-setting reflects deepening tensions in a lawsuit that began over leaked features but now hinges on whether those features can still be shielded under trade secret law.
While Apple insists discovery must continue — with more depositions and document turnovers — Prosser claims many of those materials are moot. Ramacciotti wants clarity, not endless back-and-forth. As the schedule stretches, the court’s forthcoming decisions will determine whether the case moves forward to trial or potentially collapses on procedural or substantive grounds.
What this means: This case isn’t just about leaks — it highlights vital debates in trade secret law. Once a company reveals allegedly secret material (through official release or otherwise), those claims are vulnerable. Timely, transparent discovery schedules are arguably more crucial than ever. As Apple pushes for the fullest set of documents and testimony, Prosser and Ramacciotti push back, saying legal protections like trade secret status and fairness demand limits. The upcoming status conference—or court ruling rejecting it—will likely show how aggressively trade secret claims will survive in this era of rapid leaks and software rollouts.
