Apple ordered to pay Masimo $634m in patent infringement case

The longstanding legal battle between tech giant Apple and medical-monitoring technology company Masimo just saw a new turn: a federal jury awarded Masimo $634 million in compensation for infringing a patent covering blood-oxygen reading technology.

Reuters reports that the jury sided with Masimo in a trial which concluded on Friday, agreeing that Apple Watch's workout mode and heart rate notification features violated Masimo's patent rights.

Ultimately, the jurors agreed that Apple incorporated pulse-oximetry features into 43 million devices. They also rejected the company’s claim that damages should be limited to between $3 million and $6 million. Masimo reportedly requested royalties between $634 and $749 million, so the awarded amount is on the lowest end of the range.

An Apple spokesperson said that the company is planning to appeal the decision, while Masimo called the verdict "a significant win in our ongoing efforts to protect our innovations and intellectual property, which is crucial to our ability to develop technology that benefits patients.”

“We remain committed to defending our IP rights moving forward,” Masimo added in a statement.

The yearslong dispute dates back to 2020, when California-based health tech company Masimo sued Apple for patent infringement on its oximetry technology. The company argued that Apple poached its employees, stole the technology, and integrated it into Apple Watches sold between 2020 and 2022.

In late 2023, the International Trade Commission (ITC) issued an import ban that threatened to block Apple from importing Apple Watches with blood oxygen monitoring features, which included its Series 9 and Ultra 2 smartwatches.

Apple then briefly disabled the feature in the United States and reintroduced an updated version, which was announced in August of this year. In response, Masimo filed an ongoing lawsuit against the US Customs and Border Protection over approving the devices without input from Masimo.

"CBP's function is to enforce ITC exclusion orders, not to create loopholes that render them ineffective," Masimo said at the time, requesting the Washington court to continue blocking Apple from using the feature.