Apple Inc. v. Pepper

Apple Inc. v. Pepper
Argued November 26, 2018
Decided May 13, 2019
Full case nameApple Inc. v. Pepper, et al.
Docket no.17-204
Citations587 U.S. ___ (more)
139 S. Ct. 1514; 203 L. Ed. 2d 802
ArgumentOral argument
Case history
PriorMotion to dismiss granted, In re Apple iPhone Antitrust Litig., No. 11-cv-06714-YGR (N.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2013); reversed, In re Apple iPhone Antitrust Litig. (Pepper v. Apple Inc.), 846 F.3d 313 (9th Cir. 2017); cert. granted, 138 S. Ct. 2647 (2018).
Holding
Under Illinois Brick, the iPhone owners were direct purchasers who may sue Apple for alleged monopolization.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Neil Gorsuch · Brett Kavanaugh
Case opinions
MajorityKavanaugh, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
DissentGorsuch, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito
Laws applied
Clayton Act

Apple Inc. v. Pepper, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case related to antitrust laws related to third-party resellers.[1] The case centers on Apple Inc.'s App Store, and whether consumers of apps offered through the store have Article III standing under federal antitrust laws to bring a class-action antitrust lawsuit against Apple for practices it uses to regulate the App Store. The case centers on the applicability of the "Illinois Brick doctrine" established by the Supreme Court in 1977 via Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, which determined that indirect consumers of products lack Article III standing to bring antitrust charges against producers of those products. In its 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that since consumers purchased apps directly through Apple, that they have standing under Illinois Brick to seek antitrust charges against Apple.

  1. ^ Apple Inc. v. Pepper, No. 17-204, 587 U.S. ___ (2019).

© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search