After overturning Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers to certify a class action lawsuit accusing Apple of monopolizing the iPhone App Store, the case came back to the fore today. Here are the details.
See also: Tim Sweeney: Fortnite won't come to iOS in Japan because of Apple
In 2022, after a complex process that included multiple petitions, appeals, and the consolidation of overlapping antitrust complaints, the case In re Apple iPhone Antitrust Litigation ended up in the office of Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.
Initially, the judge refused to certify it as a class action. Two years later, she overturned that decision, giving the green light under a narrower framework, including “only Apple account holders who spent $10 or more on apps or in-app content,” as Reuters reported at the time.
In October of last year, after Apple challenged the plaintiffs’ damages model, Judge Rogers reversed her decision again and the class action certification was withdrawn, finding that the plaintiffs failed to present a model “capable of credibly demonstrating class harm and damages in one motion.”
See also: More ads coming to the App Store in 2026
At that time, the plaintiffs' legal team said they would reconsider their next steps. Shortly thereafter, they filed an application for leave to appeal, which brings us to today.
As Reuters, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted the plaintiffs' request for leave to appeal.
In practice, this means that the appeals court will now consider Judge Rogers' decision to withdraw the class action certification, which could either reinstate the lawsuit as a class action, send it back to her for further analysis, or uphold her decision.
Under today's ruling, the appeal will proceed under Rule 23(f), meaning the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will only review the class action certification decision (and not the underlying antitrust allegations against Apple). The plaintiffs now have 14 days to formally file their appeal.
See also: Apple: Sweeping changes to the App Store and the iPhone in Japan
In a statement to Reuters, Mark Rifkin, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said they “look forward to presenting and arguing the merits of the appeal to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.” Apple, on the other hand, did not respond to Reuters’ request for comment.
