A PYMNTS Company

Judge Reverses Class Action Status in Apple App Store Monopoly Case

By  |  October 28, 2025

A federal judge has decertified a sweeping class action lawsuit against Apple that accused the tech giant of monopolizing the market for iPhone apps by restricting purchases to its App Store, a move that plaintiffs claimed led to inflated prices for consumers.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    According to Reuters, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, reversed her earlier February 2024 decision that had granted class certification to tens of millions of Apple customers. That earlier ruling had allowed iPhone users who spent at least $10 on apps or in-app content over the past 17 years to pursue claims against Apple collectively.

    In her new decision, Judge Rogers determined that the plaintiffs’ economic model failed to demonstrate “classwide injury and damages in one stroke,” as required under federal class action standards. The judge noted that the plaintiffs’ analysis did not adequately link Apple accounts to individual consumers and failed to sufficiently exclude those who were not harmed.

    Per Reuters, the reversal followed Apple’s presentation of an expert report that highlighted what the company described as “alarming” flaws in the plaintiffs’ data. Among the examples cited was an apparent duplication in which named plaintiff Robert Pepper and another claimant, “Rob Pepper,” were treated as separate individuals despite sharing the same address and payment information. Another error involved combining more than 40,000 payment records from customers with the first name “Kim,” regardless of any other identifying differences.

    Related: Apple Faces New EU Antitrust Complaint Over App Store Practices

    In response to the ruling, Mark Rifkin, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, said in an email that they were “of course disappointed” and were evaluating their options to protect consumers “harmed by Apple’s unlawful App Store monopoly.”

    Apple, meanwhile, expressed satisfaction with the outcome. According to Reuters, the company stated it invests “significantly” in ensuring that the App Store remains “a safe and trusted place for users to discover apps and a great business opportunity for developers.”

    The lawsuit, originally filed in December 2011, alleged that Apple’s policies forced app developers to pay high commissions—costs that were then passed on to consumers through higher app and in-app purchase prices. Attorneys for the plaintiffs had previously estimated potential damages in the billions of dollars. The now-decertified class had included users of iOS devices dating back to July 10, 2008.

    Source: Reuters