Apple pushes back as Epic fights App Store case pause

Apple has formally answered Epic Games' objection to its bid to pause lower-court proceedings over App Store commissions, arguing Epic’s position is based on a flawed reading of what the Supreme Court is now reviewing.

Last month, the Supreme Court agreed to examine whether Apple was properly held in civil contempt for charging a commission on purchases completed outside the U.S. App Store. The fight traces back to a 2021 injunction that required Apple to let developers direct users to purchase options outside the App Store. While that order did not explicitly ban commissions on those transactions, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers later found that Apple’s implementation violated the injunction and held the company in contempt.

Apple says that ruling is the entire basis for the remand proceedings now set to address what commission, if any, it can charge on those purchases. In its latest filing, Apple argues that if the Supreme Court overturns the contempt finding or says the Ninth Circuit used the wrong legal standard, the lower-court process could be wiped out or substantially changed.

Recommended reading

Apple suit could slow OpenAI’s hardware push

“Having fought to hold Apple in contempt and having defended this Court’s contempt finding on appeal, Epic’s central argument now is that the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari to decide the contempt question is somehow irrelevant. That is wrong: the only basis for remand proceedings on the commission is this Court’s contempt finding—affirmed by the Ninth Circuit—that Apple violated the original injunction.”

Apple also rejects Epic’s claim that earlier rulings by the Ninth Circuit and Justice Kagan already denied the same kind of stay. According to Apple, those decisions concerned a stay of the mandate, not the narrower pause in proceedings it is requesting now.

Epic had argued that this is “Apple’s third attempt to delay the inevitable: a hearing to evaluate Apple’s proposed fee on steered transactions.” Apple’s response repeatedly says Epic is “wrong,” including on its argument that the commission proceedings would look largely the same even if the Supreme Court sides with Apple.

If Judge Gonzalez Rogers denies the stay, Apple says it wants the proceedings paused long enough to seek relief from the Ninth Circuit or the Supreme Court.