Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 DECEMBER 2019

Decision In Ward v. Apple Inc. (Ninth Circuit)

Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Explore more from Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP

Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying class certification without conducting the "rigorous analysis" required by Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. 27 (2013), based on the plaintiff 's failure to provide ...

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Key Issue

Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying class certification without conducting the "rigorous analysis" required by Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. 27 (2013), based on the plaintiff 's failure to provide sufficient evidence of a common class-wide injury.

Background

On January 7, 2007, Apple announced that it had entered into an exclusivity agreement with AT&T. Under the terms of the agreement, AT&T would be the only authorized provider of wireless voice and data services for Apple iPhones in the United States for five years. In exchange, the two companies agreed to share revenue for voice and data services received from iPhone customers. Apple further agreed to install SIM card "Program Locks" on all phones, to prevent customers from using other cellular networks.13

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from