Apple Initiates Payments in US Class Action Lawsuit Over iPhone Slowdown Controversy

Apple has commenced compensatory payments in the long-standing class action lawsuit concerning allegations of intentionally slowing down specific iPhones in the United States.

Claimants are set to receive a share of a $500 million (£394 million) settlement, equating to approximately $92 (£72) per claim.

In 2020, Apple agreed to settle the lawsuit, asserting its denial of any wrongdoing while expressing concerns about the escalating costs of prolonged litigation.

A parallel case in the United Kingdom seeks £1.6 billion in compensation.

The origins of the US case trace back to December 2017 when Apple confirmed suspicions by admitting to intentionally slowing down some iPhones as they aged. Apple argued that, as batteries aged, their performance declined, and the intentional “slowdown” aimed to prolong the phones’ overall lifespan.

However, Apple faced accusations of throttling iPhone performance without informing customers, resulting in widespread dissatisfaction. To address the issue, Apple offered discounted battery replacements, leading to the initiation of the US legal action. Initial estimates suggested each person might receive as little as $25, but the actual payout now appears to be nearly four times that amount.

In the UK, Apple’s attempt to block a similar mass action lawsuit failed in November. The case, initiated by Justin Gutmann in June 2022, represents an estimated 24 million iPhone users.

While Apple has consistently dismissed the lawsuit as “baseless” and emphasized its commitment to product longevity, Mr. Gutmann, while acknowledging the US payments, highlighted that it does not impact the UK case.

“It’s a moral victory but not much use to me. I’ve got to plough on and pursue the case in the UK jurisdiction,” stated Mr. Gutmann, noting Apple’s staunch resistance to the UK class action. The case is set to progress to the Court of Appeal, where the firm seeks to halt the proceedings. Mr. Gutmann anticipates a potential trial in late 2024 or early 2025 but acknowledges the challenge of establishing a precise timeline.

Apple Faces Sales Ban in the US for Watch Series 9 and Watch Ultra 2 as Biden Administration Declines Veto


In a significant development, Apple is prohibited from selling the Watch Series 9 and Watch Ultra 2 in the United States, as the Biden administration opted not to override the ban imposed by the International Trade Commission (ITC) today.

The removal of both devices from Apple’s official website occurred on December 21st, followed by their withdrawal from store shelves after December 24th. A statement from the Office of US Trade Representative Katherine Tai, reported by CNBC, revealed that the agency “decided not to reverse the ITC’s determination” after careful consideration.

Responding to the ban, an unidentified Apple spokesperson, as reported by Reuters, confirmed the company’s intention to appeal the ITC decision. The spokesperson stated, “We strongly disagree with the USITC decision and resulting exclusion order, and are taking all measures to return Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2 to customers in the U.S. as soon as possible.”

The ITC imposed the ban after determining that Apple had violated the patent for blood oxygen saturation technology owned by the company Masimo. Additionally, the ITC directed Apple to cease selling any previously-imported devices containing the infringing technology. Despite Apple’s attempt to halt the decision during the appeal process, the ITC denied the request. The final opportunity for intervention rested with President Joe Biden, who did not veto the ban.

It’s important to note that the sales ban only impacts Apple’s stores in the US. Customers still have the option to purchase the Watch Series 9 or Watch Ultra 2 at retailers such as Best Buy and Target while supplies last. Apple will continue to offer the Watch SE, which lacks a blood oxygen sensor and remains unaffected by the ban.

The future steps for Apple remain uncertain. Analysts, including my colleague Victoria Song, explore potential paths Apple could take, such as implementing software changes to the blood oxygen sensor or disabling the sensor on imported devices. However, these approaches may not be sufficient to satisfy the ITC, leading to speculation that Apple might consider settling with Masimo as an alternative solution.