Apple leans on paused fraud suit in Epic court fight

Apple is pointing to a newly paused securities fraud lawsuit as support for its effort to halt further lower-court proceedings in its long-running case with Epic Games while the Supreme Court reviews part of the dispute.

Earlier this year, a proposed class action was filed on behalf of the City of Coral Springs Police Officers Pension Plan, accusing Apple of securities fraud. The suit says Apple misled investors about whether it was actually complying with the injunction in the Epic Games case, and whether it would deliver its announced AI-powered Siri features.

At the same time, Apple has continued challenging a contempt finding in the Epic case. The Supreme Court is now reviewing whether Apple could be held in civil contempt for charging a commission on purchases made outside the App Store, when the 2021 injunction requiring external purchasing options did not explicitly ban that fee.

Last week, Apple asked the lower court to pause proceedings that will decide what commission, if any, it may charge on purchases made outside the App Store while the Supreme Court considers the contempt finding. Apple says the high court’s decision could affect those proceedings; Epic Games disagrees.

Recommended reading

Uber’s $14.8B Delivery Hero Buy Would Reshape Food Delivery

Apple had made a similar request in the Coral Springs case because that lawsuit also touches on the Epic dispute. Earlier today, Judge Noël Wise granted Apple’s request, keeping the Coral Springs case paused until the Supreme Court issues its decision on the civil contempt question.

Apple then filed Judge Wise’s decision in the Epic case, arguing that it strengthens its own motion before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. In Apple’s filing, the company said the ruling is relevant to the court’s analysis of its pending motion to stay proceedings during Supreme Court review.

Judge Rogers is still weighing Apple’s arguments for a pause and Epic’s arguments against one. Apple has also asked her to temporarily halt the case even if she denies the stay, so the company can seek relief from the Ninth Circuit or the Supreme Court while the contempt review continues.