Apps can be provided for free or at a price, with Apple taking a 30% cut of any revenue generated by the sale of digital products.

One of these focused on complaints towards Apple for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act in its alleged monopoly of the App Store marketplace, while a second set of complaints were aimed at both Apple and AT&T Mobility (AT&TM) for monopolizing the iPhone market via SIM card locking, forcing iPhone users to only use the AT&T Mobility cellular network.

[3] A new class-action suit, In Re Apple iPhone Antitrust Litigation (11-cv-06714-YGR) was filed shortly after the decertification by the same plaintiffs in District Court; the new complaint, after several refinements, narrowly focused only on Apple as the sole defendant and the App Store complaints, and identified the plaintiffs as consumers of the iPhone and its apps, thus allowing for them to seek class-action.

The Court specifically noted that the 30% fee Apple collects is "a cost passed-on to consumers by independent software developers".

The Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court's ruling, stating that the class had standing to sue under antitrust laws.

[12] Justice Sonia Sotomayor stated that Apple's practice creates a closed loop that impacts the price paid by consumers.

"[15] Disagreeing with Apple's reasoning, the Court explained that if adopted, it would "directly contradict the longstanding goal of effective private enforcement and consumer protection in antitrust cases."