Hello,
My app (Gezo Gündem, a Turkish news app) has been rejected twice under Guideline 4.2.2 (Minimum Functionality), both times with the same generic template: "the app only includes links, images, or content aggregated from the Internet with limited or no native functionality."
For the second submission, I provided detailed App Review Notes listing 8 distinct native iOS features with step-by-step testing instructions for each:
- A native AI summary modal with native favoriting
- A native theming engine (5 modes) + dynamic "Club Mode" theming via native state management
- Native offline article storage using the device's file system (fully functional in airplane mode)
- A native Text-to-Speech engine reading article content aloud
- Native push notifications when followed authors publish new content
- A native source/favorites aggregation dashboard
- A native pinch-to-zoom newspaper cover gallery
WebView is used only to render the body text of individual articles — nothing else in the app relies on it.
Despite this, the second rejection used the exact same template language, with no reference to any of the listed features. I've since replied via Resolution Center asking the reviewer to re-test following the specific steps in the notes, but I'm unsure if this is the right channel to get a reviewer to actually engage with documented native functionality rather than reissue a template rejection.
Has anyone successfully gotten a reviewer to revisit a 4.2.2 rejection by providing this level of detail? Is there a more effective way to ensure the review notes are actually read before a decision is made? Any guidance would be appreciated.
Thanks.
