Overview
- The Ninth Circuit, which reversed its own stay Tuesday after Epic sought reconsideration, ordered its mandate enforced and sent the case back to the district court.
- The panel said Apple failed to show the Supreme Court is likely to take the case or that remand hearings would cause irreparable harm under Rule 41(d).
- Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will now decide what fee Apple can charge when apps direct users to pay on the web instead of inside the app, a decision that affects what developers keep from those sales.
- Apple can still ask the Supreme Court to review the case even as the lower court work goes on.
- The fight traces to a 2021 order striking Apple’s anti‑steering rules that blocked links to outside payments, followed by contempt findings and appeals over whether and how Apple can collect a commission on those purchases.