Update, April 15, 2:41 pm ET: Jon Prosser posted a separate status report. Details below.
In a joint status report, Apple’s attorneys and Michael Ramacciotti updated the court on the latest developments in the trade secret case over the leak of design information for iOS 26. Here’s what’s new about the case.
Case review
Last February, Apple and Ramacciotti sent a joint status report to the US District Court for the Northern District of California informing Judge James Donato that they continued to exchange limited access as Apple worked to find out the scope of what Ramacciotti was able to collect by accessing the iPhone of the former developer.
At the time, they also informed the court that they expect to “file another update with the Court on April 13, 2026.” That happened yesterday, the update brings new information about the latest developments in the case.
When it comes to Ramacciotti, the parties informed the court that they “continue to proceed with this case with limited availability. Apple has legally reviewed the additional tool that Mr. Ramacciotti provided to Apple.”
The document also informed the court that “Mr. Ramacciotti agreed to supplement his answers to the questions and promised to stay for follow-up once Apple has completed the limited third-party discovery, including any deposition of Mr. Prosser.”
Prosser review
As for Jon Prosser, things seem less straightforward. Last October, the court accepted Apple’s request to file a default judgment against him after he missed the deadline to respond to the complaint, losing his right to formally challenge the allegations in the case.
At the time, Prosser said he “has been in contact with Apple since the early stages of this case”, adding that “[t]the idea that I ignore the case is wrong.”
In a joint status report in February, Apple confirmed that despite the court’s default judgment against Prosser, “he acknowledged receipt of the document and subpoenas, and Apple (was) working with him to set up a date for his indictment.”
In a new joint statement, Apple says:
“The parties decided on limited access to the defaulting Defendant Jon Prosser and others. Apple sent copies of the favor to Mr. Prosser on January 30, 2026, and served subpoenas to Mr. Prosser on February 3, 2026. Although Mr. Prosser has provided other materials to respond, he has also failed to fully respond to Apple and denies it. Apple has extended the deadline for him to respond several times, but has yet to receive limited discovery seeking to understand more about what Apple’s confidential information and trade secrets are.
Again
“The parties have decided on limited access to third parties. As part of this discovery, Apple served Mr. Prosser with a document and subpoenas. Mr. Prosser has provided certain response materials and indicated that there are other response materials available. But he has failed to respond fully, or respond at all, to certain requests. Apple has likewise worked to coordinate Mr. Prosser’s filing date in full thereafter. Therefore Apple intends to apply for an order to show cause in ND Ohio.
In other words, the report says, despite showing that there are other things, Prosser has complied with Apple’s complaints, and that he is hiring a lawyer while he plans to ask the court to set aside what is wrong with him. (A court filing filed today appears to indicate that Prosser has officially retained legal counsel, though that document has not been made public.)
Apple also says it plans to file a motion in federal court in Ohio seeking an order for Prosser to show cause why he has not fully complied with Apple’s subpoenas, despite multiple extensions of the deadline.
Update, April 15, 2:41 pm ET: Following Apple and Ramacciotti’s April 13 joint status report on the latest developments in the case, Jon Prosser’s attorney filed a separate status report in the US District Court for the Northern District of California.
The report confirms that Prosser retained a lawyer on April 13 “waiting for the case to be issued,” and that his lawyer has asked Apple to agree to postpone the suspension “to avoid the time and expense of making that decision before the Court,” as it responded to subpoenas after non-payment.
Additionally, Prosser’s attorney says he was not notified and was not invited to participate in Apple’s joint status report with Ramacciotti, and that Prosser plans to argue that his reporting is protected by the First Amendment.
It’s worth checking out on Amazon
FTC: We use auto affiliate links to earn income. More.
