Apple Appeals US Ban on Apple Watch Blood Oxygen Feature

[JPack]

The former CEO made public statements to the effect of "the only way Masimo would agree to a license is if Masimo was involved in developing SPO2 tech with Apple." He was suggesting that Apple wasn't doing SP02 sensing well enough for Masimo to put their stamp of approval on it. He was also upset about Apple "poaching" engineers.

Can you share some quotes to that effect? Every other tech company doing SpO2 has successfully negotiated with Masimo. No other company has joined Apple in its fight. Either Apple is wrong or Masimo. Which do you think is more likely?

Now he's gone, but the litigation has been trending in Apple's direction. Many of Masimo's patents have been invalidated or rendered not infringed. Apple is making a business decision not to settle. It's just blood oxygen sensing, not a core feature of the Apple Watch, and only restricted in the U.S. I suppose they can live without it until they come up with something else or get the appeals court to drop the import ban, or just wait for the patents to expire in 2028.

No, it really hasn't. That's why you see this last ditch effort by Apple against this final ITC ruling. It's not even a technical argument against a Masimo patent, Apple is basically saying ITC violated an administrative procedure in determining whether a "domestic industry" exists. The law says ITC has the right to make that determination.

 

[onenorth]

Can you share some quotes to that effect? Every other tech company doing SpO2 has successfully negotiated with Masimo. No other company has joined Apple in its fight. Either Apple is wrong or Masimo. Which do you think is more likely?

Those quotes are linked in other threads on this forum relating to this issue.

Both companies have been at each other for years. They are both "playing a long game."

 

[JPack]

Those quotes are linked in other threads on this forum relating to this issue.

Both companies have been at each other for years. They are both "playing a long game."

You're not going to find it because it doesn't exist. It falls into the same category as people claiming the CEO didn't want to settle or they were asking an unreasonable amount for licensing.

Everyone from GE HealthCare, Philips, Qualcomm, to Google have partnered with Masimo. Apple stands as the outlier. Tim Cook is the only CEO that has said, "We're focused on appeal" and "there's lots of reasons to buy the watch even without the blood oxygen sensor.”

 

[onenorth]

You're not going to find it because it doesn't exist. It falls into the same category as people claiming the CEO didn't want to settle or they were asking an unreasonable amount for licensing.

Everyone from GE HealthCare, Philips, Qualcomm, to Google have partnered with Masimo. Apple stands as the outlier. Tim Cook is the only CEO that has said, "We're focused on appeal" and "there's lots of reasons to buy the watch even without the blood oxygen sensor.”

This has already been discussed. He wanted more than money.

https://archive.is/ZKkTd#selection-4829.0-4829.230

The executive, speaking Tuesday on Bloomberg TV, said the “short answer is yes,” when asked if he’d settle, but he declined to say how much money he’d seek from Apple. Kiani said he would “work with them to improve their product.”

 

[I7guy]

Apple has some really bad legal council. Like really bad.

I’m not a lawyer and even I know that a patent doesn’t need to have an actual product for it to be valid.

This is a pathetic argument. I’m rooting for O2 monitoring to come back as I miss it and I want Apple to win but it’s also clear they broke the patent.

You think Apple pays $1b per year for bad legal advice? I don’t buy it.

 

[JPack]

This has already been discussed. He wanted more than money.

https://archive.is/ZKkTd#selection-4829.0-4829.230

That's your proof? Nobody is reading it as "more than money."

Masimo offers more than just pulse ox. They have pulse CO-oximetry, blood pressure, infant monitoring technology, etc. Kiani is saying they can offer more than just a one-time transaction.

Of course he's not going to negotiate on live TV.

You should watch the video interview on Bloomberg instead of taking a fraction of a snippet out of context.

 

[onenorth]

That's your proof? Nobody is reading it as "more than money."

Masimo offers more than just pulse ox. They have pulse CO-oximetry, blood pressure, infant monitoring technology, etc. Kiani is saying they can offer more than just a one-time transaction.

Of course he's not going to negotiate on live TV.

You should watch the video interview on Bloomberg instead of taking a fraction of a snippet out of context.

You obviously didn’t read the other article I linked regarding the injunctions. But hey guess what it’s not for us to decide what Apple wants to do about this.

Also those other products have nothing to do with the patents at issue.

 

[onenorth]

You think Apple pays $1b per year for bad legal advice? I don’t buy it.

Everyone here is an armchair lawyer.

 

[btrach144]

You think Apple pays $1b per year for bad legal advice? I don’t buy it.

Everyone here is an armchair lawyer.

Well when your engineering team screws the pooch and implements designs that are patented, you aren’t left with a strong legal standing.

So I imagine they’re doing the best they can considering their hands are tied behind their back in this case.

 

[I7guy]

Well when your engineering team screws the pooch and implements designs that are patented, you aren’t left with a strong legal standing.

Doesn’t mean they were given bad legal advice. Sometimes infringements happen. That’s what the courts decide.

So I imagine they’re doing the best they can considering their hands are tied behind their back in this case.

👍

 

[onenorth]

Doesn’t mean they were given bad legal advice. Sometimes infringements happen. That’s what the courts decide.

If I give a client an opinion of non-infringement (which is a legal judgment call), the client still runs the risk that they are infringing (as decided by the court). A fair difference of opinion can exist. It takes a fair amount of claim interpretation and prior art interpretation. But with a non-infringement opinion in hand, they likely won't be liable for triple damages due to willful infringement. So it's a risk they might (or might not) be willing to take.

When I look at the Masimo patent claims that the ITC found infringed, it isn't entirely clear to me at first blush that Apple was infringing. The Masimo patents were geared toward a sensor that was separate from the control unit. But whoever drafted those patents threw in some discussion about the sensor and controller potentially being together in some sort of wrist-worn device (which Masimo was not making at the time). After Apple came out with the Apple Watch, Masimo went back to the patent office and applied for more patents having claims crafted to target the Apple Watch, leveraging that discussion from the earlier applications. It was a clever move, but sometimes it doesn't work.

We will see if the Federal Circuit agrees with the ITC on this one.

 

[onenorth]

Well when your engineering team screws the pooch and implements designs that are patented, you aren’t left with a strong legal standing.

See my post above. When Apple Watch debuted with SpO2, Masimo had "prior rights" to the IP but didn't have claims to anything that Apple would be infringing IIRC. So when Apple designed the watch, they were not technically infringing anything. Masimo used something called continuation practice to obtain new patents, with new claims, that had priority over Apple Watch, but after the fact. It is controversial but, for now, legal practice. So I would not say Apple's legal standing wasn't strong. It was risky (they were aware of Masimo's IP), but lots of tech companies do risky things. Innovation isn't stifled by patents unless everyone is highly risk adverse.

 

[macconservative]

FYI “patent trolls” is a pejorative term created by counsel and PR of companies trying to delegitimize an IP owner’s right to exploit the inherent value of that owners’s IP.

I am referring to companies that their only purpose in life is to hold patents without any plans to ever bring the product to market or even attempt to