⚖️ Apple infringes patent

In partnership with

A Long-Running Battle Over Blood Oxygen Tech

A federal jury in California has ordered Apple to pay Masimo $634 million for infringing a patent related to blood oxygen monitoring technology used in the Apple Watch. The jury found that features like workout mode and heart rate notifications violated Masimo’s patent, which Apple argues was outdated and has since expired. This decision is part of a long-running dispute between the companies over pulse oximetry technology—an optical method of measuring blood oxygen. Masimo has accused Apple of poaching key employees and infringing numerous patents, while Apple maintains that most of Masimo’s claims have been invalidated. The conflict escalated when the U.S. International Trade Commission issued an import ban on certain Apple Watches in 2023, prompting Apple to redesign its blood oxygen feature to shift processing to the iPhone. Both sides continue to litigate, with Masimo challenging Customs’ approval of Apple’s workaround and Apple appealing the original import ban.

What This Fight Reveals About Modern IP Strategy

This case highlights two major themes in modern IP litigation: the complexity of patent enforcement in fast-moving tech markets and the strategic use of regulatory bodies like the ITC to shape competitive dynamics. For founders, the Apple–Masimo dispute is a reminder that patents can remain powerful even when the underlying technology is old or the patent has expired—especially if the alleged infringement occurred while the patent was still active. It also underscores that litigation is not always about direct competition; Masimo doesn’t sell consumer devices, yet its patents give it meaningful leverage over a tech giant. The fact that Apple redesigned its product to comply with an import ban—rather than simply paying damages—shows how regulatory decisions can pressure even the largest companies to change course. For startups, especially those developing hardware or biomedical technologies, this case is a warning that IP battles can span years, involve multiple forums, and require both legal and technical strategies.

Building IP Resilience Before You Need It

For startups, the key takeaway is simple: intellectual property is not optional—it’s infrastructure. If you rely on a core technical innovation, file patents early, document your R&D thoroughly, and consider how your IP map interacts with competitors in adjacent markets. If you're developing hardware or health-related features that integrate with smartphones or wearables, perform a rigorous patent landscape review to avoid unintentionally stepping on existing claims. This case also shows the importance of planning for regulatory friction; if your product depends on imports, a single adverse ITC ruling could halt your entire business. Finally, founders should build contingency strategies—alternative implementations, fallback designs, and legal options—long before any dispute arises. Robust IP hygiene won’t make you immune to litigation, but it can give you leverage, protect your runway, and keep competitors from using legal tools to slow you down.

In addition to our newsletter we offer 60+ free legal templates for companies in the UK, Canada and the US. These include employment contracts, investment agreements and more