Apple seeks punitive damages, maximum interest from FPT's Prosser in "iOS 26 leaks" case

Render of the iPhone 18 Pro published by Jon Prosser’s FPT. | Image by FPT

Last July we told you that Apple was suing FPT’s Jon Prosser and his friend Michael Ramacciotti. Apple accused the pair of breaking into a developmental iPhone owned by Ethan Lipnik, a friend of Ramacciotti and an Apple employee who has since been fired by the tech giant. Apple alleges that Prosser and Ramacciotti obtained Lipnik’s passcode for the developmental iPhone and figured out when he would be away from the device for “an extended period.”

Apple accuses Prosser of breaking into a developmental iPhone to create renders for FPT

When Lipnik was away from the phone for a period of time, Ramacciotti, according to the court documents, accessed Lipnik’s developmental iPhone and immediately went on a FaceTime call with Prosser. During that call, Prosser got to see iOS 26 running on the developmental iPhone owned by Lipnik. In March 2025, Prosser used a video of the FaceTime call to help him create renders of what was then called iOS 19’s Messages app. The renders were the starring leaks in an FPT video.

The next month, he posted a video that included renders of “Liquid Glass” calling it the most complete leak of iOS 19 to date. These renders also were the result of the break in of Lipnik’s developmental iPhone.

Apple wins a default judgment against Apple

Apple’s filing claims that Ramacciotti was receiving financial compensation from Prosser for helping him break into Lipnik’s phone. While Ramacciotti and his legal team have been working with Apple, it appears that the same thing cannot be said about Prosser who supposedly failed to respond to Apple’s complaint before a deadline passed. As a result, the court allowed Apple to obtain a default judgment against Prosser. This means that the court accepts Apple’s claims as being true and grants them the relief they sought in their filing.

Render of thge rear camera bar of the iPhone 18 Pro. | Image by FPT

Back in October, Prosser said that he has been in talks with Apple and he stated that “The notion that I’m ignoring the case is incorrect. That’s all I am able to say.” Meanwhile, this week the lawyers for Apple and Ramacciotti said that both sides have exchanged limited discovery information, which includes evidence, documents, and witness info.

Apple says it served Prosser with subpoenas for documents and a deposition. Jon admits receiving the subpoenas and Apple is looking to schedule a date for his deposition. Even with the default judgment in its pocket, Apple remains in contact with Prosser. Both sides are awaiting the deposition that will help determine how much confidential information Prosser was able to obtain, which could help the court determine how much in damages Apple will receive.

As you might imagine, Apple and its CEO Tim Cook are not in favor of leaks involving Apple products, especially those involving its top product, the iPhone. In one hilarious story from 2021, Cook emailed Apple employees complaining about people who work at Apple and sell information as a side hustle. He said that Apple is doing “everything in our power to identify those who leaked” and he also stated that “people who leak confidential information do not belong” at Apple. The funny thing is that Cook’s email immedately leaked.

As far as Prosser is concerned, Apple wants a jury trial and demands a judgment in its favor and against the defendants. It wants to receive the necessary injunctive relief and damages for an amount that is proven at trial. Apple is also asking for punitive damages based on the defendant’s “willful and malicious misappropriation of trade secrets.” The tech giant also wants an order from the court ordering the defendants not to make use of or disclose to third parties Apple’s proprietary and confidential and proprietary trade secrets without written consent from the company.

Last month Prosser leaked iPhone 18 Pro renders

Apple seeks the maximum legal pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, reasonable attorney’s fees, reimbursement of costs incurred by Apple, and other relief the court feels is just and proper.