On Friday, a federal jury in Delaware ruled in favor of Apple in its patent infringement lawsuit against health monitoring technology company Masimo. The jury found that Masimo’s W1 and Freedom smartwatches, along with their chargers, willfully infringed two of Apple’s design patents. As a result, Apple was awarded $250 in damages. The tech giant’s primary goal in the lawsuit was to secure an injunction to halt the sale of Masimo’s smartwatches following the infringement ruling.
Despite the jury’s decision regarding the design patents, they concluded that Masimo’s smartwatches did not infringe upon other Apple patents related to smartwatch technology. Masimo expressed satisfaction with the jury’s verdict, highlighting that the decision favored them on most issues and only pertained to a discontinued module and charger. This outcome was seen as a significant victory for Masimo, especially in light of Apple’s broader objective to prevent the sale of its current products.
In response to the ruling, Apple stated it was pleased with the jury’s decision, emphasizing that it would help safeguard the innovations the company develops for its customers. This case reflects the ongoing tension between the two companies, as Masimo had previously accused Apple of engaging in unfair business practices, including poaching employees and appropriating its pulse oximetry technology during discussions about a potential collaboration.
The legal battles between Apple and Masimo have been extensive. Last year, Masimo successfully lobbied the U.S. International Trade Commission to block imports of Apple’s Series 9 and Ultra 2 smartwatches, based on claims that they violated Masimo’s patents concerning blood oxygen level readings. Apple countered by appealing this decision and subsequently resumed sales of the watches after removing the contested technology, while also alleging that Masimo had copied features from the Apple Watch for its own products.
Furthermore, Apple accused Masimo of using litigation as a strategy to clear the way for its smartwatch. In contrast, Masimo characterized Apple’s patent lawsuit as retaliatory, asserting that it was an attempt to evade the jurisdiction where their ongoing legal disputes had been taking place. This back-and-forth legal struggle highlights the competitive nature of the smartwatch market and the aggressive tactics both companies are employing to protect their innovations and market positions.
