Pending Termination can land months later inside an abandoned App Review thread
2026-10-29 · Policy Insights
A Pending Termination for “dishonest/fraudulent” can land months later inside an abandoned App Review thread you never shipped—dropping the update does not close thread risk; a friendly reviewer call is not a written Resolution Center close; peer claims that “rejection count alone” flags accounts remain unconfirmed by Apple.
This page is the ops case. The account-trust page teaches License §3.2(f) — interfere versus dishonest — and that pending is not the same as terminated. It does not teach abandoned-thread revival, that a reviewer call is not clearance, or that a Pending Termination can land on a submit you already dropped. Guideline 5.6 binary hygiene and 2.1 limited-history Notes stay on the sibling page. Those bodies are not copied here.
Five hooks
| Hook | Teach | Not this |
|---|---|---|
| Abandoned thread | A Pending Termination can arrive in the same old Review thread months after you drop the update | “Ignore old rejects; they expire” |
| Reviewer call | A phone note that the name was the last issue is not a written close. A later generic rejection still stacks | A green light to rename and resubmit indefinitely |
| Pending vs terminated | While status is still Pending Termination: App Review Board and App Store Connect Reply. After membership is terminated, the fork is different — see the account-trust page | Ordinary appeal language after membership is already terminated |
| Rejection count | Peers report flags after many rejections. Apple has not confirmed a count rule | “Apple bans at N rejects,” stated as fact |
| Revenue / tenure | The public post cites about $114K on an app the poster presents as multi-year. The notice still arrived | “Revenue immunizes the account” |
Public signal (ADJACENT · not an Apple case ID)
On 2026-10-28 UTC, @stacy_siz posted a Pending Termination notice. The post says the notice cites “Evidence of Dishonest or Fraudulent Activity,” and that it showed up inside an old App Review thread. The timeline below is the poster’s account. This page does not supply Apple’s reason for that developer. The handle is not an Apple case ID.
- A small library update had been in review more than six months earlier.
- The poster counts more than eight rejections on that thread. The number is the poster’s. It is not a threshold Apple has published.
- An App Review call. The poster took the name as the last open item. The call did not produce a written Resolution Center close.
- A full rename, then a later generic rejection on the same thread.
- The update was dropped. The poster reports the app is off the store.
- The poster cites about $114K in revenue, and presents the app as multi-year. In this public signal, neither figure stopped the notice.
- The poster says an App Review Board appeal is still pending. No outcome is stated here.
@AGTPinsights posted an explainer alongside peer anecdotes: a rumor that rejection count alone flags accounts, and other Pending Termination stories. Those peer claims are ADJACENT. Apple has not confirmed a rejection-count rule.
Hygiene G — before you walk away from the thread
- ☐ Do not abandon a multi-rejection thread in silence. In that same thread, reply that you are withdrawing the version or pausing, and ask in writing what is still blocking.
- ☐ Export before you leave: the full Resolution Center / Review thread (PDF or screenshots), the phone-call date plus your notes, and a metadata change log (keywords, subtitle, screenshots, name).
- ☐ If a Pending Termination notice arrives and the status is still Pending Termination: prepare an App Review Board appeal and an App Store Connect Reply with that export pack. Do not wait until membership is terminated. Do not open a second Team to evade.
- ☐ Do not treat the reviewer call as clearance. Only a written Resolution Center outcome closes an item.
- ☐ Cut repeat resubmits of the same contested metadata. Fix the root Guideline or binary issue once. Do not assert that Apple auto-flags at a fixed rejection count.
Soft-links
Sibling pages only. Their bodies are not restated here.
- License §3.2(f) account-trust, and the pending-versus-terminated fork: DPLA §3.2(f) is account-trust · ZH. This page is the abandoned-thread case. That page is the clause.
- Sibling hygiene only — 5.6 binary and 2.1 limited-history Notes: Account termination, 5.6 and 2.1 · ZH.
What this leaf is not
- Not a reprint of License §3.2(f), and not a reprint of the account-trust page.
- Not the 5.6 binary checklist or the 2.1 limited-history Notes.
- Not an Apple case file on @stacy_siz. The post is an ADJACENT public signal. This page does not invent Apple’s reason.
- Not a confirmed rule that rejection count alone flags an account. Peer claims stay labeled ADJACENT.
- Not a reinstate-rate promise, and not legal advice.
Sources
- ADJACENT public post (not an Apple case ID): @stacy_siz — Pending Termination in an old review thread (2026-10-28 UTC)
- ADJACENT explainer and peer anecdotes. Apple has not confirmed a rejection-count rule: @AGTPinsights
- Still-Pending path docs: Appeal to the App Review Board · Reply to App Review messages
Policy education only — not legal advice. Public posts are ADJACENT signals, not Apple case labels.