California appeals court revives lawsuit accusing Apple of blocking iPhone repairs after a three‑judge panel found the consumer claims sufficiently detailed to survive a dismissal.
The appellate panel reversed a Santa Clara Superior Court decision that had thrown out the case, saying the plaintiffs’ allegations could plausibly show an unfair competition claim.
Panel overturns dismissal of repair‑related suit
Acting presiding Associate Justice Cynthia Lie authored the unanimous opinion. The judges said the complaint “substantially injures consumers” by limiting affordable repair options.
Lie noted that, at the pleading stage, the plaintiffs had offered “reasonable inferences” linking Apple’s conduct to broader market pricing patterns.
Related: Kilburn’s Sparkling Secret: Lab Grown Diamonds Unveiled
Key allegations and statutes cited
Two consumers, Jesse Granato and Janice Zarad, each paid for out‑of‑warranty screen fixes in 2021 after being told a third‑party repair would void their warranty. They sued in 2022, asserting that the firm withholds parts, tools, manuals and software, inflating independent repair costs.
The suit also references California’s 2024 Right to Repair Act, which obligates manufacturers to supply components and documentation to owners and independent shops. The law took effect after the original filing, but the court said the later statute suggests the conduct was unfair even before it was codified.
Another claim invokes the 1975 Magnuson‑Moss Warranty Act, which protects consumers against deceptive warranty practices. While the panel found the plaintiffs had not adequately pleaded a violation of that act, it acknowledged the spirit of the law was relevant.
Apple argued the plaintiffs never actually obtained third‑party repairs, a point the court dismissed as irrelevant to the broader market impact claim.
Related: The Most Common Errors to Avoid After an Injury
The judges wrote that the alleged price difference between Apple’s repair fees and what independent shops might charge “does not need to be proven” for the plaintiffs to argue that Apple’s policies raise overall repair prices.
In effect, the appellate decision says the complaint’s allegations are enough to move forward, without requiring the plaintiffs to demonstrate the exact cost savings they would have achieved elsewhere.
The case now returns to the superior court.