Beverage

I. INTRODUCTION

This case requires us to explore the intersection of laws regulating antitrust activities and unfair competition. Plaintiffs Michelle Beverage and Joseph Mejia (Plaintiffs) appeal after the trial court sustained without leave to amend a demurrer brought by Defendant Apple, Inc. (Apple) to their class action complaint. They alleged that Apple’s restrictive contractual terms and its coercive conduct toward portable software developers who seek to do business on Apple’s App Store constituted unlawful and unfair practices that violated both the Cartwright Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 16700 et seq.) and the Unfair Competition Law (Id. § 17200 et seq. (UCL).). Applying the Colgate doctrine, U. S. v. Colgate & Co. (1919) 250 U.S. 300 (Colgate) and the holding of Chavez v. Whirlpool Corporation (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 363 (Chavez), the trial court determined that Plaintiffs did not and could not state causes of action under either legal regime as a matter of law. On appeal, Plaintiffs challenge only one aspect of the trial court’s ruling. They argue the court erred by relying on Chavez to sustain the demurrer to their UCL cause of action alleging unfair practices by Apple…