Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Blood Oxygen Feature Workaround Sparks Fresh Masimo Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Very good question indeed.
AFAIK all wearable devices that display SpO2 use the same tech, hence violate those patents. Example: garmin watches, Samsung watches etc.
Do those guys have licensing agreements? Of course we do not know the answer but, if they have licensing agreements their royalty is not $100 as supposedly Masimo asked from Apple.
And if they don't have licensing agreements - why does Masimo let them get away with this?
There is way more to this story than we know and what is publicly shared.
One thing is for sure, the lawyers are the winners and have job security...
If you actually read the customs ruling (there's a link in a thread in the AW forum) you'd know that this has been under investigation for much longer.
Connecting those 2 "events" is merely conspiracy, nothing else.
They’re definitionally not a patent troll, they make actual products based on these patents.
Whether Apple’s workaround truly avoids their patents or not I dont know, but they’re not a troll, they have legitimate concerns
Apple has refused to properly license Masimo’s technology. So, you don’t get the feature and you’re mad at Masimo 🙄
Yup, and it only affected the newer watches
Anything older than series 9 and down to the 6 (which was the first watch to have this feature) was unaffected
Wow, can't say I'm too surprised
Part of me kind of figured that they would find some way despite the workaround to get another lawsuit going
Part of me kind of figured that they would find some way despite the workaround to get another lawsuit going
And introduce security risks to your watch by not updating its software like you should?
Good luck with that boss...
What's worse is this workaround was proposed by Apple back in January 2025. The CBP rejected it then but somehow approved it now.
Most likely is Apple proposed one version of a workaround, it was rejected (and reasons given why), and they re-submitted it with changes to get approved.
It would certainly be more accurate than what is on the Apple Watch. I checked 4 times in the past 10 minutes and got readings of 95%, 98%, 92% and 97% percent.
According to your post - it's partial sarcasm, so which part?
Reality is, CBP ruling is dated Aug 1 2025, the "trophy event" happened on Aug 7 2025 ...
so I stand by my comment:
Anything is possible, but the timing is way too suspect.
The custom 24k trophy and box takes weeks if not a month to make. It's made in the U.S. after all. You can't just order it at FedEx Kinko's, they cast the gold, and pick up the next business day.
This means the $100B investment decision and trophy was probably made at least a month before it was presented. All of this would have been telegraphed to the White House for approval and agreeing to be on live TV.
and the CBP ruling is dated Aug 1 and it did take more than 1 day to come together ...
Conspiracy theories add nothing to this, it's in the legal system so we will have to wait and see.
The decision to invest $100B and present the trophy was likely planned and communicated to the White House back in June or July. You can't just design and build a custom 24k gold trophy in a week.
Once the WH knew about the investment decision, they would have been a lot more open to hearing about any legal concerns Apple had.
again, conspiracy theory.
From the CBP ruling:
The Apple Watches were presented for examination on July 2, 2025. See Email to the EOE Branch from the Port of
Chicago (dated July 9, 2025); see also 19 U.S.C. § 1499(c)(5),
CROSS Customs Rulings Online Search System
again, conspiracy theory.
From the CBP ruling:
The Apple Watches were presented for examination on July 2, 2025. See Email to the EOE Branch from the Port of
Chicago (dated July 9, 2025); see also 19 U.S.C. § 1499(c)(5),
CROSS Customs Rulings Online Search System
rulings.cbp.gov
The CBP decision was made between that date and August 1. Tim Cook delivered the trophy and speech to the White House on August 6.
Does anyone really think Apple decided to invest $100B, designed and built a trophy, and coordinated with the president's schedule to appear on live TV within five days? All without the WH's knowledge?
Like I said, all of this requires planning. It would have been decided in June or July.
Apple announce $500B US investment on Feb 24 2025
Apple will spend more than $500 billion in the U.S. over the next four years
Apple today announced plans to spend and invest more than $500 billion in the U.S. over the next four years.
www.apple.com
Play with dates/time all you want, again, nothing but a conspiracy theory
Apple announce $500B US investment on Feb 24 2025
Then an additional $100B on Aug 6Apple will spend more than $500 billion in the U.S. over the next four years
Apple today announced plans to spend and invest more than $500 billion in the U.S. over the next four years.www.apple.com
Play with dates/time all you want, again, nothing but a conspiracy theory
I get your position.
There's no possible way the White House has influence over the CBP decision. That Apple wouldn't have sent feelers out in June or July to the WH asking if an extra $100B investment and gold trophy would make the boss happy. The trophy and box would have been designed, cast, perfected the first time, and transported across the country within 5 days.
It's all very reasonable.
They’re still selling it worldwide as Apple was shown not to be infringing. They took specific actions to prevent the US sale, but that particular patent expires in the US in a couple years. Apple just put something in place to provide the feature to users until that time. Buying the company would be a lot of money for just two years worth of annoyance.
I wonder if Masimo will have their lawyers going at it right up to the day it expires?
in your opinion, and that's fine, after all we're on an Internet forum where rumors are the primary discussion objects
Not the problem. Yes there is a patent originally issued in 2008. Masimo had filed continuations on the patent a number of times. The problem is, the only two continuations that the ITC found Apple 'violated' were the two that were filed AFTER Apple had debuted their oximeter. As the article at Patentlawyermagazine states:
"Apple introduced pulse oximetry in its Series 6 Watch in 2020. Masimo quickly and tactically filed continuation patent applications with claimed features resembling those in the Apple Series 6 Watch, which were later granted."
They altered their original patent so that it covered features like the Apple Watch AFTER it was out, and for some reason the patents were granted.
Masimo is not the injured party here - they just took a chance and succeeded patenting the Apple Watch tech after Apple was already selling it. No wonder Apple doesn't feel like they owe them a thing.