The Apple iCloud storage lawsuit is a proposed federal class action, Felix Gamboa v. Apple Inc., accusing Apple of illegally monopolizing cloud backups for iPhone users by blocking third-party services from handling app data and device settings, then charging inflated prices for iCloud as a result. A federal judge in California refused to dismiss the case in June 2025. It is now in discovery. No class has been certified, and no settlement has been reached.
What the Lawsuit Claims
Apple lets iPhone owners store photos and videos with third-party providers like Google Drive or Dropbox, but it blocks those same services from backing up app data and device settings. Those are the files needed to fully restore an iPhone. Because no competitor can offer a complete backup, the plaintiffs argue Apple has cornered the market and can charge whatever it wants for iCloud storage.
The complaint frames this two ways. The first is an illegal “tying” arrangement: buying an iPhone effectively forces you to buy iCloud storage if you want a complete backup. The second is monopoly maintenance, with Apple allegedly using technical restrictions to shut out competitors and preserve what the plaintiffs claim is a 96.1% share of cloud storage revenue on Apple devices. The suit says the underlying infrastructure for all iOS backups is the same regardless of file type, making the restriction on third parties a business decision rather than a technical necessity.1Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP. Apple iCloud Antitrust
Plaintiffs point to Samsung as a counterexample. Samsung device owners can back up all file types to alternative cloud platforms, which the lawsuit argues shows Apple’s restrictions serve profits rather than security.1Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP. Apple iCloud Antitrust The complaint alleges the resulting fees are “marked up to the point where the service is generating almost pure profit.”2Classaction.org. iCloud Lawsuit Says Consumers Have Been Overcharged Due to Apple Monopoly on Cloud Storage Market
Who Filed the Case and Where
The lawsuit was filed on March 1, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.1Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP. Apple iCloud Antitrust The lead plaintiff, Felix Gamboa, is a Los Angeles resident who pays $2.99 per month for iCloud storage. The plaintiffs are represented by Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, with Steve Berman and Ben Harrington leading the team. The plaintiffs’ lawyers want to represent a nationwide class of tens of millions of consumers who bought iCloud storage plans within the past four years.3Reuters. Apple Must Face Consumer Lawsuit Over iCloud Storage, US Judge Rules
What the Judge Has Ruled So Far
An earlier version of the complaint was dismissed. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in June 2024 and a second amended complaint in March 2025.1Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP. Apple iCloud Antitrust Apple again moved to dismiss, arguing in part that the antitrust claims were barred by a four-year statute of limitations.
On June 16, 2025, U.S. District Judge Eumi K. Lee denied Apple’s motion in its entirety. The judge found that the plaintiffs had introduced “substantial new allegations about the importance of data storage for all iPhone files” and had plausibly alleged that Apple’s restrictions on competing cloud providers are “coercive.”3Reuters. Apple Must Face Consumer Lawsuit Over iCloud Storage, US Judge Rules1Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP. Apple iCloud Antitrust On the statute-of-limitations question, Judge Lee called dismissal “premature” but left the door open for Apple to raise the issue again later.
Where the Case Stands Now
The case has moved into discovery under Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi.4CourtListener. Gamboa v. Apple Inc. In January 2026, Judge DeMarchi ordered Apple to search for and produce documents from the custodial files of Steve Jobs and Eddy Cue, Apple’s senior vice president of services, though the parties still need to negotiate the date range for those searches.5Justia. Gamboa v. Apple Inc., Filing 89
A separate discovery fight surfaced in 2026. Plaintiff Julianna Gamboa sought to withdraw, and Apple accused Hagens Berman of trying to remove her to avoid consequences from deleted emails that may have been relevant evidence. Apple argued it should be allowed to investigate what instructions the plaintiff received about preserving those documents before any withdrawal is permitted. Plaintiffs characterized Apple’s position as an attempt to create a “sideshow.”6MLex. Apple Using Troubling Tactics in iCloud Antitrust Case, US Plaintiffs Say No ruling on that dispute has been reported. No trial date has been set.
Apple’s Response
Apple denies wrongdoing. The company says the restriction on third-party backups of app data and device settings exists to “guarantee high levels of security” for its users.3Reuters. Apple Must Face Consumer Lawsuit Over iCloud Storage, US Judge Rules Its defense is being led by Latham & Watkins.7Law360. Apple Targets Hagens Berman Gamesmanship in iCloud Suit
The Pricing at the Center of the Damages Claim
Every Apple device comes with 5 GB of free iCloud storage. That figure has not changed since iCloud launched in 2011.89to5Mac. Apple Rethink iCloud Storage Tiers9Apple. iCloud+ Plans and Pricing The plaintiffs argue that the frozen free tier, combined with growing device storage and photo file sizes, effectively pushes users onto paid plans they cannot get from anyone else.
Related Cases Abroad
Similar claims are moving in Europe. In November 2024, the UK consumer group Which? filed a collective action against Apple in the Competition Appeal Tribunal alleging Apple breached UK competition law by leveraging control of iOS to favor iCloud and overcharge customers. The claim covers roughly 40 million UK Apple customers who paid for iCloud since October 1, 2015, with total claimed damages of about £3 billion, or roughly £70 per person if successful.10The Guardian. Apple Facing Near £3bn UK Lawsuit Over Cloud Storage Competition Law In April 2026, the Tribunal granted a Collective Proceedings Order, formally letting the case proceed as a class action for approximately 38.5 million people and finding Which? a suitable class representative.11Competition Appeal Tribunal. Consumers’ Association (Which?) v Apple Inc. – Judgment Apple has said it will “vigorously defend” itself and contends that users are not required to use iCloud, noting that nearly half of its customers do not pay for iCloud+.
In June 2026, Italy’s competition authority (AGCM) opened an investigation into whether Apple ensures third-party cloud storage providers have effective and free interoperability with iOS and iPadOS features. It is the first probe the AGCM has opened under the EU Digital Markets Act, and its findings will be sent to the European Commission.12Telecompaper. Italian Watchdog to Investigate Apple’s iCloud Practices Under DMA13Economic Times. Italy Investigates Apple for Cloud Services Non-Compliance Under Digital Markets Act
Not the Same as the Older 16 GB Storage Case
A separate lawsuit, Orshan et al. v. Apple Inc., filed in December 2014, alleges Apple misrepresented the usable storage on 16 GB iPhones and iPads because iOS 8 consumed roughly 3 GB of the advertised capacity, allegedly to push consumers into iCloud upgrades.14Time. Apple Lawsuit iPhone iOS 8 iCloud Storage It was certified in September 2024 as a class action for a California subclass covering purchases between September 17, 2014, and September 30, 2016.15Top Class Actions. Apple Storage Capacity Class Action Seeks Class Certification That case is not formally connected to Gamboa and involves different legal theories.