District Judge Julien Neals of New Jersey ruled that the government had adequately demonstrated that Apple maintains monopoly power in smartphone markets and engages in anticompetitive conduct to maintain that dominance.

The lawsuit, filed in March 2024 by the US Department of Justice's antitrust division and 20 states, accuses Apple of illegally monopolizing smartphone markets through restrictions on app developers and device makers that limit competition and innovation.

According to the complaint, Apple controls 65 percent of the broader US smartphone market and 70 percent of the "performance smartphone" market -- a premium segment that excludes lower-end devices.

Judge Neals found these market share figures, combined with significant barriers to entry, sufficient to indicate Apple's monopoly power and warrant taking the case to trial.

The judge has yet to set a trial date, but the case is expected to take years.

"We believe this lawsuit is wrong on the facts and the law, and we will continue to vigorously fight it in court," an Apple spokesperson said in an email to AFP.

The government alleges Apple maintains this dominance by restricting five key technologies: "super apps," cloud-streaming apps, text messaging, smartwatches, and digital wallets.

The ruling highlighted internal Apple communications that allegedly show intent to maintain monopoly power, including statements from executives about preventing users from switching to competing devices.

Apple faces potential remedies ranging from changes to its business practices to orders requiring it to divest parts of its device and software empire if the government ultimately prevails at trial.

The case is among several major antitrust challenges facing Apple, which has also been accused for taking a significant cut of proceeds from outside apps on its devices.

The lawsuit is one of five major cases launched by the first Trump administration and Joe Biden's administration that also targeted Meta and Amazon.

In the two cases against Google, judges found the search engine giant guilty of running an illegal monopoly, and the company faces potential forced divestments of some of its businesses.