Apple Subpoena Compliance Issue in iOS 26 Leak Case
▼ Summary
– Apple and defendant Michael Ramacciotti are progressing through limited discovery, with Apple forensically reviewing an additional device he provided.
– Ramacciotti has agreed to supplement his interrogatory responses and sit for a follow-up deposition after Apple completes its third-party discovery.
– A default judgment was entered against Jon Prosser for missing a deadline, but he has partially complied with subpoenas and indicates he will seek to have it set aside.
– Apple plans to file a motion in Ohio court to compel Prosser’s full compliance with subpoenas, despite granting him multiple deadline extensions.
– In a separate filing, Prosser’s new attorney states Prosser will argue his reporting is protected by the First Amendment and has requested Apple agree to undo the default.
The ongoing legal dispute between Apple and individuals accused of leaking details about the unreleased iOS 26 operating system has entered a new phase, with a recent court filing highlighting a significant compliance issue. In a joint status report submitted to a federal court in California, Apple detailed its progress in the trade secrets lawsuit, revealing that one defendant has cooperated while another has not fully complied with legal demands.
The case centers on Michael Ramacciotti, who allegedly accessed a former Apple engineer’s iPhone to gather confidential information. According to the latest report, the parties have continued with limited discovery. Apple has forensically reviewed an additional device provided by Ramacciotti, who has also agreed to supplement his interrogatory responses and sit for another deposition after Apple completes its third-party discovery.
The situation involving tech commentator Jon Prosser is more complex. A default judgment was entered against Prosser last year after he missed a deadline to answer Apple’s complaint. Despite this, Apple stated in a February report that it was working with Prosser to coordinate a deposition after he acknowledged receiving subpoenas. The new April 13 report, however, paints a different picture. Apple asserts that while Prosser was served with document and deposition subpoenas in late January and early February, he has only provided some responsive materials. The company notes he has failed to fully comply with requests, indicating he is retaining counsel and intends to move to set aside the default judgment.
Apple further stated it has extended deadlines multiple times but has not received the discovery it seeks to understand the full scope of the confidential information and trade secrets involved. Consequently, Apple plans to file a Motion for an Order to Show Cause in a federal court in Ohio, seeking to compel Prosser’s full compliance.
In a separate filing submitted on April 15, an attorney for Jon Prosser confirmed his client retained legal counsel on April 13. The filing states Prosser’s lawyer has asked Apple to agree to undo the default judgment to avoid a formal court motion, arguing that Prosser has responded to subpoenas since the default was entered. The attorney also noted he was not informed of or invited to participate in the joint status report filed by Apple and Ramacciotti. Furthermore, the filing indicates Prosser plans to argue that his reporting on the matter is protected by the First Amendment.
(Source: 9to5Mac)
