Apple has filed its response to Fintiv’s trade secret lawsuit over digital wallet technology.

Despite Fintiv initiating the complaint two months ago, the company hasn’t actually served Apple, which would set the case in motion. Apple told 9to5Mac that Fintiv is simply delaying and avoiding having its frivolous and meritless case tried in court.

The lawsuit alleges violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, Georgia’s RICO Act, The Defend Trade Secrets Act, and Georgia’s Trade Secret Act. iled by Kasowitz LLP, it alleges that Apple “engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity, including wire fraud and trade secret misappropriation, in furtherance of a scheme to steal Fintiv’s proprietary mobile wallet technology and trade secrets that Apple used to create Apple Pay, a service that generates billions in annual revenue and has been a major force in growing Apple’s market valuation to more than $3 trillion.”

The complaint claims Apple approached CorFire (Fintiv’s predecessor) more than a decade ago under the pretense of forming a mobile payment business partnership. Between 2011 and 2012, it’s alleged, Apple attended multiple meetings with CorFire representatives and received confidential technical information under non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). 

The purpose of those meetings was to enter into an agreement in which Apple would license CorFire’s mobile wallet technology, for which CorFire would receive licensing fees, according to the complaint. Instead, it’ alleged, Apple stole Fintiv’s confidential information and later hired away key CorFire employees, before launching Apple Pay in 2014. Fintiv asserts in the court filing that Apple Pay’s core features including secure element technology, NFC technology, and trusted service management platform were based on CorFire’s innovations.

Judge Alan Albright, who presided over the long-running case in Texas, has twice ruled that Apple doesn’t Fintiv’s patented technology.

Hopefully, the latest lawsuit will fail miserably as has the other two. Then perhaps Fintiv will give this a rest.

We’ll see, but, as 9to5Mac pointed out, Apple says the lawsuit should be dismissed because:

  • Fintiv’s claims under the federal and Georgia trade secrets laws, as well as federal racketeering law, are barred because the company had known the underlying facts since 2014 but waited until August 2025 to sue after losing its patent case.
  • The Georgia racketeering claim is invalid because it relies entirely on trade secret allegations already governed by state trade secret law.
  • Fintiv’s attempt to reframe its trade secret complaint as a racketeering case fails because it does not establish the required elements of an enterprise or a recurring pattern of illegal acts.

I hope you’ll help support Apple World Today by becoming a patron. All our income is from Patreon support and sponsored posts. Patreon pricing ranges from $2 to $10 a month. Thanks in advance for your support.



Article provided with permission from AppleWorld.Today