{"id":67003,"date":"2026-04-21T04:38:47","date_gmt":"2026-04-21T02:38:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.apfelpatient.de\/?p=67003"},"modified":"2026-04-21T04:39:45","modified_gmt":"2026-04-21T02:39:45","slug":"doj-criticizes-apples-samsung-application-in-the-proceedings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.apfelpatient.de\/en\/news\/doj-kritisiert-apples-samsung-antrag-im-verfahren","title":{"rendered":"US Department of Justice criticizes Apple's Samsung application in the antitrust case"},"content":{"rendered":"

The US Department of Justice has filed a motion against Apple's request to obtain documents from Samsung's parent company in South Korea. The reason given is that Apple waited too long to make the request, and the complex international process should not justify any delay in the proceedings.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The antitrust case against Apple, which has been ongoing since 2024, has taken a new turn. A few days ago, Apple requested<\/a> internal documents from Samsung's South Korean parent company, arguing that they could reveal the true extent of competition in the smartphone and smartwatch markets. The DOJ has now responded with sharp criticism of the timing of the request and a clear warning against delays (via 9to5mac<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The dispute over Samsung documents demonstrates how deeply the antitrust case delves into the intricacies of legal detail. Apple wants to prove that the smartphone market is highly competitive and that users can easily switch between platforms. The DOJ wants to prevent Apple from prolonging the process with international document requirements \u2013 a high-stakes legal tug-of-war.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Apple's application in detail<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Apple initially requested that Samsung's US subsidiary release certain internal documents. Samsung US refused, stating that the requested documents were located exclusively at the parent company in South Korea. Apple then filed a motion with the US District Court for the District of New Jersey to issue a formal request for mutual legal assistance to South Korea.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The legal basis for this is the Hague Convention on the Evidence of Foreign Legal Evidence, which provides a formal mechanism for courts to obtain evidence from foreign entities in civil or commercial proceedings. Even if the US court grants Apple's request, South Korean authorities would still have to decide whether to comply. Furthermore, Samsung could raise objections under Korean law, which would further complicate the process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The DOJ's criticism<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In its counter-argument, the US Department of Justice primarily focuses on timing: Apple had long known how central Samsung was to the proceedings and that the parent company likely possessed relevant documents. Despite this, the company took nine months to file the application.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The consequence is clear: the complex international evidence-gathering process will likely not be completed before the conclusion of the evidentiary phase. And the DOJ explicitly emphasizes that this should not justify any extension of deadlines. Should the court grant Apple's request, Apple must "bear the risk" that some or even all of the requested evidence will not be returned in time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One clarification is noteworthy: The DOJ formally takes "no position" on whether the court should grant the request. The agency's primary concern is not a yes or no decision, but rather preventing this requirement from further prolonging the process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why this is important<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The seemingly technical dispute over document requirements has a strategic dimension. The longer the proceedings drag on, the more time Apple has to build its own arguments and negotiate potential settlements. For the DOJ, however, every delay is a problem \u2013 the case has already been pending for two years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Samsung is central to this argument for a specific reason: Apple argues that Samsung devices are a genuine alternative to the iPhone and that users can easily switch. If internal Samsung documents reveal how intensely the company competes with Apple and how frequently users actually switch, it would strengthen Apple's defense. That's precisely why Apple wants these documents \u2013 and the DOJ is understandably skeptical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The broader context<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

This case is the latest in a series of ongoing legal battles against Apple worldwide. In addition to the DOJ case, Apple is currently fighting a $38 billion antitrust fine in India<\/a>, the Masimo dispute was recently decided<\/a> in Apple's favor, and there are currently issues with gambling apps<\/a> in the App Store in Brazil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Apple, the DOJ case is potentially the most consequential of these proceedings. The ruling could fundamentally change the iPhone business model in the US \u2013 especially if the court concludes that Apple is indeed abusing its dominant market position. The court has not yet decided when the case will actually be concluded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is currently unclear when the judges will rule on Samsung's application. The next few weeks will show whether Apple can enforce its document strategy \u2013 or whether the DOJ will meet the deadlines. (Image: Shutterstock \/ alexkich)<\/p>\n\n\n\n