The struggle between Apple and Epic Games, one of the longest-running and largest legal battles in the technology world, becomes even more complicated with a brand new legal attack.

US-based technology giant Apple wants to completely stop the trial process in the lower court while waiting for the critical decision of the Supreme Court regarding non-App Store payments.

To justify this demand, the company cites a securities fraud case filed against it, which was recently suspended, as a precedent.

Epic Games, on the other hand, strongly opposes this postponement request and advocates that the legal process continue without slowing down.

This breakthrough, which will radically affect the future of the smartphone and digital application ecosystem, draws attention to the California district court again.

What is the Coral Springs Case as a Precedent?

The new trump card that Apple presented to the court actually stems from another legal process that contains quite important arguments in itself. Earlier in the year, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Apple on behalf of the City of Coral Springs Police Officers Retirement Plan.

In this case, Apple is accused of securities fraud and misleading investors. Investors claim that the technology giant is lying to the market about whether it has actually complied with the injunction decision given in the Epic Games case in 2021 and whether it will be able to introduce new artificial intelligence-supported Siri features on time.

Judge Noël Wise, the judge of this case, finds Apple’s request justified and decides to freeze the Coral Springs case until the decision of the Supreme Court.

The reason for the suspension of the case depends entirely on the outcome of the Epic Games case. Backed by this decision, Apple immediately appealed to Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who is presiding over the Epic Games case, and set a legal precedent by saying, “The other court is waiting for this process, and you should stop our case until the Supreme Court decision.”

Commission Battle on the Supreme Court’s Table

So, what does the Supreme Court decision that Apple wants to wait by stopping all these lawsuits cover? It all starts with the rule imposed by the court in 2021 on Apple to allow app developers to link to external payment methods outside the App Store.

Although Apple seems to have complied with this rule, it continues to demand a very high commission rate of 27 percent from sales made through external channels.

Epic Games argues that Apple is circumventing the court order and committing civil disobedience with this closed pricing. The Supreme Court is currently examining whether Apple can be found at fault for civil disobedience in cases where the brand new 2021 decision does not explicitly prohibit such external boards.

Apple says that the Supreme Court’s decision here will directly affect the lower court’s current debates about how much committees can be recruited from external purchases.

Epic Games’ Objection and Apple’s Plan B

The Epic Games side completely opposes Apple’s argument. Lawyers for the gaming giant argue that the Supreme Court’s review does not bind the lower court’s authority to appoint a committee and that Apple is just trying to buy time. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is currently reviewing these opposing arguments presented by both sides.

Apple has also prepared a very strategic plan B in case its main request to suspend the case is rejected. In its response petition to Judge Rogers, the company requests that the processes be suspended indefinitely, even if the suspension request is rejected.

Thus, Apple aims to gain time to stop the trial, even if by force, by moving the decision to a higher court (Ninth Circuit Court) or directly to the Supreme Court before the case in the lower court progresses.

How these legal tactics will shape developer boards in the portable application market will become clear with the court decision in the coming weeks.