This case was last updated from U.S. District Courts on 10/04/2025 at 20:28:02 (UTC).

In Re Apple App Developer Antitrust Litigation (Proton/KPA)

Case Summary

On 05/23/2025 In Re Apple App Developer Antitrust Litigation Proton/KPA was filed a Commercial and Trade - Antitrust lawsuit. This case was filed in U.S. District Courts, California Northern District. The Judge overseeing this case is Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The case status is Open.

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    4:25-cv-04438

  • Filing Date:

    05/23/2025

  • Case Status:

    Open

  • Case Type:

    Commercial and Trade - Antitrust

Complaint

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................ - 1 -
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE............................................................................................................... - 4 -
III. PARTIES................................................................................................................................................ - 5 -
A. PLAINTIFFS ...................................................................................................................................... - 5 -
B. DEFENDANT....................................................................................................................................... - 7 -
IV. CLASS ALLEGATIONS .......................................................................................................................... - 7 -
V. RELEVANT FACTS ................................................................................................................................ - 10 -
A. PROTECTING THE APPLE “ECOSYSTEM” AND IOS APP DISTRIBUTION AND PAYMENT PROCESSING SERVICES....................................................................................................................................... - 10 -
B. APPLE’S LONG-RUNNING ANTICOMPETITIVE CONDUCT INSULATED ITS “ECOSYSTEM” FROM LAWFUL COMPETITION........................................................................................................................................ - 10 -
1. Apple Used Distribution, Payment Processing and Anti-Steering Restrictions to Implement and Maintain its Monopoly........................................................................................................................................................................ - 11 -
2. Apple’s Anticompetitive “Commissions” for its iOS App Distribution and Payment Processing Services................................................................................................................................................................................ - 13 -
C. THE FIRST EPIC GAMES INJUNCTION ......................................................................................................... - 14 -
D. APPLE’S VIOLATIONS OF THE FIRST INJUNCTION AND CONTINUED ANTICOMPETITIVE CONDUCT......................................................................................................................................................................... - 15 -
1. Apple’s Anticompetitive 27% Commission on Linked Purchases........................................................... - 16 -
2. Apple’s Anticompetitive Link Design & Placement Requirements........................................................... - 17 -
3. Apple’s Anticompetitive Flow Friction Policies......................................................................................... - 19 -
4. Apple’s Anticompetitive Limitations on Calls to Action........................................................................... - 21 -
5. Apple’s Anticompetitive Program Exclusions......................................................................................... - 22 -
E. THE SECOND INJUNCTION ...................................................................................................................... - 22 -
VI. THE SMALL APP DEVELOPER SETTLEMENT..................................................................................... - 23 -
VII. THE RELEVANT MARKET ..................................................................................................................... - 24 -
A. RELEVANT PRODUCT MARKET ................................................................................................................ - 24 -
B. RELEVANT GEOGRAPHIC MARKET........................................................................................................... - 24 -
C. APPLE MONOPOLIZES THE RELEVANT MARKET, WITH CONSUMERS FACING LOCK-IN.................. - 25 -
VIII. STANDING .............................................................................................................................................. - 27 -
IX. APPLE HAS CONTINUOUSLY VIOLATED THE ANTITRUST LAWS............................................... - 29 -
X. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF.............................................................................................................................. - 29 -
COUNT ONE: MONOPOLIZATION................................................................................................................ - 29 -
COUNT TWO: CALIFORNIA UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW ................................................................... - 31 -
COUNT THREE: KOREAN MONOPOLY REGULATION & FAIR TRADE ACT ........................................... - 33 -
XI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF............................................................................................................................... - 36 -
XII. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED............................................................................................................................ - 37 -

Page 2

Plaintiffs Korean Publishers Association, Korea Electronic Publishing Association, Dan
Scalise, and PangSky Co., Ltd., (collectively “Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and Classes of
similarly situated developers of Apple iOS and Apple iPadOS application(s) and/or in-app digital
goods or services, including subscriptions offered for sale at a non-zero price (“iOS Apps”), bring
this Class Action Complaint for damages and equitable relief against Defendant Apple, Inc.
(“Defendant” or “Apple”) for violations of Sections 2 and 3 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 2, 3),
California’s Unfair Competition Law (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ , et seq.) (“UCL”), and
Korea’s Monopoly Regulation & Fair Trade Act (Act No. ) (“MRFTA”). All allegations herein,
other than those concerning Plaintiffs, are based on information and belief.

I. INTRODUCTION

1. For more than a decade, Apple has been engaged in anticompetitive practices aimed

at protecting its supra-competitive profits on iOS Apps. Specifically, until very recently, Apple has:

(a) charged (and continues to charge) monopoly rents to iOS App developers, such as Plaintiffs and

members of the putative Classes, in the form of commissions that have reached as high as thirty

percent (30%) on in-app payments (“IAPs”), which are payments made either in Apple’s App Store

or within iOS Apps themselves; (b) enacted policies and engaged in practices that have effectively

prevented iOS App developers, such as Plaintiffs and members of the putative Classes, from

distributing or selling iOS Apps on competing iOS App platforms; and (c) enacted policies and

engaged in practices that have effectively prevented iOS App developers, such as Plaintiffs and

members of the putative Classes, from steering consumers of iOS Apps toward competing iOS App

distribution or payment processing services. As a result of Apple’s anticompetitive policies and

practices, Apple has successfully monopolized iOS App distribution and sales for more than a decade,

thus reaping supra-competitive profits at the expense of both consumers and iOS App developers,

such as Plaintiffs and members of the putative Classes.

2. Apple’s anticompetitive scheme has been perpetuated and reinforced by Apple’s “lock

in” of consumers into the Apple “ecosystem.” As the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and sixteen

Attorneys General (“AGs”) recently noted in their own antitrust complaint against Apple, Apple has

designed its products, software, and policies to make it exceedingly difficult for consumers and iOS

Page 3

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

Korean Publishers Association

Korea Electronic Publishing Association

Dan Scalise

PangSky Co., Ltd.

Scalisco LLC

OverX Co., Ltd.

Defendant

Apple, Inc

Interested Party

Proton AG

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

Daniel Margolskee

Scott Allan Martin

Samuel Maida

Mindee Jill Reuben

Michael Paul Lehmann

Katie R. Beran

Christopher L. Lebsock

Defendant Attorneys

Julian Wolfe Kleinbrodt

Daniel Glen Swanson

Cynthia Richman

 

Court Documents

54 #2

Declaration of Shuya Hayashi with Exhibits

54 #1

Declaration of Hwang Lee with Exhibits

45 #9

Proposed Order

45 #8

Declaration of Junya Naito

45 #7

Declaration of Nobuaki Mukai

45 #6

Declaration of Jae Hun Jeong

45 #5

Exhibit 4

45 #4

Exhibit 3

45 #3

Exhibit 2

45 #2

Exhibit 1

45 #1

Declaration of Julian W. Kleinbrodt

#45

(#45) MOTION to Dismiss Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint or Stay Proceedings filed by Apple, Inc. Motion to Dismiss Hearing set for 11/18/2025 02:00 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 1, 4th Floor. Responses due by 10/3/2025. Replies due by 10/24/2025. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Julian W. Kleinbrodt, #2 Exhibit 1, #3 Exhibit 2, #4 Exhibit 3, #5 Exhibit 4, #6 Declaration of Jae Hun Jeong, #7 Declaration of Nobuaki Mukai, #8 Declaration of Junya Naito, #9 Proposed Order)(Richman, Cynthia) (Filed on 9/5/2025) (Entered: 09/05/2025)

#10

(#10) SUMMONS Returned Executed by PangSky Co., Ltd., Korean Publishers Association, Dan Scalise, Korea Electronic Publishing Association. Apple, Inc served on 5/28/2025, answer due 6/18/2025. (Lebsock, Christopher) (Filed on 5/29/2025) (Entered: 05/29/2025)

#6

(#6) CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Korean Publishers Association, Korea Electronic Publishing Association, Dan Scalise, PangSky Co., Ltd... (Lebsock, Christopher) (Filed on 5/28/2025) (Entered: 05/28/2025)

#5

(#5) Summons Issued as to Apple, Inc. (exl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/27/2025) (Entered: 05/27/2025)

#4

(#4) Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 8/19/2025. Initial Case Management Conference set for 8/26/2025 01:30 PM in San Jose, - Videoconference Only. (exl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/27/2025) (Entered: 05/27/2025)

#2

(#2) Proposed Summons. (Lebsock, Christopher) (Filed on 5/23/2025) (Entered: 05/23/2025)

#1

(#1) COMPLAINT against Apple, Inc ( Filing fee $ 405, receipt number ACANDC-20716075.). Filed by PangSky Co., Ltd., Korean Publishers Association, Dan Scalise, Korea Electronic Publishing Association. (Lebsock, Christopher) (Filed on 5/23/2025) (Entered: 05/23/2025)

