WP Engine has taken its evidence preservation dispute with Automattic and Matt Mullenweg back to court, filing a motion that seeks sanctions over allegedly missing communications and disputed preservation efforts.
In a motion filed July 28, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, WP Engine said Mullenweg’s WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram communications from the relevant period were not properly preserved and that certain messages are no longer available.
WP Engine outlines requested relief in sanctions motion
WP Engine is asking the court to deem it “conclusively established” that Mullenweg used WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram for case-related communications from July 2024 through March 16, 2026, and that certain of those communications were destroyed or are no longer available.
The company is also requesting “mandatory adverse inference instructions” that would require a jury to presume the missing communications contained evidence supporting WP Engine’s claims.
According to the motion, those instructions would cover allegations that Mullenweg intended to interfere with WP Engine’s customer and prospective customer relationships, made public statements about WP Engine that he knew were false or made with “reckless disregard for their truth,” and acted with improper intent when making demands in September 2024 and taking control of the ACF plugin.
WP Engine also asked the court to prevent Mullenweg from testifying about the substance of unavailable WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram communications involving WP Engine, his state of mind during the September 2024 events, and the basis for his trademark enforcement actions, except where supported by produced documents.
They further requested that the court dismiss Automattic’s trademark-related counterclaims. Alternatively, WP Engine asked for adverse inference instructions that would require a jury to presume the missing communications showed Automattic knew WP Engine’s trademark use was permissible and that the September 2024 enforcement actions were a “pretext for financial coercion” rather than a “good-faith trademark protection effort.”
WP Engine also requested attorneys’ fees and costs related to the sanctions motion, an earlier motion to compel, and months of discussions over evidence preservation.
Dispute over preservation of WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram messages
According to the motion, WP Engine argues that Automattic and Mullenweg’s obligation to preserve evidence began no later than July 2024, when Automattic retained outside litigation counsel and began preparing a cease-and-desist letter involving WP Engine.
The filing states that the dispute escalated in September 2024, when WP Engine alleges Automattic demanded a percentage of WP Engine’s revenue and Mullenweg launched what he described publicly as an “all out nuclear war” against the company.
WP Engine says communications from that period are central to the lawsuit because they relate to allegations involving customer relationships, public statements about WP Engine, access to WordPress.org services, and Automattic’s actions involving the Advanced Custom Fields (ACF) plugin.
The motion states that on September 21, 2024, Mullenweg publicly encouraged people with information about WP Engine to contact him through personal devices and Signal with disappearing messages.
Two days later, WP Engine sent Automattic a cease-and-desist letter that included a document preservation demand, according to the filing. Automattic responded the same day with its own cease-and-desist letter accusing WP Engine of trademark infringement.
WP Engine later filed its lawsuit on October 4, 2024, after alleging Automattic had blocked access to the WordPress.org API and continued other actions against the company. The motion separately cites Automattic’s October 12, 2024 takeover of the ACF plugin as another event in the dispute.
After the lawsuit began, WP Engine says it repeatedly raised concerns about potential evidence deletion.
The company states that it sent a November 2024 letter identifying deleted X posts, a deleted WordPress.org post related to WP Engine, and removed ACF plugin reviews. WP Engine says Automattic responded that the WordPress.org post had not been destroyed and that changes to ACF plugin pages were preserved through WordPress revisions.
WP Engine later raised concerns after learning that Mullenweg had requested deletion of his account on the Post Status Slack workspace, according to the motion. The company asked Automattic to confirm preservation steps across Slack, social media accounts, email accounts, and other potential sources of relevant information.
The motion states that during a February 2025 discussion, Automattic’s counsel said they did not know whether messaging platforms used by Mullenweg had default auto-delete settings or whether communications from Signal, Telegram, and WhatsApp could be preserved.
WP Engine says Automattic later stated in April 2025 that it had taken “all reasonable steps” to preserve relevant documents, including communications from Signal, Telegram, and WhatsApp. The company argues those assurances were inaccurate.
WP Engine argues missing messages affected its case
In October 2025, WP Engine sought an order requiring production of Mullenweg’s WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram communications, according to the motion.
WP Engine says Automattic represented in a joint discovery letter that Mullenweg’s responsive communications from those platforms had been preserved and would be produced where appropriate.
The motion states that WP Engine later received only limited material, including one Signal message exchange and no WhatsApp or Telegram messages. WP Engine argued that the production did not resolve its concerns and continued requesting information about what happened to the missing communications.
In April 2026, the court ordered Automattic to provide a sworn declaration addressing Mullenweg’s use of WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram, preservation efforts, auto-delete settings, deleted communications, and other evidence preservation issues.
According to WP Engine’s motion, the court found WP Engine had plausibly argued that Mullenweg may have deleted relevant documents or allowed them to be deleted after a preservation obligation had been triggered. The motion states that the court described those allegations as “concerning” and found Automattic’s response “unsatisfying” because it did not address what was allegedly deleted or left unpreserved.
WP Engine argues that the May 2026 declarations from Mullenweg and Jonathan Robins supported its claims that relevant communications were not properly preserved.
The company also points to Mullenweg’s deposition testimony, arguing that he was unable to provide sufficient explanations regarding the preservation of communications from WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram.
WP Engine argues that the missing communications cannot be restored because disappearing messages are not recoverable and that the loss has affected its ability to prove its claims and defend against Automattic’s counterclaims.
The company says the unavailable communications are relevant to allegations involving customer outreach, public statements about WP Engine, the September 2024 trademark dispute, and Automattic’s actions involving ACF.
WP Engine also argues that the missing messages are important to Automattic’s trademark counterclaims because they could provide evidence about whether Automattic’s enforcement actions were a legitimate trademark effort or connected to broader financial demands.
Motion seeks dismissal of counterclaims and legal fees
As part of its requested relief, WP Engine is asking the court to dismiss Automattic’s trademark-related counterclaims as a sanction.
The company argues that lesser sanctions would not address the impact of the missing evidence on its ability to defend against Automattic’s claims. Alternatively, WP Engine is requesting adverse inference instructions related to those counterclaims.
WP Engine is also seeking attorneys’ fees and costs connected to the sanctions motion, its prior motion to compel, and its efforts to resolve the preservation dispute before filing the motion.
The court has not yet ruled on WP Engine’s requested sanctions. A hearing on the motion is scheduled for September 30, 2026, before Magistrate Judge Ajay S. Krishnan