Epic v. Apple Update

We previously covered the early stages of this case here. Epic, upset with Apple’s “compliance” with the Judge’s injunction, recently sought enforcement of the original injunction. On April 30, 2025, Judge Gonzalez Rogers found Apple had failed to comply, stating dramatically:

This is an injunction, not a negotiation. There are no do-overs once a party willfully disregards a court order. Time is of the essence. The Court will not tolerate further delays. As previously ordered, Apple will not impede competition. The Court enjoins Apple from implementing its new anticompetitive acts to avoid compliance with the injunction. Effective immediately Apple will no longer impede developers’ ability to communicate with users nor will they levy or impose a new commission on off-app purchases.

For one Apple witness, the Court found that he was “outright lying under oath” and referred him to the Department of Justice for potential perjury prosecution. It was a shocking rebuke of Apple and its plan, brought on by a review of potentially-privileged communications using a somewhat controversial procedure reliant upon a third party discovery special master. Apple’s behind-doors behavior was show to apparently be quite improper. A presentation summarizing the relevant cases and decisions may be viewed here. The presentation includes links to all of the relevant decisions.

We will discuss the history of the case, the recent injunction enforcement decision, and the present status of Apple’s 9th Circuit appeal in our SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, July 28, 2025.

Jonathan Pearce, a partner at SoCal IP, will lead the discussion.