{"id":68063,"date":"2026-05-15T23:19:51","date_gmt":"2026-05-15T21:19:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.apfelpatient.de\/?p=68063"},"modified":"2026-05-15T23:20:34","modified_gmt":"2026-05-15T21:20:34","slug":"court-draws-federighi-into-xai-lawsuit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.apfelpatient.de\/en\/news\/gericht-zieht-federighi-in-xai-klage-hinein","title":{"rendered":"Court draws Federighi into xAI lawsuit \u2013 Cook remains uninvolved"},"content":{"rendered":"

In Elon Musk's xAI antitrust lawsuit against Apple and OpenAI, a US court has ordered Craig Federighi to be appointed as a document custodian. Tim Cook, however, remains excluded. This shifts the focus of the lawsuit directly to Apple's top software executives for the first time.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The lawsuit filed by xAI against Apple and OpenAI has been ongoing since summer 2025 and centers on the integration of ChatGPT into Siri and whether Apple's ranking practices in the App Store disadvantage competing chatbots. With the new order from US Magistrate Judge Hal R. Ray Jr., the case takes on a dimension that goes beyond the previous pleadings: Apple must submit internal documents from Federighi's archives by June 17, 2026. It had already become clear in recent months that the lawsuit extends far beyond App Store rankings and touches upon the fundamental question of the Apple-OpenAI partnership<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What a Document Custodian means in US legal proceedings<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In US discovery proceedings, a custodian is a person whose emails, files, and other relevant documents must be systematically examined for the purpose of gathering evidence. Those assigned this role are not necessarily suspects, but become a key source of information. xAI had requested that both Tim Cook and Craig Federighi be designated as custodians, arguing that both had made \"high-level strategic decisions regarding the Apple-OpenAI agreement.\"<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why the dish differs between Cook and Federighi<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Judge Ray split the motion in two. He found the requirements for Federighi to be met because, as Senior Vice President of Software Engineering, Federighi likely possessed unique evidence regarding the integration of OpenAI into Apple Intelligence and could be considered a key decision-maker in Apple's software development. However, he found that xAI lacked a justification for why Cook's documents should contain relevant information that had not already been submitted or was not covered by Federighi's name.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court is sending a clear signal: Who is required to provide information in this case is not determined by their position within the company, but by their demonstrable proximity to the specific contract negotiations. This puts Federighi in a position that further underscores his role in the company's AI strategy. Since the departure of AI chief John Giannandrea, Federighi and Mike Rockwell have been the central drivers of Apple's AI strategy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additional orders of the court<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The ruling contains further points. The court rejected xAI's request to call another, unnamed Apple employee to the proceedings. This employee was supposed to provide information on iPhone sales. Judge Ray stated that documents relating to competition across the entire smartphone industry were clearly outside the scope of the lawsuit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the same time, xAI's request to produce documents relating to the partnership between Apple and Google was partially granted. However, the court limited the scope to those documents relating to potential exclusivity clauses for AI providers in Apple products. The deadline of June 17, 2026, also applies here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

OpenAI succeeded in one of its own points: Elon Musk must hand over emails from Tesla and SpaceX, as well as other text and XChat accounts, by June 3, 2026. However, xAI's attempt to compel Apple to disclose its internal AI usage guidelines for its own employees was rejected. The court found no discernible connection to the antitrust allegations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AI's attempt to gather international evidence<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Beyond the now-approved US disclosure obligations, xAI has been working for months to expand its evidence gathering internationally. Based on the Hague Convention, the company has filed requests to demand documents from foreign companies. While the US Department of Justice has largely granted such requests so far<\/a>, implementation abroad remains slow. In South Korea, the request for documents from the super-app operator Kakao was rejected in January 2026. Similar requests are still pending in other countries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The broader framework of the procedure<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The lawsuit centers on the allegation that Apple and OpenAI have distorted the market for generative AI through their collaboration. The original lawsuit, filed in August 2025, initially focused on App Store charts, where, in his view, Musk's Grok and xAI's own applications were systematically pushed back. Subsequent filings increasingly shifted the focus to the issue of super apps and the claim that Apple is protecting its smartphone monopoly through an exclusive partnership with OpenAI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Apple has denied the allegations from the outset, emphasizing that the contract with OpenAI does not contain any exclusivity clause. Nevertheless, the now expanded evidentiary hearing is likely to become one of the most complex phases of the proceedings for Apple's legal department, as Federighi's custodian status significantly increases the pool of documents that must be disclosed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Federighi moves into the spotlight<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

With this ruling, the focus shifts somewhat away from Cook and towards Federighi. The software chief has been the public face of iOS, iPadOS, and macOS keynotes for years \u2013 now he will also become a key figure in one of the most prominent antitrust cases surrounding Apple. The deadline of June 17, 2026, is likely to mark the next concrete turning point, as it will reveal which internal discussions surrounding the ChatGPT deal the court will have firsthand access to. (Image: Shutterstock \/ becauz gao)<\/p>\n\n\n\n