Apple has asked a U.S. court to send a formal international request to South Korea for internal Samsung documents, escalating a discovery fight in the Department of Justice’s long‑running antitrust lawsuit over the iPhone and the App Store.
The company says it needs Samsung’s market research, sales figures and consumer‑switching analyses to rebut government claims that Apple uses its control of the iPhone and App Store to limit competition — including making it harder for iPhone users to switch to Android.
What Apple formally asked for
Filing materials show Apple is seeking a targeted set of records from Samsung Electronics in Seoul: smartphone and smartwatch business reports, market analyses, Smart Switch data that tracks device transfers, information about the Galaxy Store and developer agreements, and documents related to Samsung Pay and messaging or “super app” strategies.
Apple already subpoenaed Samsung’s U.S. arm, Samsung Electronics America, but the subsidiary repeatedly objected, telling Apple the responsive records are held by the South Korean parent. So Apple turned to the Hague Evidence Convention — the international route courts use to collect evidence from foreign corporations.
In its motion Apple argues the request is narrowly tailored, central to the litigation, and that there’s no adequate alternative way to obtain the material. The company frames Samsung’s internal data as real‑world evidence of how often customers actually switch platforms — a fact the company says undercuts the government’s portrayal of market foreclosure.
Why Samsung matters to the case
All four complaints in the DOJ and state suits name Samsung as Apple’s “closest smartphone competitor.” Plaintiffs point to examples they say illustrate Apple’s clout, including allegations that Apple’s practices contributed to Samsung stopping production of smartwatches that worked with iPhone in 2021. Apple, for its part, wants Samsung’s own numbers to show competition is vigorous and consumers can and do move between ecosystems.
The Smart Switch tool — Samsung’s utility for transferring contacts, photos and settings from iPhone to Galaxy devices — is singled out in Apple’s filing as an example of where Samsung itself may hold data directly relevant to switching behaviors.
If Apple can show high head‑to‑head switching rates, or that Samsung’s pricing and platform choices are robustly competitive, it hopes to weaken the government’s argument that Apple’s ecosystem restrictions have an anticompetitive effect.
Legal hurdles: court, Korean authorities, and Samsung’s potential objections
Even if the U.S. court issues the Letter of Request under the Hague Convention, that doesn’t guarantee Apple gets the documents. South Korean central authorities must decide whether to execute the request, and Samsung Electronics can object on grounds of Korean law or business confidentiality. Past Hague requests have been rejected or narrowed by Korean officials when they deemed them overly broad.
So Apple faces a three‑front uncertainty: a U.S. judge must sign off; South Korea must agree to produce (or permit production of) the records; and Samsung itself may litigate or quiet‑object under its local statutes.
Why this could matter beyond the courtroom
Discovery fights like this are often won or lost on the details. Samsung’s internal analyses could supply concrete numbers — transfer rates, reasons consumers choose Galaxy over iPhone, developer economics in the Galaxy Store — that are more persuasive to a judge or jury than abstract market theory.
There’s also an awkward commercial undertone. Apple and Samsung remain tightly intertwined: Samsung supplies components and is a major Android rival selling flagship phones such as the Galaxy S26 series. That commercial interdependence makes the drama feel a little like corporate theater. For readers who follow device developments, Samsung’s product strategy and messaging moves remain relevant context (for example, Samsung’s recent shifts around apps and messaging), and those shifts feed into the bigger competition story around mobile ecosystems and consumer choice. See our reporting on the Galaxy S26 Ultra and Samsung moving its Messages strategy toward Google Messages for useful background on how Samsung is shaping its Android play (/news/samsung-messages-goes-to-google).
What to watch next
Expect a procedural back‑and‑forth. Apple will press the U.S. court to issue the Hague request; Samsung and South Korean authorities will then weigh whether to comply. Either side could file objections or seek protective orders that limit what’s shared publicly.
Beyond the pleadings, the practical significance is simple: if Samsung’s internal documents show robust switching and a vibrant marketplace, Apple gains a persuasive factual counterpoint to claims it walled off competition. If the documents are withheld or don’t help Apple, the government’s narrative about ecosystem lock‑in will remain intact.
The case itself — filed in March 2024 and now deep in discovery — is one of several legal fights testing how much control big platform companies may exert over app markets and hardware features. This phase, where both sides dig for memos and numbers, often decides what evidence actually reaches a judge or jury. In other words: the war of documents is where the story will live for a while, not on a single headline.
