An Apple Watch Model Is Accused Of Infringing A Patent

Certain Apple Watch models could be banned from entering the U.S. due to a patent dispute between Apple and medical device maker Masimo Corp.

‍

The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) recently ruled that Apple Watch Series 6 infringed on one of Massimo's patents involving the use of light sensors to determine blood oxygen levels in the device's pulse oximeter in January by an administrative judge who was assigned to the ITC. It is expected that the ITC will issue a final ruling by May 10 on the case after it has been reviewed by a full commission.

‍

Apple Watch Series 6 which contains the disputed components are being halted by the ITC based on a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Irvine, California-based Masimo. The ITC can impose a ban on Apple Watches if it rules in Masimo's favor.

‍

Additionally, the judgment will also apply to models released after Apple Watch Series 6 that contain these components, as well. It was also found that Apple did not infringe upon four other Masimo patents mentioned in the lawsuit, according to Bhattacharya.

‍

In a January note, Trade Algo noted that the ITC's first-round decision “may not provide sufficient leverage for the medical device maker to sway Apple into a licensing agreement.”

‍

“Apple is believed to have the capability to design around the infringement claims, thereby reducing the risk of an import ban against the company. Masimo's best shot at getting a deal now hinges on the outcome of a trade secret trial that is scheduled for March, assuming its claims survive summary judgment."

‍

Bond Denial, Masimo Royalty Payments

Masimo had requested a bond of equal value to the value of the infringing items in addition to an exclusion order blocking the import of the Watch models in an effort to prove that Apple's products were affecting people's perception of pulse oximetry as a result of its products.

‍

Bhattacharya dismissed the bond request, stating that there was no clarity regarding the alleged harm to public perception caused to Masimo.

‍

It was Bhattacharya's ruling that Apple had violated two claims on a Masimo patent according to her ruling. This patent claim did not go into the “core of the technology” in order to monitor blood oxygen levels, as Bason pointed out.

‍

Bason estimates that Masimo will succeed in pushing Apple into a licensing agreement 60 percent of the time. The royalty revenue from this could be in the range of $50–300 million per year for Masimo.

‍

Apple Versus Masimo Lawsuits

In June 2021, Masimo filed a lawsuit against its competitor for patent infringement. Masimo's CEO, Joe Kiani, referred to Bhattacharya's decision in January as one which restores "fairness in the market" as a result of Bhattacharya's ruling.

‍

“It is a pleasure for us to be able to report that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) has recognized Apple's infringement of Masimo's pulse oximetry technology and took this first critical step towards accountability,” Kiani said, according to a press release issued on Jan. 10.

‍

“Apple has similarly infringed on other companies’ technologies, and we believe today’s ruling exposes Apple as a company that takes other companies’ innovations and repackages them.”

‍

Bhattacharya's ruling was disagreed with by Apple, which stated it was looking forward to the ITC's full review. As well as the patent infringement lawsuit from June 2021, Apple and Masimo filed multiple other lawsuits.

‍

According to Apple, Masimo launched the Masimo W1 watch on Aug. 31 in order to push Apple Watch out of the market. Moreover, Apple accused Masimo of infringing its intellectual property by copying Apple Watch.

‍

Masimo filed counterclaims against Apple in mid-December 2022, accusing the company of infringing on ten of its patents as well as procuring patents through a fraudulent process. It has also been claimed that Apple engaged in unfair competition, antitrust law violations, misleading trade practices, false advertising, and deceptive trade practices.