Match won’t have to provide documents in Apple’s app litigation

A federal judge denied a motion to compel documents from online dating company Match Group.

The motion concerned two antitrust class actions that app developers and consumers filed against Apple, which alleged that Apple "monopolizes the iOS app distribution market and uses that monopoly power to charge supracompetitive commissions to app developers for paid apps and on in-app purchases," according to an order issued last Thursday by U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson.

Match, which owns various online dating services including OkCupid, PlentyofFish, and Tinder, is not a party in either case. Hixson noted both Apple and the plaintiffs in the two cases have subpoenaed many other non-parties. Cameron et al. v. Apple Inc., 4:19-cv-03074-YGR (N.D. Cal., filed June 4, 2019). In re: Apple iPhone Antitrust Litigation, 4:11-cv-06714-YGR (N.D. Cal., filed December 29, 2011).

The documents Apple sought concern Match's internal documents about the Coalition for App Fairness -- a nonprofit organization that Match co-founded with Epic Games and other companies to advocate for anti-competitive practices in the mobile app market. Match argued Apple wanted the documents to "peek behind the curtain of a political opponent."

"As the coalition has an entire website explaining its purpose and objectives, why should Match be compelled to produce documents about those subjects?" Hixson asked. "Also, in the class actions, why do we care what the coalition's purpose and objectives are?"

He added, "The court cannot read minds to know Apple's true intentions, but it also doesn't need to. Rule 26 limits discovery to what is relevant and proportional to the needs of the underlying cases, and much of what Apple is requesting does not meet that standard."

In addition to arguing that the documents were relevant to the class actions, Apple said its request does not infringe on the First Amendment privilege. Hixson disagreed, writing, "Apple's motion to compel does not satisfy a heightened standard under the First Amendment."