[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]Fact, Samsung entered into a contract with Apple to supply CPU's for the iPhone. [/citation]
There's a few things that you seem to be jumping to here just on the basis of the contract. First of all, do you know what the contract actually states? For most contracts that I've been involved with if they cover a length of time, there are provisions to protect each party such as rise in cost of goods, failure to deliver, etc. As you mention, Apple went looking for other suppliers. If you think the contract was as iron clad as you seem to think, could Apple look for other suppliers? This is probably one of the other provisions to protect Apple, and similarly there would be provisions to protect Samsung. Stop assuming things that are not in evidence unless you know exactly how the contracts were written, and while I myself do not know, but I do know no company unless they plan to be out of business in a few years, won't have contracts signed that doesn't cover their asses for all possible contingencies.
How does making a profit even a hefty profit construe as anti-trust behavior, sorry the leap of logic is beyond me. That would mean any company posting a hefty profit could be anti-competitive, then better start lining up all those profitable companies in line to be called labeled as anti-trust lawsuits. Because a company raises rates on a product they sell you have the option of accepting or not, and to claim anti-trust you first have to show that they are a monopoly which you haven't even met the burden of proof.
Just because you claim that Samsung is a monopoly of CPUs, where's the proof, I read that Apple tried to seek another source of the chips but the company declined because they had established clients that they did not seek to enter into a contract that tied them that heavily into Apple with the possible lost of their other clients. So your claim that Samsung has a monopoly is false if other companies are available to provide chips to Apple, just that none are willing to risk their current clients and none that are willing or able to provide in the quantities that Apple seeks. There are many makers of chips but quality and quantity are issues that arises, that Apple doesn't want to deal with.
If you really want to task anyone with anti-trust actions, I'd think you'd consider Apple first with their lawsuit against Samsung, considering that Apple virtually has a monopoly on the tablet in the US, and using the lawsuits could be construed as anti-trust actions.