Apple is defending its right to seek documents from 14 federal agencies in its ongoing antitrust case with the Department of Justice. The company argues that evidence of federal agencies choosing Apple products for privacy features supports its claim that challenged practices have legitimate justifications rather than being anticompetitive. Agencies involved include the CIA, FBI, FTC, and Department of Defense. Following Apple's victory on the discovery issue, the DOJ filed a motion asking special discovery master Jose Linares to reconsider his decision, arguing that Judge Linares applied the wrong legal standard and that the requests impose undue burden. Apple's response calls the DOJ's motion legally flawed, stating it fails at every level. The company argues the DOJ's new evidence was always available and that the submitted declarations do not establish undue burden. Apple requests the motion be denied, with Judge Linares set to make a final ruling without further briefing.

The dispute centers on whether federal agencies should be treated as parties or non-parties in the discovery process. Apple maintains that previous case law supports treating agencies as parties when they voluntarily engage with the company's products. The DOJ contends that agencies are not ordinary consumers and that the broad document requests would create significant administrative burden.

Judge Linares appointed special master role to resolve narrow discovery disputes. His August 4 timeline prevents additional briefing, leaving the decision pending. The outcome could impact how tech companies defend against government antitrust actions and what evidence they can obtain from federal agencies.