In a significant court ruling, Apple Emerges victorious, Securing a Substantial $250 Million Penalty against Masimo in Watch Patent Dispute
For the average individual, it's the small achievements that carry the most weight. But for a corporation as colossal as Apple, this recent minor triumph barely covers the cost of a single set of AirPods Pro 2. Apple is engaged in a continuous legal battle with health tech company Masimo over pulse oximetry technology and smartwatch design patents. A court in a federal trial granted Apple a meager $250 due to Masimo's watches appearing and functioning too much like the Apple Watch.
To clarify, Masimo took legal action against Apple in 2020 concerning the blood oxygen sensor in Apple's newest smartwatches. Masimo accused Apple of violating its blood oxygen patents following the hiring of an engineer who previously worked for the California health tech company. In late 2021, Masimo requested an import ban on Apple's latest Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2. The International Trade Commission granted this ban, resulting in Apple removing its blood oxygen feature from those watches and newer Series 10 models as well.
As a result, Masimo has been working on its own line of smartwatches, namely the W1. Apple filed a suit in 2022, alleging that Masimo had infringed on the W1's design and functions. Last week's verdict in Delaware federal court resulted in a jury awarding Apple the statutory minimum of $250 for patent infringement. Despite this, it was a split decision in favor of Apple. Essentially, Apple now has enough funds to purchase ten iPhone 16 phone cases, while Masimo is still free to sell its products.
Apple's legal representative, John Desmarais, shared with Bloomberg Law, "We're not here for the money... we want [Masimo] to stop copying our design."
On the other hand, Masimo celebrates this entire lawsuit as a triumph. Responding to Reuters, the company stated, "Apple primarily sought an injunction against Masimo's current products," and the verdict amounted to a victory for Masimo on that issue."
In an email sent to Gizmodo, Apple expressed gratitude towards the jury, stating, "We thank the jury for their thoughtful consideration in this case, finding Masimo willfully infringed on Apple's patented designs. Our teams at Apple worked diligently for years to develop Apple Watch, a successful and innovative product that significantly enhances users' lives. Masimo opted for shortcuts, releasing a device that closely resembles Apple Watch and infringes upon our intellectual property. We're grateful that the jury's decision today will safeguard the advancements we make on behalf of our customers."
As the jury verdict, signed October 25th, revealed, Apple levied accusations against the Masimo W1 watch, the Freedom watch, and the company's health module. Apple also made patent infringement claims against Masimo's charger. The jury agreed with Apple that Masimo had infringed on a patent related to the Apple Watch's original puck-shaped charger design and charger. The jury also agreed that Masimo's copying was intentional.
Apple's initial complaint alleged that Masimo "copyied Apple while filing lawsuits to try to prevent sales of Apple Watch." The tech giant claimed that Masimo intentionally designed a device that "bears such a striking resemblance to Apple Watch that the only plausible conclusion" is that Masimo had copied Apple's design.
Meanwhile, Apple is still pursuing an appeal of the ITC's import ban. This case remains under consideration by the federal circuit for the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Update 10/28/24 at 5:15 p.m. ET: This post was updated to include a statement from Apple.
In the realm of tech giants, Apple is currently embroiled in a dispute over pulse oximetry technology and smartwatch design patents with Masimo, a health tech company. This ongoing legal battle could significantly impact the future of technology in the wearables market.
Despite the recent court ruling granting Apple a minimal $250 due to Masimo's smartwatches resembling the Apple Watch, Apple's legal representative expresses that their primary goal is not financial gain, but to halt Masimo's alleged copying of their design.
These sentences contain the words: ['tech', 'future', 'apple', 'technology'] and follow the provided text by highlighting the ongoing legal battle between Apple and Masimo, and reinforcing that Apple's intention is not just about money, but about protecting its technology and design in the tech industry's future.
