**
In a significant development in the Apple lawsuit against Jon Prosser over iOS 26 leaks, Apple’s legal team has filed for a default judgment after Prosser failed to respond to the complaint. The case, which also involves Michael Ramacciotti, centers on alleged theft of trade secrets related to Apple’s upcoming operating system, including the Liquid Glass design revealed months before its official announcement.
Background of the Apple vs. Prosser Legal Battle
Apple initiated the lawsuit in July, accusing Prosser and Ramacciotti of coordinating to access a former Apple engineer’s development iPhone. The goal was allegedly to profit from confidential details about what was then referred to as iOS 19, later named iOS 26. Prosser shared these leaks on his YouTube channel, Front Page Tech, disclosing features like the translucent Liquid Glass interface well ahead of Apple’s WWDC 2025 unveiling. This case highlights Apple’s aggressive stance on protecting intellectual property, a recurring theme for the tech giant. For broader context, see our related analysis on Apple’s legal history.
Recent Court Developments and Deadlines
This week brought key updates from court filings. On Tuesday, Ramacciotti’s deadline to respond to the complaint was extended to October 17, as he retained legal counsel after missing the initial August 14 deadline. This suggests he is preparing a defense, unlike Prosser. On Friday, Apple’s lawyers noted Prosser’s lack of response and filed for a default judgment, which could lead to a ruling in Apple’s favor without a trial. Documents from the case, such as the initial complaint, outline Apple’s claims in detail.
- Ramacciotti’s extension: New response deadline of October 17, 2025.
- Prosser’s default request: Filed due to no response or appearance in court.
- Potential outcomes: Judge may grant Apple’s request for damages and an injunction.
Apple’s Demands and Legal Strategy
In its filing, Apple is seeking monetary damages and an injunction to prevent further disclosure of confidential information. This move aims to curb leaks that could harm Apple Inc.‘s competitive edge, especially with iOS 26 features like Liquid Glass. The company’s legal strategy emphasizes the seriousness of trade secret theft, aligning with its history of safeguarding innovations. For more on how Apple handles such cases, check our additional coverage on trade secret litigation.
Impact on Jon Prosser and Ongoing Activities
Despite the lawsuit, Prosser has continued uploading content, including an iPhone Air review this week. This raises questions about his approach to the legal battle, as ignoring a complaint can strengthen Apple’s case for a default judgment. If granted, Prosser could face significant financial penalties and restrictions on his reporting. The case docket shows ongoing activity, with further hearings likely.
Broader Implications for Tech Leaks and Journalism
This case underscores the tension between tech companies and leakers in the digital age. While leaks generate buzz, they can lead to legal repercussions, as seen here with Apple’s firm response. It also touches on ethical issues in tech journalism, where sources like Prosser operate in a gray area. For insights into similar cases, refer to our analysis on legal risks for leakers.
What to Expect Next in the Case
With Ramacciotti’s response due in October and Apple’s default judgment request pending, the court’s decisions will shape the outcome. If the judge rules in Apple’s favor, it could set a precedent for future leak-related lawsuits. Stakeholders should monitor filings like the latest motion for default judgment for updates. This case is part of a larger pattern, as detailed in our coverage of IP trends.
