iyO and OpenAI pause trademark lawsuit for settlement

iyO’s trademark lawsuit against OpenAI and Jony Ive has been paused for seven days after the parties told a federal judge they had reached a settlement in principle.

Judge Trina L. Thompson approved the requested pause on July 27, giving the parties until August 6, 2026, to finalize the agreement. They must then either file a formal request to dismiss the case or submit a joint status report if the settlement is not completed.

Why iyO sued OpenAI and Jony Ive

The dispute began shortly after OpenAI announced that it was acquiring Jony Ive’s io Products startup to develop a new generation of AI devices. iyO accused OpenAI and Ive’s venture of infringing its trademarks.

Recommended reading

AI spending hits $205 billion and spooks investors

iyO later amended its complaint to add trade-secret claims. The company alleged that Tang Tan, io Products' co-founder, obtained confidential information about iyO’s technology and product designs through a former iyO executive.

A hearing scheduled for July 28 was set to address OpenAI’s motion to strike or dismiss iyO’s amended complaint. The joint settlement notice filed the previous day led the court to vacate that hearing.

September hearing and the “io” branding dispute

Judge Thompson reset the hearing for September 8, 2026, alongside a hearing on OpenAI’s motion to alter or dissolve a preliminary injunction. That injunction prevents OpenAI and Jony Ive’s hardware venture from using the “io” branding.

OpenAI had previously told the court that it did not plan to use “io” to name or market its upcoming hardware products. Judge Thompson later questioned the scope and duration of that commitment before granting iyO’s request for the preliminary injunction.

The court’s order sets out the next deadlines:

“Upon finalization and no later than 8/6/26, the parties shall either file a request for dismissal or a joint status report.”

If the case is dismissed, the pending motions will become moot and the lawsuit will be terminated. If the settlement fails, the parties must respond to the court’s hearing questions by September 7 and answer an order to show cause. The terms of the proposed settlement have not been made public.