How do I know it is a false positive?

Only after the audit is clean: one original product, no template, no leftover IDs, no sibling apps. Until then, assume there is something to find.

Guideline4.3

Guideline 4.3 False Positive: When the Match Is Wrong

§ 01What this rejection usually means

A false positive is possible. Classifiers and tired reviewers both over-trigger on common stacks: SwiftUI tabs, Firebase, a generic chat layout. You still have to prove it. “We are original” is not proof.

§ 02What Apple’s wording tells you

App Review

We noticed your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept with apps submitted to the App Store.

The note will look identical to a real spam reject. The difference is on your side of the checklist: clean account, original source, no leftover IDs, distinct metadata.

§ 03Common causes

A common architecture that looks like a template at a glance.
A category Apple is currently tightening (AI image, VPN, locker).
A previous rejected build that still influences the new one.
An actual mix-up with another developer’s app.

§ 04How to diagnose your case

Run the full identifier and metadata audit anyway.
If anything leftover exists, it is not a false positive yet. Clean it.
If the audit is clean, write the reply as evidence, not as a complaint.

§ 05What to inspect in your project

The entire similar-binary checklist
Account history including deleted apps
Whether a contractor reused files you were not told about

§ 06What not to do

Do not rewrite the whole app to soothe a guess.
Do not open with “your system is broken.”
Do not create a new bundle ID, which can look like evasion.

§ 07How to fix it

Document the audit in the reply.
Make the unique flow obvious in screenshots so the next reviewer does not pattern-match in two seconds.
If they repeat the same boilerplate, escalate to appeal with the same evidence.

§ 08How to verify the fix

A second engineer confirms there is no vendor skeleton.
You can describe the unique job in one sentence and show it on screen one.

§ 09What evidence to prepare

Source ownership and timeline
Identifier audit
Design files
Product website
Feature comparison that is specific

§ 10Suggested reply to App Review

Resolution Center · Reply

Hello App Review,

We believe this 4.3 may be a false positive.

This is an original codebase. We do not ship a template or white-label. This account has not submitted lookalike apps. We audited identifiers and metadata and found no leftover vendor configuration.

The product’s unique job is [sentence]. Screen one shows [feature], which is not a stock template flow.

If you are matching a specific other app, please name it so we can respond to that overlap.

Thank you.

§ 11Should you appeal?

This is the 4.3 case that can justify an appeal — after a calm reply and a clean audit. Attach the same facts. Do not attach your entire repo.

§ 12Questions people ask next

How do I know it is a false positive?: Only after the audit is clean: one original product, no template, no leftover IDs, no sibling apps. Until then, assume there is something to find.