A federal judge has decertified a long-running class action accusing Apple of monopolizing iOS app distribution. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that the plaintiffs’ damages model failed to show classwide harm, undoing last year’s certification of a class of Apple account holders who spent at least 10 dollars on apps or in-app content.
Reuters reports that Judge Rogers found the model could not “reliably” match Apple accounts to individual consumers while excluding people who suffered no harm. 9to5Mac also carried Apple’s statement saying it was pleased with the ruling and that it invests to keep the App Store safe for users and a strong business for developers.
The decision turns on accuracy, not antitrust theory. Apple’s expert flagged mistakes the judge called “alarming,” including mixing up two different people named Robert and Rob Pepper, who shared an address and card details. The model also lumped more than 40,000 transactions by anyone with the first name “Kim,” regardless of whether those buyers had anything else in common. That level of noise, the court said, made it impossible to prove injury “in one stroke.”
Why the judge reversed course
Judge Rogers previously declined to certify a class in 2022, then allowed a narrower class in 2024. Apple’s new challenge targeted the mechanics of the plaintiffs’ proof, not the broader allegation that Apple’s App Store rules inflate prices. Once the court agreed that the matching and filtering were unreliable, certification could not stand.
Without a certified class, the case loses leverage and scope. Individual claims can continue, but the collective pathway has closed for now.
Plaintiffs’ counsel said they are disappointed and will review options. Apple says the App Store remains a trusted marketplace. The fight over iOS distribution policy is not over, but the plaintiffs must fix the numbers before they return to court.
