The xAI Apple lawsuit is over. X Corp and SpaceXAI LLC asked a federal judge on 14 September 2026 to dismiss their antitrust claims against Apple with prejudice, saying the claims had been resolved. No terms were disclosed, and the same case continues against three OpenAI entities.
The action is X Corp. v. Apple Inc., case 4:25-cv-00914, before United States District Judge Mark Timothy Pittman in the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division. It was filed on 25 August 2025. This is a United States federal antitrust case; it decides nothing about regulatory action in the European Union or elsewhere.
As of 15 September 2026, the claims against Apple were dismissed and the case against the OpenAI defendants remained live, with trial listed for 11 January 2027.
What the Motion Actually Says
The filing is short and it withholds more than it reveals. The plaintiffs told the court, in wording quoted by The Texas Lawbook: “Plaintiffs accordingly move under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) to dismiss with prejudice their claims against Apple. Apple does not oppose this motion.”
Rule 41(a)(2) is the provision that lets a plaintiff drop a case by court order once the other side has responded. The motion states that the claims have been resolved. It does not state how, whether money changed hands, or whether anything was agreed beyond the dismissal itself.
The motion also names what it does not touch: the plaintiffs do not seek to dismiss any claims against OpenAI Foundation, formerly OpenAI, Inc.; OpenAI, L.L.C.; and OpenAI OpCo, LLC. Those are the only other defendants in the caption.
What “With Prejudice” Locks In
Dismissal with prejudice is final as to those claims. X Corp and SpaceXAI cannot bring the same antitrust claims against Apple again in that court.
Three things follow from that, and all three are worth separating from what the coverage implies.
- No admission by anyone: a voluntary dismissal is not a finding. No court has held that Apple did anything unlawful, and Apple has admitted nothing.
- No disclosed consideration: the public filing does not say whether a payment, a licence, a commercial arrangement or nothing at all sits behind the word “resolved”.
- No effect on other cases: the dismissal binds these plaintiffs and these claims. It does not bind other litigants or other regulators, and competition authorities elsewhere have been examining platform defaults on their own timetables, as with the changes Google made to European search results.
What the Original Complaint Alleged
The claims that have now gone were filed 13 months earlier. The complaint set out claims under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, which addresses agreements in restraint of trade, and Section 2, which addresses monopolisation.
Its central allegation was a June 2024 agreement between Apple and OpenAI that, the plaintiffs said, made ChatGPT the only generative artificial-intelligence chatbot integrated into the iPhone. The complaint stated: “Working in tandem, defendants Apple and OpenAI have locked up markets to maintain their monopolies and prevent innovators like X and xAI from competing.”
Alongside the integration, the plaintiffs alleged that Apple deprioritised the X and Grok apps in App Store rankings and delayed Grok updates. Damages were pleaded in the billions of dollars; reporting on the filing put the demand at more than $1 billion.
The case had already survived an early test. On 13 November 2025, Judge Pittman denied motions to dismiss brought by both Apple and OpenAI, and said the order “should not be construed as a judgment (or pre-judgment) on the merits of this litigation”. That is why the September filing is a resolution rather than a defeat: the claims were live when they were dropped.
Why the Plaintiff’s Name Changed Mid-Case
The case was filed by X Corp. and X.AI LLC. The caption was amended on 14 August 2026 to X Corp. and SpaceXAI LLC, which is why some reports name xAI and others name SpaceXAI for the same party.
The reason is corporate, not legal. SpaceX’s acquisition of xAI closed on 2 February 2026, valuing xAI at about $250 billion within a combined entity reported at roughly $1.25 trillion. The merged company was rebranded SpaceXAI on 6 July 2026. The rename followed the deal by five months and did not change the party’s position in the litigation.
What Is Left, and When
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 25 August 2025 | X Corp. and X.AI LLC file the complaint against Apple and the OpenAI entities |
| 13 November 2025 | Judge Pittman denies both defendants’ motions to dismiss |
| 16 April 2026 | Order moves trial from 19 October 2026 to 11 January 2027 |
| 14 August 2026 | Caption amended to name SpaceXAI LLC in place of X.AI LLC |
| 14 September 2026 | Claims against Apple dismissed with prejudice; OpenAI claims preserved |
| 11 January 2027 | Trial date for the remaining claims |
What has not been decided is the substance. Whether the Apple–OpenAI integration restrained trade, whether either company held monopoly power in the markets the complaint defined, and what if anything the plaintiffs are owed are all questions that now rest on the OpenAI half of the case.
Apple’s own dispute with OpenAI is separate and continues, and OpenAI’s commercial position has shifted in the period since the complaint was filed, including its decision not to pursue a public listing in 2026. Neither bears directly on the Texas claims.
xAI Apple Lawsuit: Frequently Asked Questions
Did Apple Pay Anything to Settle?
Not disclosed. The motion filed on 14 September 2026 says only that the claims have been resolved and that Apple does not oppose dismissal. No settlement sum, licence or other consideration appears in the public filing.
Can X Corp Sue Apple Over This Again?
Not on these claims. The dismissal was sought with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), which bars the plaintiffs from refiling the same antitrust claims against Apple in that court.
Is the Case Against OpenAI Still Going?
Yes. Claims against OpenAI Foundation, OpenAI, L.L.C. and OpenAI OpCo, LLC were expressly preserved. The trial date on the docket is 11 January 2027, moved from 19 October 2026 by an order entered on 16 April 2026.
Did a Court Find That Apple Broke Competition Law?
No. A voluntary dismissal is not a finding of liability, and no court has ruled on the merits. Judge Pittman’s November 2025 order refusing to dismiss the case said expressly that it was not a judgment on the merits.
Why Do Reports Name Both xAI and SpaceXAI?
They are the same party at different points. The plaintiff was X.AI LLC when the case was filed in August 2025 and was renamed SpaceXAI LLC in the caption on 14 August 2026, following SpaceX’s acquisition of xAI, which closed on 2 February 2026.
