Apple has asked a federal judge to dismiss the Justice Department’s antitrust case against it, claiming that the government is asking the court “to sanction a judicial redesign of one of the most innovative and consumer-friendly products ever made: iPhone.”

The DOJ and 16 state and district attorneys general claimed in their March lawsuit that Apple has illegally monopolized the US smartphone market. The government claimed Apple broke the law by maintaining a closed ecosystem for the iPhone in pursuit of profits and at the expense of consumers and innovation. The government pointed to several examples in its complaint, including allegedly suppressing message quality between iPhones and competing platforms like Android and preventing third-party developers from making competing digital wallets for the iPhone with tap-to-pay functionality.

Apple says in a new filing that the DOJ’s argument “is based on the false premise that iPhone’s success has come not through building a superior product that consumers trust and love, but through Apple’s intentional degradation of iPhone to block purported competitive threats.” It calls that idea “outlandish” and says that antitrust law protects its ability “to design and control its own product” rather than cater to third-party developers.

And Apple says it has given third-party developers “exceptionally broad” access to the iPhone platform “while also enforcing reasonable limitations to protect consumers.” Apple characterizes the third-party developers at issue in the complaint not as small upstarts, but rather as “well-capitalized social media companies, big banks, and global gaming developers, all of whom are formidable competitors in their own right and none of whom have the same incentives to protect the integrity or security of iPhone as Apple has.”

Apple lays out five main reasons for which it says the court should dismiss the DOJ’s lawsuit:

• Apple is not obligated to work with any third-party developers, and choosing not to work with them is not exclusionary conduct.
• The DOJ doesn’t adequately connect Apple’s approach to messaging apps, “so-called ‘super apps,’” cloud streaming apps, smartwatches, or digital wallets to how consumers decide what smartphone to buy.
• Apple does not control enough of the smartphone market to be fairly considered a monopolist.
• The DOJ hasn’t sufficiently shown Apple’s intent in its attempted monopolization claim.
• The DOJ has made its case overly broad “by making cursory references to numerous Apple products and services.”

Apple requests oral arguments to debate its motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Apple says if the government gets its way, it would “harm innovation and risk depriving consumers of the private, safe, and secure experience that differentiates iPhone from every other option in the marketplace.”

The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment.