Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 06 AUGUST 2020

U.S. Courts Annual Review: Supreme Court

Sheppard
Sheppard
Contributor
Sheppard

Sheppard

Businesses turn to Sheppard to deliver sophisticated counsel to help clients move ahead. With more...

View firm profile
Explore more from Sheppard

The United States Supreme Court's single antitrust case of the 2019 term, Apple, Inc v. Pepper upheld the long-standing and often criticized direct purchaser rule in the realm of sales...

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The United States Supreme Court's single antitrust case of the 2019 term, Apple, Inc v Pepper, 1 considered and upheld the long-standing and often criticized direct purchaser rule established by Hanover Shoe v United Shoe Machinery Co 2 and Illinois Brick Co v Illinois, which limited standing under Clayton Act section 4 to 'the overcharged direct purchaser, and not others in the chain of manufacture or distribution.'3

Background of the case

On 29 December 2011, several iPhone owners sued Apple, Inc (Apple) in federal court on behalf of a class consisting of 'all persons in the United States . . . who purchased an iPhone application or application license from Apple for use on an iPhone at any time from December 29, 2007 through the present.'4 The plaintiffs alleged that Apple illegally monopolized the iPhone application (app) aftermarket, comprising 'the market for distributing software applications that can be downloaded on the iPhone for managing such functions

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