A single Apple complaint is casting a shadow over OpenAI’s hardware plans and its IPO

Apple’s trade-secret lawsuit against OpenAI is reverberating through the IPO schedule that OpenAI had originally hoped to finalize as early as the end of this year, as well as the valuation negotiations. The legal and reputational uncertainty added by the litigation is making underwriters and investors take a more cautious approach, and it is also casting a shadow over OpenAI’s plan to unveil its first hardware product.
(Background: Apple accuses OpenAI of poaching talent and stealing secrets—bringing interview handoff design files, not returning laptops after leaving, downloading thousands of pages of files..)
(Additional background: Apple goes to war with OpenAI: 400 employees walk out to fight an AI hardware battle)

Table of contents

Toggle

• From parts to exit checks
• The lawsuit hits the $1 trillion floor
• Hardware is being wagered too

On July 10, Apple filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and its acquired company io in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging matters involving “Tang Tan,” a hardware executive long at issue, internal training materials teaching people how to evade exit security checks, and hiring processes involving more than 400 former Apple employees. These details of the lawsuits have already been reported by others; what this article wants to discuss is something else: whether this lawsuit will directly slow down OpenAI’s move toward going public, and even undermine the trust foundation investors have in the whole company—because on the eve of an IPO, the last thing anyone wants is a lawsuit that cannot be explained.

From parts to exit checks

The complaint alleges that improper conduct extended all the way to OpenAI’s hardware executive “Tang Tan.” The senior executive, who spent 24 years at Apple and previously led product design for iPhone and Apple Watch, is accused of instructing Apple employees being interviewed by OpenAI to bring the actual parts, CAD design files, and prototype units to the interview site for demonstration—effectively laying out products that haven’t launched yet on the rival’s table.

The complaint also discloses that OpenAI taught departing employees to evade Apple’s security check procedures. An internal document—allegedly circulated specifically to teach people how to get around “exit checks”—had been making the rounds within the company. Chang Liu, a former senior Apple systems electrical engineer, even allegedly sent messages saying he could still access the company’s storage space, calling it “too funny.” Currently, more than 400 Apple employees work at OpenAI, and the complaint says this is not a coincidence: it claims the hiring process itself was treated as a mechanism for extracting confidential information. In other words, Apple believes poaching itself is one of the ways of stealing secrets, not just a simple matter of talent mobility.

io (founded by Jony Ive, acquired by OpenAI in 2025) is also accused of misusing Apple’s metal surface treatment technology, and of using Apple’s internal terminology and information about proprietary batteries and power component details to contact suppliers. Apple says it reached out to OpenAI as early as February this year but received no response, and only then filed the lawsuit formally on July 10.

In a statement, OpenAI said it has no interest in other companies’ trade secrets and continues to focus on building technology that empowers everyone. In its further response on July 14, OpenAI said it takes these allegations seriously, but found no evidence indicating that the complaint is supported, and emphasized its belief in fair competition and people’s freedom to choose where to work.

Whether these allegations will ultimately hold up in court is not yet determined, but the lawsuit itself has already begun to influence outsiders’ perceptions of OpenAI.

The lawsuit hits the $1 trillion floor

OpenAI had originally been reported to be aiming to go public as quickly as possible by the end of 2026. Sam Altman once set September of this year as a target for going public. In late June, overseas media reported that the IPO advisers presented Altman with two options: accept a lower valuation and go public before the end of the year; or insist on the $1 trillion target and wait until 2027 to go public. Altman’s stance was very clear— a valuation below $1 trillion is a “nonstarter.” Put simply, it’s not up for discussion, and as a result, the company leaned toward pushing the IPO to 2027.

OpenAI’s most recent round of private-market valuation was $852 billion as of March 2026. The $1 trillion target is about 17% higher than that—meaning it would need to climb close to another 20% within a year. In other words, OpenAI would need to boost its valuation by nearly 20% again within six months to meet the floor that Altman himself set, and this trade-secret lawsuit has flared up right at the time when it is most needed to persuade investors.

On the other hand, OpenAI’s second-largest shareholder, SoftBank, borrowed a $40 billion bridge loan to fulfill its investment commitment, which matures on March 25, 2027. A bridge loan, simply put, is borrowing money to bridge/turn things over first, and then repaying it once the company goes public and obtains cash. This debt therefore became an invisible countdown timer tied to OpenAI’s IPO timeline.

After the lawsuit was revealed, Kalshi data—the prediction market—showed that the probability of “OpenAI completing an IPO before the end of 2026” fell from 22% to 18.5%; the probability of “formally announcing an IPO before March 2027” landed at 59%, below 73% before the lawsuit. The numbers are not a sudden plunge, but the direction is consistent—both have been marked down.

Hardware is being wagered too

What’s being dragged down is not only valuation, but also OpenAI’s hardware product, which aims to break through. Reports say OpenAI still plans to present the product this year and ship it in 2027. The device, codenamed “Gumdrop,” is a screenless, audio-first unit designed by Jony Ive’s team, and it will be produced by Foxconn in Vietnam or the United States. But the complaint points directly to io’s alleged misuse of Apple’s metal surface treatment technology. If the lawsuit forces the team to redesign the appearance and the manufacturing process, the product could be delayed—along with affecting investors’ confidence in OpenAI’s hardware narrative.

Hardware matters because it is a key bargaining chip OpenAI uses to convince the market it’s “not just a chatbot company.” Once the hardware timeline changes, the most “sexy” part of the valuation narrative could loosen as well, and the premium investors were previously willing to pay would lose its footing.