Epic Games has escalated its fierce rivalry with Apple by formally asking a federal judge to mandate Fortnite’s return to the U.S. App Store. The developer also seeks a second civil contempt finding against Apple, asserting the tech giant’s refusal to review a purportedly compliant Fortnite submission directly violates a court injunction aimed at Apple’s App Store conduct. This legal gambit places the contentious dispute squarely before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, challenging Apple’s iOS gatekeeper status and risking further sanctions, especially following her recent, separate contempt ruling against Apple.
In its court filing, the company argues that “Apple’s refusal to consider Epic’s Fortnite submission is Apple’s latest attempt to circumvent this Court’s Injunction and this Court’s authority. Epic therefore seeks an order enforcing the Injunction, finding Apple in civil contempt yet again, and requiring Apple to promptly accept any compliant Epic app, including Fortnite, for distribution on the U.S. storefront of the App Store.”
This followed Apple’s May 15 communication, in which it stated: “Apple has determined not to take action on the Fortnite app submission until after the Ninth Circuit rules on [Apple’s] pending request for a partial stay of the [Contempt Order].” Epic claims its May 9 Fortnite submission, made via its Epic Games Sweden subsidiary, met all App Review Guidelines, offering both Apple’s In-App Purchase system and an external purchase link. Epic’s filing highlights that it has successfully maintained a compliant version of Fortnite in the European Union for the preceding nine months, and that Apple typically reviews 90% of app submissions within 24 hours, contrasting with the five-day inaction on Epic’s May 9 submission.
The developer emphasized Apple’s past statements, including CEO Tim Cook’s trial testimony where he suggested, “It would be to the benefit of the users to have Fortnite back on the App Store.” Furthermore, Epic’s motion asserts, “Apple also expressly and repeatedly told both this Court and Epic that it would welcome Fortnite back to the App Store if Epic complied with all of Apple’s Guidelines. That is exactly what Epic did.” This latest confrontation follows an earlier declaration from Apple that it would “not revisit” reinstating Epic Games’ developer account “until after the U.S. litigation between the parties concludes.”
Apple’s Defense And The Global Picture
Prior to Epic’s court action, Apple presented a different narrative regarding the worldwide availability of Fortnite. On May 16, Apple released a statement saying it had not blocked Fortnite updates in the European Union: “We asked that Epic Sweden resubmit the app update without including the US storefront of the App Store so as not to impact Fortnite in other geographies. We did not take any action to remove the live version of Fortnite from alternative distribution marketplaces in the EC.”
This explanation implies the global interruption, particularly in the EU under the Digital Markets Act (DMA) where Fortnite had been accessible via alternative marketplaces, stemmed from Epic’s decision against submitting a decoupled EU update.
The conflict originally ignited in 2020 when Epic Games introduced a direct payment system within Fortnite to circumvent Apple’s commissions, leading to the game’s swift removal from the App Store. While an initial ruling in the ensuing lawsuit did not compel Fortnite’s reinstatement, it did find Apple’s “anti-steering” rules—policies preventing developers from directing users to other payment options—to be unlawful.
Judicial Scrutiny Intensifies
The spotlight now turns to Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, whose history with the case is notable. In 2020, she had indicated she was “inclined not to require Apple to allow Fortnite on the App Store” and subsequently denied Epic’s request for a preliminary injunction that would have forced Apple to relist the game.
However, the judicial environment has evolved. On April 30, 2025, Judge Rogers found Apple in civil contempt for “willful[ly] violat[ing]” the 2021 anti-steering injunction. This ruling also included a referral of Apple and its VP of Finance, Alex Roman, to federal prosecutors for a potential criminal contempt investigation, with the judge describing testimony as “replete with misdirection and outright lies.”
Judge Rogers stated at the time, “Apple’s continued attempts to interfere with competition will not be tolerated. This is an injunction, not a negotiation. There are no do-overs once a party willfully disregards a court order.”
Apple, meanwhile, is contesting parts of Judge Rogers’ recent ruling. Apple filed an emergency motion with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on May 8, 2025, seeking to suspend prohibitions against charging commissions for external link purchases and limitations on link displays. Apple argued that “these new rules are not temporary sanctions for non-compliance that Apple can purge. Instead, the district court took the highly irregular step of imposing new, different, and permanent restrictions.”
Broader Battle Over App Ecosystems
The legal skirmish is a key front in a larger, worldwide debate concerning app store dominance, developer freedoms, and digital market competition. Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney has been a vocal opponent of Apple’s policies. He recently posted on X that “App Review shouldn’t be weaponized by senior management as a tool to delay or obstruct competition, due process, or free speech,” adding that “There is no way a rapidly evolving multi-platform game like Fortnite can operate if platforms use their power or processes to obstruct.”
Epic’s motion argues that Apple’s denial “is blatant retaliation against Epic for challenging Apple’s anticompetitive behavior and exposing its lies to the Court, culminating in the Injunction and the Contempt Order.” The filing concludes by requesting “that the Court enter an Order (1) finding that Apple violated the Injunction by refusing to consider Epic’s Fortnite submission; and (2) requiring Apple to accept any compliant version of Fortnite onto the U.S. storefront of the App Store.”
The resolution of this motion could significantly impact the ongoing power dynamics between platform holders and developers, potentially influencing regulatory actions and app store business models globally. Fortnite had been available to iPhone users in the EU via an alternative store for nine months before Epic’s latest claim of a global takedown.
Last Updated on May 20, 2025 6:13 pm CEST