The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to review Apple’s petition in its continuing fight with Epic Games over a civil contempt finding, putting one slice of the dispute back before the justices.
In a June 30 order list, the court granted certiorari in Apple Inc. v. Epic Games, Inc., docketed as No. 25-1311. The grant is narrow: the court said review is “limited to Question 1” from Apple’s petition.
That qualifier matters. A certiorari grant does not mean Apple won. It means at least four justices voted to hear the case. By limiting the grant to one question, the court also left the rest of Apple’s petition outside the case for now.
The order list does not spell out the text of Question 1, and it gives no reasoning for the grant. That is normal for this stage, though it is not especially satisfying for anyone trying to work out exactly how much of the contempt dispute the court wants to address.
The case name confirms the parties: Apple Inc. is the petitioner, and Epic Games Inc. is the respondent. The dispute is tied to a civil contempt finding in the long-running Apple v. Epic Games litigation, according to the case description.
What the court actually did
The court’s action was procedural and precise. It granted Apple’s request for review, but only in part. It did not issue a merits ruling, did not vacate the lower-court decision, and did not say whether the contempt finding was correct.
The same order list included several other grants and summary dispositions. The court granted review in Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins, consolidated those cases, and allotted one hour for oral argument. It also granted review in Grand v. University Heights.
Other cases were sent back to lower courts for reconsideration in light of recent Supreme Court decisions, including matters involving Monsanto and cases linked to Chatrie v. United States and Landor v. Louisiana Dept. of Corrections and Public Safety.
For Apple and Epic, the operative fact is shorter: the justices have decided to hear Apple on one question arising from the contempt fight. Everything else, including what the court thinks of the merits, remains undecided.
This story draws on original reporting from Daring Fireball.
