I was waking up choking and terrified of dying in my sleep. When I took a blood test I was horrified by the results... and now I'm suing Apple

A former Apple engineering program manager has accused the tech giant of exposing her and her neighbors to toxic chemicals at its Santa Clara chipmaking facility.

Ashley Gjovik filed a federal lawsuit in September 2025 in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, claiming Apple's operations at 3250 Scott Boulevard violated environmental laws by mishandling and releasing hazardous substances.

Gjovik alleged in the complaint that the apartment complex where she lived is located less than 300 feet from Apple's exhaust stacks. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), people living within 300 feet of air pollution sources are exposed to higher levels of contaminants that contribute to respiratory and cardiovascular issues.

Air monitors in her apartment allegedly detected spikes in volatile organic compounds (VOCs) around 3am multiple times, according to the lawsuit. She claimed to the Daily Mail that she moved out in October 2021 because she was constantly getting sick.

'I nearly died in 2020,' she said, describing symptoms that escalated to multiple emergency room visits.

Gjovik also claimed in the lawsuit that other residents experienced similar problems, including asthma flare-ups and sleep disturbances.

The complaint alleged that the emissions 'caused severe chemical poisoning of nearby residents, including documented presence of arsenic, mercury and industrial solvents in victim's blood and urine, consistent with acute toxic gas exposure.'

The lawsuit was filed one month before the EPA reached a settlement with Apple over hazardous waste violations. 

'During a recent site visit, the EPA identified compliance issues at one of our facilities related to labeling, documentation and management of a conveyance system,' an Apple spokesperson told the Daily Mail.

'The issues posed no risks to the environment and were quickly resolved, and we remain deeply committed to protecting the environment everywhere we operate.'

According to the EPA's official press release on the matter, inspections conducted in 2023 and 2024 found that Apple failed to properly store and label hazardous waste, did not adequately control air emissions and neglected required daily inspections - violations that created potential risks to workers and nearby residents.

As part of the settlement, Apple agreed to upgrade its solvent waste handling systems, install new emissions-control equipment and pay a $261,283 civil penalty.

Gjovik's lawsuit goes further, alleging that those violations placed thousands of residents at risk of exposure to toxic chemicals.

The lawsuit alleges that the 'Plaintiff had described the experience as "thinking she was dying" but did not realize she likely could have actually died.' 

However, Apple's motion to dismiss the filing claimed that the 'Plaintiff is a serial litigant, and Apple is her main target.

'This case is the latest in a series of cases and administrative actions she has filed against the Company over the same alleged environmental conditions near Apple's facility at 3250 Scott Boulevard in Santa Clara ("Facility").

'This case is not a legitimate environmental enforcement action. It is an attempt to resurrect claims dismissed or resolved elsewhere, including by this District.'

Reports have suggested that Gjovik filed more than 25 legal claims, investigations or complaints against Apple in courts and agencies in the US and abroad.

Many of her past claims have been dismissed or rejected by courts or agencies because they lacked merit, were filed too late or were already resolved.

Gjovik was employed at Apple from 2015 until 2021. She joined the company shortly after it reportedly started semiconductor manufacturing in Santa Clara, and has claimed her 2021 termination was retaliation for raising environmental health and safety concerns.

While the court dismissed some of her prior claims, it moved forward with her 2025 environmental citizen suit.

The current status of the case is 'active and pending,' with recent docket activity including filings by Gjovik (eg, notices regarding Apple's motions) and no orders indicating dismissal or termination.

In 2025, Gjovik said she conducted months of independent research into the site's history, reviewing land-use records, stormwater systems and regulatory filings. 

She compiled her findings into a 60-day notice and formal complaint, which she filed pro se - meaning she will represent herself.

The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief to halt alleged violations, civil penalties, funding for supplemental environmental projects and a declaratory judgment regarding contamination at the site.

It also invokes California's public nuisance law, alleging Apple's actions interfered with public health and safety. 

Apple's motion to dismiss the filing stated: 'She concedes that she moved across the country years ago, has no ongoing grievances resulting from the alleged violations, and has no continuing connection to the facility or the surrounding environment.' 

Gjovik has responded to these motions and requested case management guidance from the court. 

Approximately 3,000 residents currently live near the facility, and the complaint highlights potential risks to families using adjacent parks and playgrounds. 

Gjovik alleged in the complaint that she provided anonymized testimony and documentation to the EPA, which she said contributed to inspections and enforcement actions.