The legal battle over the leaked iOS 26 videos has stalled, with evidence being presented. Apple informed the court that it has not heard from the opposing side since July 6th. Prosser's lawyer cites the birth of his client's second child as the reason.
The case has been ongoing since July 2025. Apple accuses YouTuber Jon Prosser and Michael Ramacciotti of gaining access to an Apple employee's development iPhone and leaking the Liquid Glass interface of iOS 26. After a default judgment and its subsequent reversal, the proceedings resumed in the summer – Prosser formally responded to the lawsuit in early July. A joint status report from both sides now shows that little has happened since then.
Key Facts at a Glance
- Apple and the opposing party submitted a joint status report to the court on August 5.
- Prosser handed over documents and was questioned on June 16th; after that, the exchange came to a standstill.
- According to Apple, his lawyer has not responded since July 6th, despite repeated inquiries.
- The opposing side cites the birth of Prosser's second child as the explanation.
- The next status report is scheduled for October 7th.
What the status report says
The report, signed by the lawyers of all three parties, is sobering. Both sides have advanced the case through limited evidence gathering: Prosser provided documents and communication records and was available for questioning on June 16, 2026 (via 9to5mac).
After that, contact ceased. Apple states that it last heard from Prosser's lawyer on July 6, despite repeated follow-up attempts. From Apple's perspective, gaps remain in the documents provided; the opposing party has been informed of this.
Shortly before the report was submitted, Prosser's lawyer stated that the delay might be related to the fact that his client had just given birth to a second child and was caring for the newborn. He wanted to find a time when further documents could be submitted.
The situation is different for the second defendant. Ramacciotti has agreed to supplement his written answers and testify a second time in September. This division of roles has been consistent throughout the entire proceedings: he has cooperated with Apple's requests from the very beginning.
The case over time
| Date | What happened |
|---|---|
| July 2025 | Apple files the lawsuit against Prosser and Ramacciotti |
| October 2025 | The court issues a default judgment against Prosser. |
| June 2026 | Both sides jointly request that the default judgment be set aside. |
| June 16, 2026 | Prosser is questioned and hands over documents. |
| June 22, 2026 | The court overturns the default judgment. |
| July 6, 2026 | Last contact between Apple's lawyers and the opposing side |
| August 5, 2026 | Joint status report documents the standstill |
| October 7, 2026 | Next status report scheduled |
The overturned default judgment was the decisive turning point. Without this step, Prosser would have been unable to substantively refute Apple's allegations – the overturning of the judgment was a prerequisite for any evidentiary hearing to take place. Both sides had jointly requested it, arguing that this was the most efficient way forward.
Why this procedural step carries so much weight in the USA
The taking of evidence, called discovery in US law, functions fundamentally differently than in German civil proceedings. In the US, the parties must disclose extensive documents to each other before the trial – including documents that could harm their own position. This is supplemented by sworn testimony outside the courtroom.
In German civil procedure, there is no comparable obligation. Anyone bringing a lawsuit must prove their claims themselves; investigating the opposing party is not permitted. Therefore, from a German perspective, a case like this appears unusually detailed – every pleading, every deadline, and every missed call is recorded in a publicly accessible file.
This also explains why a month of radio silence even becomes a matter of record. A joint status report is not an attack, but a legal obligation – both sides must describe the current situation, even if it is inconvenient.
What the standstill means for the process
The report reveals no escalation. Apple acknowledges the delay, identifies the gaps in the documentation, and refrains from proposing any sanctions to the court. The opposing party's statement is also reproduced without comment. For a case that has already resulted in a default judgment, this is a restrained tone.
The real test comes in October. By then, Prosser's side must submit the outstanding documents; otherwise, the next status report will contain the same finding – for the second time. Experience shows that a court that has already been accommodating to one party will be less patient the second time around.
For Apple, this case has significance beyond the individual incident. The company is clearly pursuing it to demonstrate that it is actively investigating leaks originating from within its own ranks. A case that fizzles out without a resolution is hardly conducive to this – and that likely explains why Apple is documenting the standstill instead of simply waiting it out. The interface at issue has already been released and its transparency can now even be adjusted. The joint status report is filed in case 452973 in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California. (Image: Apfelpatient)
- macOS Tahoe 26.6.1 closes a gap in screen sharing
- GPT-5.6 Sol: ChatGPT removes the limit in the free plan
- Apple Vision Pro reduces surgery time by 19 percent
