Eligible iPhone owners in the United States can now submit claims in Apple’s proposed $250 million settlement over allegations that buyers were led to expect Siri Apple Intelligence features that were not delivered. The claims period opened on September 21, 2026 and runs until December 21.
The practical eligibility test is narrower than simply owning an iPhone 15 Pro or iPhone 16. Claimants must be original purchasers, meet the U.S. purchase and residency requirements, and confirm they expected to receive a Siri Apple Intelligence feature when they bought the device but did not receive it.
The settlement has only received preliminary court approval. A final approval hearing is scheduled for February 24, 2027, so opening the claims process does not mean payments are about to be issued.
| Settlement detail | Verified position |
|---|---|
| Total settlement amount | $250 million |
| Claims opened | September 21, 2026 |
| Claim deadline | December 21, 2026 |
| Indicative payment | $25 per eligible device |
| Maximum payment | Up to $95 per eligible device |
| Court status | Preliminary approval granted |
| Final approval hearing | February 24, 2027 |
Which iPhone owners can submit a claim?
The settlement covers the iPhone 15 Pro, iPhone 15 Pro Max, iPhone 16, iPhone 16e, iPhone 16 Plus, iPhone 16 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro Max.
Ownership alone is not enough. The settlement class covers people living in the United States who originally purchased an eligible device in the United States between June 10, 2024 and March 29, 2025. The purchase must have been for personal or business use rather than resale.
Claimants must also confirm that, when they bought the device, they expected to receive a Siri Apple Intelligence feature and did not receive it. The claim process can use information such as the iPhone serial number, Apple Account email address or phone number associated with the device to confirm the purchase or ownership.
Eligible users can start the process through the official Smartphone AI Settlement website. The deadline for submitting a valid claim is December 21, 2026.
The $25 payment is not guaranteed to stay at $25
The settlement uses $25 per eligible device as the presumptive payment, but the final amount depends on how many valid claims are submitted and how much of the fund remains after permitted costs.
If valid claims use less than the available net settlement fund, payments can increase proportionally up to a maximum of $95 per device. If claims exceed the available amount, the per-device payment can instead be reduced. Describing this simply as a guaranteed “$25 to $95 payout” misses that downside adjustment.
Each eligible device can support a payment, subject to validation. The $250 million fund also covers settlement administration, taxes, court-approved legal fees, litigation expenses and any approved service awards before the remaining money is distributed to claimants.
What Apple was accused of doing
The case is Landsheft et al. v. Apple Inc. Plaintiffs alleged that purchasers bought eligible iPhones expecting certain Siri features powered by Apple Intelligence that they did not receive.
The dispute followed Apple’s promotion of a more capable Siri with features built around personal context, awareness of information on screen and deeper actions across apps. Those capabilities became closely associated with Apple’s pitch for newer iPhones.
Apple denies wrongdoing. The settlement agreement expressly states that the deal is not an admission that Apple acted unlawfully or that the plaintiffs’ allegations have been proven.
Apple separately began rolling out its new Siri AI as a beta with iOS 27 on September 14, 2026, including personal context, on-screen awareness and broader app actions. That software release came shortly before the claims window opened, but it is separate from the settlement obligations.
The settlement does not require Apple to change Siri
One important limitation is what the settlement does not contain. The filed agreement establishes the $250 million fund, the claims process and releases of covered legal claims. It does not impose a separate requirement for Apple to redesign Siri, issue a particular software update, extend device warranties or change the way it markets future AI products.
Apple’s subsequent Siri AI rollout therefore should not be described as a court-ordered remedy. It is a product release happening alongside the litigation rather than a non-monetary term of the settlement.
Why the Siri case matters for future AI product launches
The $250 million settlement does not create a court ruling that automatically determines how future AI marketing disputes will be decided. There has been no trial finding that Apple’s conduct was unlawful, and the settlement specifically prevents the agreement itself from being treated as an admission of liability.
The more useful lesson for AI companies is commercial. Features described during a product launch can influence a purchase long before the underlying AI system is ready. If the gap between demonstrated capability and delivered capability becomes large enough, the dispute can move beyond disappointed users into consumer litigation.
That makes release language around “available now”, “coming later”, beta functionality and device eligibility more consequential. AI features are unusually exposed to this problem because model behaviour changes, integrations slip and capabilities demonstrated under controlled conditions may take much longer to become reliable consumer features.
For buyers, evaluating what an AI product can do today is safer than treating a roadmap demonstration as an existing capability. DIY AI’s AI model comparison takes that approach by separating measurable current capabilities from broader product positioning.
For companies building assistant products, the same discipline applies earlier in development. Our guide to building an AI assistant covers defining scope, testing failure cases and setting clear boundaries before users depend on the product.
Claiming also affects your legal rights
Eligible owners should read the settlement notice rather than focusing only on the payment. Remaining in the settlement class means you are bound by the eventual settlement and release of covered claims if it becomes effective.
Doing nothing does not provide a payout while automatically preserving the right to bring the same covered claims later. Settlement class members who want to exclude themselves must follow the opt-out process by the December 21 deadline. Anyone considering an objection or exclusion should rely on the official notice for the exact procedure.
What happens next?
Claims, exclusions and objections are due by December 21, 2026. The court’s final approval hearing is then scheduled for February 24, 2027.
The settlement still needs final approval, and payment timing can also be affected by appeals. Eligible iPhone owners can therefore file now, but should not treat the February hearing as a guaranteed payment date.
The wider AI lesson is clearer than the legal precedent. Selling hardware around AI functionality that remains unfinished can create a measurable liability long after the launch campaign has ended. As AI becomes a bigger reason for choosing one phone, laptop or software subscription over another, companies will need to be more precise about the difference between a demonstrated feature, a beta and something customers can actually use on the day they pay.
