Singapore Denies xAI Document Requests in Lawsuit

9to5mac reports that Singapore's Attorney-General's Chambers told the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas it was "unable to accede" to multiple document requests sent by xAI in connection with Elon Musk's lawsuit against Apple and OpenAI. The requests sought records from Singapore-based companies named in the requests as Gojek, Grab, GrabTaxi, and WeChat, per 9to5mac. 9to5mac says Singapore declined the requests on the grounds that they did not comply with the Hague Evidence Convention. 9to5mac summarizes Singapore's reasons as:

• •the underlying litigation was described as antitrust and unfair competition, which Singapore viewed as outside the Convention's scope;
• •the requests were not specific enough about the person or entity to be examined, and some company names did not match Singapore's business registry;
• •the requests were too broad, asking for whole categories of documents rather than identifiable items, 9to5mac reports.

Courts and practitioners use the Hague Evidence Convention to gather evidence across jurisdictions in civil and commercial cases. Industry observers note that the Convention is interpreted narrowly by some signatory states, which can block broad or vaguely framed discovery demands. Requests that do not identify precise custodians or that seek sweeping categories of documents commonly fail the specificity tests applied by responding authorities.

9to5mac also reports other cross-border requests tied to the same US litigation remain pending in Asia, and that earlier this year a Korean court rejected a related request for documents from Kakao, according to the same reporting. Observers following cross-border tech litigation will see this as part of a broader pattern in which transnational discovery faces legal and procedural limits that vary significantly by jurisdiction.

Monitor filings in the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas for any follow-up motions or revised requests that narrow scope or correct entity naming, and watch whether other signatory states' central authorities accept or reject comparable Hague requests. For readers tracking enforcement, changes in how request specificity and subject-matter scope are litigated across jurisdictions will be the clearest signal of whether foreign discovery can meaningfully support the US suit, 9to5mac reporting suggests.