Sam Altman And Jony Ive Lose Appeal Over ‘io’ Name - 9to5Mac

The legal fight between OpenAI and iyO took another turn, following a decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Here are the details.

A bit of background

Earlier this year, as soon as OpenAI announced that it had acquired Jony Ive’s io company, iyO. Inc. filed a lawsuit over alleged trademark infringement.

In the days that followed, multiple documents were made public and revealed interesting details, including the fact that iyO CEO Jason Rugolo had tried to hire Evans Hankey while she was still Apple’s VP of Industrial Design, and before she joined Ive’s venture.

The documents also showed that Ive and Altman decided on the name io in mid-2023, and that Rugolo approached Altman in early 2025 seeking funding for a project regarding “the future of human-computer interface”.

At the time, Altman declined the offer, revealing that he was working on “something competitive,” to which Rugolo replied “ruh roh. / want to work together?”

So when iyO sued, claiming that OpenAI was about to enter its market under a similar name and with similar products to its planned AI-powered in-ear headphones, OpenAI countered.

The company stated that io’s first product wouldn’t be an in-ear headphone, nor a wearable, and that Rugolo had not only volunteered unrequested information about his company, but had also suggested OpenAI acquire ioY for $200 million.

Back then, the court initially sided with iyO, and issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), blocking OpenAI from using the io branding. At the time, OpenAI removed the partnership announcement video, as well as mentions of io on its website.

Following this decision, OpenAI appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which brings us to the new decision.

The new decision

On Wednesday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the TRO, which means that OpenAI is still blocked from using the io branding to market upcoming products that may be similar to iyO’s.

Per iyO’s press release, the court validated iyO’s complaints over:

Likelihood of Confusion: The Court noted that “IO” and “iyO” are phonetically identical and that the products are related, as both companies aim to sell new computers with AI-driven natural language interaction.

Reverse Confusion: The Court recognized the danger of “reverse confusion,” where a larger, better-funded junior user (OpenAI/IO Products) saturates the market, making consumers believe the smaller senior user (iyO) is the infringer.

Irreparable Harm: The Court aﬃrmed that the defendants’ aggressive launch “jeopardized iyO’s ongoing fundraising efforts” and threatened to erode iyO’s brand.

With the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision, the case will likely continue in the district court for a Preliminary Injunction hearing, which will either leave the restrictions in place, narrow them, or expand them.

Just don’t expect this to be over quickly. After the court issued the TRO, the Preliminary Injunction was scheduled for April 2026, with fact and expert discovery, dispositive motions, and a jury trial running through 2027 and 2028.