DOJ proceedings: Apple may request Samsung data Apfelpatient

Apple has achieved a significant procedural victory in its US antitrust case against the Department of Justice: A federal court in New Jersey has granted the request to obtain internal documents from Samsung Electronics of South Korea under the Hague Convention on the Evidence of Unfair Competition. However, this does not definitively determine whether Samsung will ultimately release the documents.

A procedural hurdle has been cleared in the US Department of Justice's antitrust case against Apple, which has been ongoing since March 2024. Last Friday, the court granted Apple permission to formally pursue a request to the South Korean judiciary for internal Samsung documents. This marks the next step in a dispute that began in early April with Apple's request to access Samsung data, a timing the DOJ sharply criticized. The approval represents a partial victory for Apple, but not a final outcome.

What the court decided

The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey granted Apple's request. In its brief ruling, the court stated that it had reviewed submissions from both sides and found sufficient grounds for granting the request. The phrase "good cause shown" is the legal threshold that must be met for a request for evidence to be granted across international borders.

This means Apple can now officially forward the request to the South Korean authorities via the Hague Convention on the Evidence of Unfair Competition. The convention governs how courts in civil and commercial matters can obtain evidence from parties or third parties abroad. Apple had invoked precisely this mechanism because Samsung's US subsidiary had refused to release the documents held by its South Korean parent company.

Approval does not equal release

The key caveat of the decision: A "yes" from the US court does not automatically mean "yes" from South Korea. The actual review of whether and how the request for legal assistance will be implemented now lies with the Korean authorities. They will decide, according to local law, whether the request will be carried out in its submitted form – or whether parts of it will be rejected.

Even if South Korea cooperates in principle, Samsung can still object or refuse to provide individual documents. A similar request from Elon Musk's company xAI failed in South Korea earlier this year because the requested documents were deemed too extensive. According to court documents, Apple deliberately formulated its request more narrowly to avoid this pitfall.

What it's about

Apple's strategy aims to counter the core allegations of the DOJ lawsuit. The Department of Justice accuses the company of exploiting a dominant market position through the App Store, developer rules, and control over key iPhone functions. Apple's defense argues, however, that the smartphone and wearable market is extremely competitive, and Samsung provides the most direct evidence of this.

Specifically, Apple is hoping for internal Samsung data on market analyses, competitive assessments against the iPhone, the development of the Galaxy Store, and platform switching rates. If Samsung has internally documented how frequently users switch between iPhone and Galaxy, this would significantly strengthen Apple's argument against the monopoly allegations.

Response to the DOJ's criticism of the timing

The approval follows a strong challenge from the Department of Justice. The DOJ had argued that Apple waited nine months before filing the request, unnecessarily prolonging the evidence-gathering process. The department did not urge the court to deny the request, but warned that the lengthy international process could negatively impact the timeline of the main trial.

The court did not address this concern in its current ruling. It approved the application without specifying a timeline. While this means Apple assumes the risk that the proceedings in South Korea might not be completed in time, it allows the attempt to proceed at all.

Strategic dimension of the dispute

The dispute over the Samsung documents may seem at first glance like a procedural sideshow, but it is strategically crucial. Both sides are indirectly fighting over the definition of the market in which Apple is being investigated. The DOJ argues that it is a narrowly defined premium US smartphone segment in which Apple holds a dominant position. Apple counters with a broader global market in which Samsung operates as an equal competitor.

Whoever defines the market wins the case – this rule of thumb almost always applies in antitrust law. In this context, the Samsung documents are potentially ammunition for Apple's market definition. This is precisely why the international effort is worthwhile for Apple, even if the prospects of success in South Korea remain uncertain.

What the permit reveals about the status of the proceedings

The court's approval of the request suggests that the judges do not intend to prevent Apple from gathering all relevant evidence, at least during the discovery phase. A rejection would have curtailed key lines of defense for Apple—an accusation the defense could later have raised on appeal. By granting the request, the court is procedurally protecting itself against precisely this accusation.

At the same time, the decision signals that the discovery phase is not yet in its final stages. Anyone expecting a request for legal assistance to South Korea to be approved implicitly assumes that there is sufficient time for a response. This in itself says something about the length of the proceedings.

Why this goes beyond the news

The US antitrust case against Apple is potentially the most consequential the company currently faces. A conviction would allow fundamental changes to the App Store model, developer guidelines, and the entire iPhone ecosystem - comparable to the changes Google faces following its victory in that case. Even Apple's successful defense in the Google search engine ruling in the fall of 2025 does not change the fact that its own DOJ case remains pending.

Every step in the evidence gathering process - even a seemingly technical one like the current approval - shifts the balance of power ever so slightly. Apple gains access to a potential source of evidence. The DOJ loses a safeguard that could have allowed it to streamline the proceedings. Both of these factors accumulate over the course of the trial.

Antitrust proceedings with a long duration

The proceedings will drag on for years. The discovery phase is typically the longest and most complex stage of such a trial, and the international gathering of evidence concerning South Korea will not expedite the process. It remains unclear when the court will decide on further motions and whether the Samsung documents will ultimately be included in the case file.

One thing is certain: Apple is allowed to pursue this path. How far Apple will get with it will be decided in the coming months – in Seoul, not in New Jersey. (Image: Shutterstock / baona jnr)