OpenAI’s recent motion to dismiss Apple’s trade secrets lawsuit—along with the supporting documents it filed—offers a clear look at its legal strategy. Rather than directly contesting whether former Apple employees at OpenAI accessed specific information, the AI firm is shifting the focus to Apple’s own security measures and offboarding procedures, arguing that these practices weaken the claim that the data qualifies as protected “trade secrets.”

Apple’s original complaint, filed in July, alleges that OpenAI orchestrated a scheme to obtain confidential hardware details from former Apple engineers. This week, Apple also requested expedited discovery, stating that its internal review suggests additional ex-employees may have been involved in or witnessed the alleged misappropriation. In response, OpenAI’s filing contends that Apple allowed staff to use personal iCloud accounts for work-related matters and failed to revoke access after departures. The company submitted text message evidence showing that an Apple manager stayed logged into the personal iCloud account of Chang Liu—a defendant and former Apple engineer—after he left, using it to transfer files and later asking him for technical assistance on Apple projects.

OpenAI further criticizes Apple for leaving out the consequences of its own “inexplicable information-management practices” from the lawsuit. It argues that Apple failed to secure its systems when employees left, leading to confusion and unintended access that Apple now labels as theft. While this might resemble a “the door was unlocked, so it wasn’t really stealing” defense, the argument is designed to support the idea that former Apple employees were merely helping their old colleagues. It also bolsters the claim that the information in question wasn’t truly a trade secret if it wasn’t safeguarded as one. OpenAI also asserts that Apple has not pinpointed which specific trade secrets or confidential parts were allegedly taken, instead referring to broad categories like component manufacturing, product testing, vendor and supplier relationships, and distribution channels.

The filing suggests that Apple’s real motive is to slow down a competitor’s progress in AI-powered hardware rather than advancing its own product roadmap. “OpenAI has no use, need or desire for Apple’s trade secrets,” the motion states, adding that the company is building something entirely new and distinct from anything at Apple. It acknowledges that OpenAI is actively hiring top engineers, inventors, and creators—many of whom chose to leave Apple—and frames this as part of the appeal of its innovative work. “Apple might not like that,” the filing reads, “but Apple should not be permitted to use a baseless and pretextual lawsuit to make up for its shortcomings in the market for talent and retaining its employees, and its failures to integrate AI into its products.”