54 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

10/03/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#54) OPPOSITION/RESPONSE (re #45 MOTION to Dismiss Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint or Stay Proceedings ) filed byScalisco LLC, OverX Co., Ltd., Korean Publishers Association, Korea Electronic Publishing Association, Dan Scalise, PangSky Co., Ltd.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Hwang Lee with Exhibits, #2 Declaration of Shuya Hayashi with Exhibits)(Lebsock, Christopher) (Filed on 10/3/2025) (Entered: 10/03/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
10/03/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#53) STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER (Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice of Plaintiffs Dan Scalise and Scalisco LLC) filed by Scalisco LLC, OverX Co., Ltd., Korean Publishers Association, Korea Electronic Publishing Association, Dan Scalise, PangSky Co., Ltd.. (Lebsock, Christopher) (Filed on 10/3/2025) (Entered: 10/03/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
09/18/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#52) Application for Admission of Attorney Pro Hac Vice; Order Granting #49 MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice (Grace Ann Brew). Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 9/18/2025. (eac, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2025) (Entered: 09/18/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
09/17/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#51) ***PLEASE DISREGARD. POSTED IN ERROR. REFER TO #52 FOR CORRECT ORDER.*** Application for Admission of Attorney Pro Hac Vice; Order by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers Granting #49 Motion for Pro Hac Vice (Grace Ann Brow). (eac, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/17/2025) Modified on 9/18/2025 to edit docket text. (eac, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 09/17/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
09/17/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#50) Application for Admission of Attorney Pro Hac Vice; Order by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers Granting #48 Motion for Pro Hac Vice (Nathaniel Regenold). (eac, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/17/2025) (Entered: 09/17/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
09/17/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#49) MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-21136349.) filed by Proton AG. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing)(Brew, Grace Ann) (Filed on 9/17/2025) (Entered: 09/17/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
09/11/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#48) MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-21117370.) filed by Proton AG. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing)(Regenold, Nathaniel) (Filed on 9/11/2025) (Entered: 09/11/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
09/10/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#47) Order by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers Granting #43 Stipulation to Consolidate Actions Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 42(a) as Modified. (eac, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/10/2025) (Entered: 09/10/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
09/08/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#46) ADR Certification (ADR L.R. 3-5 b) of discussion of ADR options - Proton AG (Stake, Sam) (Filed on 9/8/2025) (Entered: 09/08/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
09/05/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#45) MOTION to Dismiss Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint or Stay Proceedings filed by Apple, Inc. Motion to Dismiss Hearing set for 11/18/2025 02:00 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 1, 4th Floor. Responses due by 10/3/2025. Replies due by 10/24/2025. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Julian W. Kleinbrodt, #2 Exhibit 1, #3 Exhibit 2, #4 Exhibit 3, #5 Exhibit 4, #6 Declaration of Jae Hun Jeong, #7 Declaration of Nobuaki Mukai, #8 Declaration of Junya Naito, #9 Proposed Order)(Richman, Cynthia) (Filed on 9/5/2025) (Entered: 09/05/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
35 More Docket Entries
05/29/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#10) SUMMONS Returned Executed by PangSky Co., Ltd., Korean Publishers Association, Dan Scalise, Korea Electronic Publishing Association. Apple, Inc served on 5/28/2025, answer due 6/18/2025. (Lebsock, Christopher) (Filed on 5/29/2025) (Entered: 05/29/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
05/29/2025

Docket(#9) CLERK'S NOTICE SETTING A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE FOR REASSIGNED CIVIL CASE. Notice is hereby given that a Case Management Conference via a Zoom webinar has been set for 8/26/2025, before Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., at 2:00 p.m. Case Management Statement due by 8/19/2025. Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. All future filings should reflect the case number as 4:25-cv-04438-HSG. All attorneys and pro se litigants appearing for the case management conference are required to join at least 15 minutes before the hearing to check-in with the CRD. Webinar Access: All counsel, members of the public, and media may access the webinar information at #https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/hsg General Order 58. Persons granted access to court proceedings held by telephone or videoconference are reminded that photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings, including screenshots or other visual copying of a hearing, is absolutely prohibited.Zoom Guidance and Setup: #https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/zoom/. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (nmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/29/2025) (Entered: 05/29/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
05/28/2025

Docket(#8) ORDER REASSIGNING CASE IT IS ORDERED that this case is reassigned using a proportionate, random and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Haywood S Gilliam, Jr. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi no longer assigned to the case. Counsel are instructed that all future filings shall bear the updated judicial initials immediately after the case number. Counsel are reminded to verify the location of the judge on the court website. All hearing and trial dates presently scheduled are vacated. However, existing briefing schedules for motions remain unchanged. Motions must be renoticed for hearing before the judge to whom the case has been reassigned, but the renoticing of the hearing does not affect the prior briefing schedule. Other deadlines such as those for ADR compliance and discovery cutoff also remain unchanged. Mark B. Busby Clerk, United States District Court (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (smc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/28/2025) (Entered: 05/28/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
05/28/2025

Docket(#7) CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (amk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/28/2025) (Entered: 05/28/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
05/28/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#6) CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Korean Publishers Association, Korea Electronic Publishing Association, Dan Scalise, PangSky Co., Ltd... (Lebsock, Christopher) (Filed on 5/28/2025) (Entered: 05/28/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
05/27/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#5) Summons Issued as to Apple, Inc. (exl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/27/2025) (Entered: 05/27/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
05/27/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#4) Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 8/19/2025. Initial Case Management Conference set for 8/26/2025 01:30 PM in San Jose, - Videoconference Only. (exl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/27/2025) (Entered: 05/27/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
05/27/2025

Docket(#3) Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 6/10/2025. (mbc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/27/2025) (Entered: 05/27/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
05/23/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#2) Proposed Summons. (Lebsock, Christopher) (Filed on 5/23/2025) (Entered: 05/23/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less
05/23/2025
View Court Documents

Docket(#1) COMPLAINT against Apple, Inc ( Filing fee $ 405, receipt number ACANDC-20716075.). Filed by PangSky Co., Ltd., Korean Publishers Association, Dan Scalise, Korea Electronic Publishing Association. (Lebsock, Christopher) (Filed on 5/23/2025) (Entered: 05/23/2025)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less

Search Court Records