Is it just me or is that really confusing when you have "appellees", "appellants" and "Apple" as the appellant?
This case reminds me of one Conrad Black (newspaper barron) who still complains that he should not have been found guilty and served jail time for obstruction of justice for removing records from his office, explicitly against a court order, because he was found not guilty of some of the fraud charges the court order related to. His theory is that if he was found not guilty he couldn't have obstructed justice
.