US appeals court to consider reviving Apple app store class action

By Mike Scarcella

WASHINGTON, Dec 18 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court said on Thursday it will consider whether millions of Apple customers can band together in a lawsuit accusing the iPhone maker of monopolizing the market for apps and inflating prices, after a trial judge stripped the case of class action status earlier this year.

In a brief order, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it will review a ruling that decertified a class of nearly 200 million consumers who claim Apple’s App Store rules led to $20 billion in overcharges.

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California, ruled in October that the customers failed to provide a model "capable of reliably showing classwide injury and damages in one stroke" by matching Apple accounts to consumers, while limiting the number of "unharmed" consumers in the class.

The three plaintiffs asked the appeals court to overturn the decision and revive the class action before their individual claims are decided. Class actions can expose companies to far greater damages than individual lawsuits.

Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Mark Rifkin, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said they “look forward to briefing and arguing the merits of the appeal in the Ninth Circuit.”

The lawsuit, filed in 2011, accuses Apple of violating U.S. antitrust law by too tightly restraining how customers download apps and pay for transactions, causing overcharges for apps and in-app content on their iPhones and iPads. Apple has denied any wrongdoing.

In their appeal, the consumers called the decertification ruling “manifestly erroneous,” saying they showed Apple’s conduct harmed virtually all class members.

They warned the ruling creates a “death knell” for claims worth only $268 collectively for the three named plaintiffs.

Apple told the appeals court that the plaintiffs still can pursue individual claims and that review was unwarranted because the decertification order turned on fact-specific rulings, not unsettled law.

The case is In re Apple iPhone Antitrust Litigation, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 25-7122.

For plaintiffs: David Frederick and Aaron Panner of Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, and Betsy Manifold and Mark Rifkin of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz

For defendant: Cynthia Richman and Theodore Boutrous Jr of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher

Read more:

Live Nation, Ticketmaster must face sprawling class action over prices

Amazon must face US nationwide class action over third-party sales

US appeals court wipes out order certifying FirstEnergy investor class action

US Supreme Court reverses decision to rule on class action question

(Reporting by Mike Scarcella)