Apple fires back at DOJ antitrust case, calls for immediate dismissal

Posted:
in iPhone

Apple has begun the process of filing a motion to have the Department of Justices lawsuit over App Store and other antitrust actions to be dismissed.

A view of Apple Park from the air
Apple Park



Apple's motion to dismiss the Department of Justice's (DOJ) allegations of antitrust behaviour, is required to start with a maximum three-page pre-motion letter outlining the arguments for dismissal. Apple has today filed that letter with US District Judge Julien Neals, claiming that this "case lies well beyond the outer limits of antitrust law."

According to Apple, the DOJ has brought an antitrust case as a Section 2 Sherman Act claim, and that this can only "move past the pleadings" if it is shown that three specific allegations are valid. The DOJ, says Apple, has to show that the company has:


  • Monopoly power in a relevant market

  • Has performed anticompetitive conduct

  • It has had anticompetitive effects



"This complaint fails on all three fronts," continues Apple's letter. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the type of conduct at the core of this case -- namely, Apple's decisions about how and whether to grant third parties access to its platform -- does not give rise to Section 2 liability as a matter of law."

Apple then says that the DOJ has accused it of restrictions that it has then failed to show have had anticompetitive effects. Apple "faces fierce competition from well-established rivals" and does not have "the market share necessary to establish or infer market power."

Consequently, Apple is asking the court to dismiss the case. But it's also going further in accusing the DOJ of attempting to change antitrust law. "This Court," it says, "should reject the invitation to forge a new theory of antitrust liability that no court has recognized."

Apple's filing of this pre-motion letter starts a process that will next see the DOJ responding by the end of the month. After that, Judge Neals may call for a conference with the two parties.

All subsequent steps depend on Judge Neals but assuming Apple is allowed to then file its full motion to dismiss, that it likely to be no sooner than mid-June. Then once more the DOJ gets to file an opposition brief, and Apple can then issue a reply to that.

If the case gets this far without the judge declining to dismiss, there will probably be a hearing but no date will be set for some time. Given the scope of the case, though, it is likely that the motion to dismiss will be heard in court no sooner than September.

If Apple's motion to dismiss is not upheld, the DOJ's case will continue and proceed to a full hearing. The dates for this are again down to the court.

With appeals expected regardless of outcome from either side, it's unlikely that the case will be resolved for some years.



Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 11
    jas99jas99 Posts: 159member
    The case is a ridiculous waste of DOJ’s resources. It’s also an insult to what could be the most ethical and socially responsible major company in history. 
    bshankwilliamlondon9secondkox2radarthekatbeowulfschmidtiOS_Guy80watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 11
    KumingaKuminga Posts: 34member
    This DOJ is honestly good for nothing.
    bshank9secondkox2iOS_Guy80watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 11
    9secondkox29secondkox2 Posts: 2,907member
    Can we get a new DOJ that knows the difference between justice and harassment please
    bshankiOS_Guy80watto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 11
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,390member
    jas99 said:
    The case is a ridiculous waste of DOJ’s resources. It’s also an insult to what could be the most ethical and socially responsible major company in history. 
    The waste of taxpayer dollars at the DOJ with regard to ANTITRUST is set to increase, thanks to a strong push by the Whitehouse:
    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/biden-requests-63-million-boost-to-justices-antitrust-division
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 11
    eriamjheriamjh Posts: 1,689member
    I’m sure every company files for immediate dismissal in cases like this.   100%.   

    And the dismissal rate is far less than 100%.  
    williamlondon9secondkox2CrossPlatformFroggerthtwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 11
    9secondkox29secondkox2 Posts: 2,907member
    jdw said:
    jas99 said:
    The case is a ridiculous waste of DOJ’s resources. It’s also an insult to what could be the most ethical and socially responsible major company in history. 
    The waste of taxpayer dollars at the DOJ with regard to ANTITRUST is set to increase, thanks to a strong push by the Whitehouse:
    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/biden-requests-63-million-boost-to-justices-antitrust-division
    I don’t think a single person is surprised. 
    jdwwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 11
    Dead_PoolDead_Pool Posts: 125member
    This case is nothing more than wealthy, white, middle-aged, technophobic politicians trying to look “tough on big tech.” There’s no there there. There never was. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 11
    teejay2012teejay2012 Posts: 398member
    Garland threw the gauntlet down to show America that the DOJ is looking out for 'the people', having failed miserably by not bringing more compelling 'cases' cough cough to trial faster. There is a lot of pressure on the DOJ to prove they can do anything right. Apple is doing not only the predicted thing, but the right thing against this politically motivated charade of a case.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 11
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,422member
    jdw said:
    The waste of taxpayer dollars at the DOJ with regard to ANTITRUST is set to increase, thanks to a strong push by the Whitehouse:
    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/biden-requests-63-million-boost-to-justices-antitrust-division
    All I can say to this is that the actions of large companies — even ones we like — is at least in part driving the recent false “inflation” that is making life unaffordable for millions of people. I’m mostly talking about companies and industries that make “staples of life” products like food, housing, cars, etc, not Apple.

    Apple has long had creeping price increases on its hardware, but by contrast they hold the line on the price of a lot of their services and software. For example, the cost of iCloud storage or individual services like Apple TV+ and Apple Arcade haven’t TTBOMK changed since they were introduced five or more years ago. Can’t say that about gas, basic groceries, and health care. And yet, corporate profits are skyrocketing.

    Turns out that “the rent is too damn high” guy for a few years back was on to something. :smile: 
    williamlondonmuthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 11
    mikethemartianmikethemartian Posts: 1,428member
    eriamjh said:
    I’m sure every company files for immediate dismissal in cases like this.   100%.   

    And the dismissal rate is far less than 100%.  
    It is just standard operating procedure. The same with a criminal defense team seeking a summary judgment from the judge before a case goes to a jury.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 11
    mikethemartianmikethemartian Posts: 1,428member
    They just announced a case against Ticketmaster today.
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.