Apple files motion to dismiss DOJ antitrust lawsuit, citing harm to innovation and user experience

Apple has officially filed a motion to dismiss the Department of Justice’s antitrust lawsuit filed in May. Apple argues the case should be dismissed because the DOJ’s lawsuit does not meet the legal standards required to prove a violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act.

This development follows Apple questioning the validity of the DOJ’s lawsuit, arguing it would harm innovation and deprive consumers of the competitive features that make iPhone distinctive.

In the filing, Apple writes:

Ultimately, this case is foreclosed by longstanding antitrust law. This Court should reject the Government’s invitation to forge a new theory of antitrust liability that no court has recognized, based on five disparate examples of Apple design choices that do not harm smartphone competition. And to the extent the Government seeks to use these five examples to seize unprecedented authority to control Apple design choices more broadly, the case is even more far-fetched. Such a sweeping rule, if recognized, would harm innovation and risk depriving consumers of the private, safe, and secure experience that differentiates iPhone from every other option in the marketplace. The complaint should be dismissed

Those five examples referenced by Apple of the DOJ’s accusations of anticompetitive behavior include:

• Super Apps: Apple limited how developers could categorize and display mini apps in the App Store and their access to Apple’s in-app payment system.
• Cloud Streaming Apps: Apple initially required streaming games to be submitted as standalone apps for review rather than in a single app, but later relaxed this requirement.
• Messaging Apps: Apple did not allow third-party messaging apps to use the SMS protocol, run in the background while closed, or access the iPhone’s camera, and did not develop iMessage for Android.
• Smartwatches: Apple restricted third-party smartwatches from responding to iPhone notifications, maintaining certain Bluetooth connections, or receiving messages without disabling iMessage, and did not make Apple Watch compatible with Android.
• Digital Wallets: Apple limited third-party digital wallet apps’ access to sensitive financial information and the NFC antenna used for tap-to-pay functions, reserving this access for Apple Wallet.

Apple adds:

“The Government’s theory that Apple has somehow violated the antitrust laws by not giving third parties broader access to iPhone runs headlong into blackletter antitrust law protecting a firm’s right to design and control its own product.”

Now that Apple has filed its motion to dismiss, Judge Julien X. Neals will review the motion and the arguments from both sides and can either grant or deny the motion.

You can read Apple’s full motion to dismiss below. If the case moves forward to trial, that trial likely wouldn’t happen until 2027 or 2028.