Jon Prosser Still Not Fully Cooperating in Apple's iOS 26 Trade Secrets Lawsuit - MacRumors
Skip to Content

Jon Prosser Still Not Fully Cooperating in Apple's iOS 26 Trade Secrets Lawsuit

A joint status report filed yesterday in Apple's trade secrets lawsuit against YouTuber Jon Prosser and Michael Ramacciotti shows Prosser is still failing to comply with discovery, prompting Apple to seek a court order to compel him.

Jon Prosser Rainbow
The latest filing, submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California yesterday, covers developments since the parties' last update in February 2026. It notes that Apple served Prosser with document and deposition subpoenas on February 3, and that while he has provided some responsive materials, he has failed to fully respond to certain requests and has not responded at all to others. Apple has extended his deadline multiple times and says it has still not received the limited discovery it needs to understand the full scope of what confidential information Prosser and Ramacciotti obtained and how they got it. Apple says it now intends to file a Motion for an Order to Show Cause in the Northern District of Ohio to force his compliance.

The filing also reveals that Prosser has indicated he is retaining counsel and intends to move to set aside the default judgment entered against him in October 2025, after he missed the court deadline to respond to Apple's complaint. At the time, Prosser told The Verge he had "been in active communications with Apple since the beginning stages of this case," a claim Apple subsequently disputed in court documents.

Apple filed the lawsuit in July 2025, accusing Prosser and Ramacciotti of misappropriating trade secrets by gaining unauthorized access to a development iPhone belonging to former Apple software engineer Ethan Lipnik. According to Apple's complaint, Ramacciotti accessed the device while Lipnik was away and showed Prosser the contents over FaceTime, revealing details about what was then called iOS 19 and later unveiled at WWDC 2025 as iOS 26. Prosser published videos on his YouTube channel showing recreated renderings of the software's Liquid Glass design months before Apple's announcement. Lipnik was terminated for failing to follow Apple's policies for securing development devices.

Ramacciotti's posture in the case stands in contrast to Prosser's. According to the filing, he has allowed Apple to forensically review an additional device, agreed to supplement his interrogatory responses, and offered to sit for a follow-up deposition once Apple completes its third-party discovery, including any deposition of Prosser. Apple and Ramacciotti have been informally discussing a potential settlement since at least October. Apple is seeking monetary damages and an injunction barring both defendants from further disclosing any of the company's confidential information.

The parties have scheduled a further status update with the court for June 10, 2026.

Related Roundups: iOS 26, iPadOS 26
Related Forum: iOS 26

Top Rated Comments

Apple_Robert Avatar
1 day ago at 07:00 am
Is anyone shocked by this news? The guy is a lying Youtube weasel. He deserves to lose everyhing he gained due to his bad behavior.
Score: 21 Votes (Like | Disagree)
PBG4 Dude Avatar
1 day ago at 07:42 am




Attachment Image
Score: 18 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Will Co Avatar
1 day ago at 07:00 am
So they ain't messing about, Mr Prosser. Better get your house in order, and smartly, it would seem.
Score: 18 Votes (Like | Disagree)
lepetitnicolas Avatar
1 day ago at 07:26 am


Attachment Image
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
FatLouie Avatar
1 day ago at 07:01 am
I had wondered what became of this mess. There are times when you simply must comply with legal requirements... and have a lawyer. I don't think Apple is going to let this one rest.
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
The_Gream Avatar
1 day ago at 07:59 am

Like him or not, Prosser is protected under the free press clause of the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Apple has to show he colluded with this source for unfair gain or bad faith. While the leaker is publicly known, they would have to prove he didn't additionally have another source they don't know about.

They will lose this lawsuit, and probably know it. The process itself is the punishment here, they are making an example so they can attempt to control future leaks. What is curious is they don't seem to care at all about Mark Gurman's highly accurate reporting, suggesting it is actually marketing.
Ah mate, might wanna reread the First Amendment; it clearly states that Congress shell not make any laws that prohibit… plus, your rights only go so far. Outside of due process (and fair treatment), once you (imho) infringe on someone else’s rights, your rights are gone.

What Prosser is doing is pretty much corporate espionage for personal gain, there is no ground for the First Amendment.
If this had been a case of whistleblowering coverage for bad behavior by Apple, that would be a totally different thing, but this is about ‘trade secrets’ which a company has a right to protect. Just like you have a right to protect yourself and your property.
Score: 13 Votes (Like | Disagree)