Yes, to the CAFC, which Apple is trying to argue the ITC erred in administration, law, or jurisdiction. It’s basically a Hail Mary at this point. The technical arguments against the patent have long been settled in Masimo’s favor.
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 Wins Symbolic $250 in Masimo Watch Patent Trial
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, to the CAFC, which Apple is trying to argue the ITC erred in administration, law, or jurisdiction. It’s basically a Hail Mary at this point. The technical arguments against the patent have long been settled in Masimo’s favor.
I’m just worried they are going to come after my Casio next.
In any case what does Tassimo have to do with Apple Watch?
In any case what does Tassimo have to do with Apple Watch?
But why are you only condemning Apple when they violate patens and not Masimo?
In my opinion Apple went after Masimo because if Apple won they would have some leverage over Masimo and I believe Apple would have used that leverage to get Masimo to allow Apple to use the pulse oximetry patents so Apple can bring back the blood oxygen monitoring feature.
Probably because when Masimo released their 'alleged' infringing watch Apple did nothing, they appeared to be not interested in taking Masimo to court. The ONLY reason Apple sued Masimo for infringement of Apple design patents is when Masimo sued Apple for breach of Masimo's pulse oximetry patents a case which Masimo won. Apple being the wounded dog decided to get their own back on Masimo by counter suing them for infringement of design patents. If Masimo infringed on Apple's design patent's, why didn't Apple take Masimo to court the day they released the watch? Apple got angry that they lost the pulse oximetry patents case so they decided to get their own back by counter suing Masimo, something Apple was supposed to have done the day Masimo released their infringing watch but the fact of the matter is Apple did nothing. Apple ONLY raised the issue as revenge for losing the pulse oximetry patents case.
The federal case against the ITC but also the cases to invalidate the patens are still ongoing.
So you're arguing its ok to break patents in certain circumstances and it it's a good thing to defend multi-billion dollar companies when they to so?
It’s probably not that expensive to extend or renew patents. $100 an hour isn’t that much to even a small company. Lawyers get a lot more expensive than that.
There’s nothing saying they can’t renew the patents that they’re not going to sell a product for and out of spite not share them with Apple. I hope they don’t do that because it would hurt both parties involved. A good outcome would be both sides get rich off of this.
thats purely due to how patent protection works, you can bet once apple ran out of appeals in the us court, masimo is going after apple internationally.
its not allegedly, its fully purportedly. courts don't slap injunctions for allegations, the court fully sided with masimo that apple did infringe on masimo's patents.
The original article frames this result as a win though symbolic for Apple but I interpret this as a net loss.
if I understand correctly Apple lost on all the most important issues and only won the smallest award possible for a patent that doesn't apply to any of its current products. Massimo was released from everything else:
"“Apple primarily sought an injunction against Masimo’s current products, and the jury’s verdict is a victory for Masimo on that issue,” Masimo’s statement said."
news.bloomberglaw.com
if I understand correctly Apple lost on all the most important issues and only won the smallest award possible for a patent that doesn't apply to any of its current products. Massimo was released from everything else:
"“Apple primarily sought an injunction against Masimo’s current products, and the jury’s verdict is a victory for Masimo on that issue,” Masimo’s statement said."
Apple Wins $250, But Little Else, at Trial on Watch Patents (2)
A federal jury in Delaware awarded Apple Inc. $250 on Friday, finding the original designs of Masimo Corp.'s smartwatches infringed Apple Watch design patents.
Buying Masimo would be pennies to Apple 🍎 Ok so they wait 3 years when the patent expires and save that $7.45 Billion.
I am sure someone at Apple has already done the calculation (or more likely an entire model incorporating several scenerios) and I guess the decision was this...
However, their net cost would be less than that. Masimo is a working company with real revenue and profit. They could buy the whole company and then spinoff the non-consumer side with an perpetual license for the non-consumer use (i.e. medical) for billions.
Or if Apple wants to really sell into the health care industry B2B-style, they would keep the medical side and start pushing their other products through those channels/established business relationships.
Sure, and that will take as long as it has for them to develop a 5G modem!
Becuase they know the last couple patents that haven't been thrown out yet will most likely be thrown out seeing how they are weakest of all the patents. And if they do get tossed Apple will sue Masimo for lost revenue.
No they cant, patents cant be renewed indefinitely, those patents will have hit their full expiration in 2028
Apple 🍎 paid Intel $1 Billion just for there Modem division alone and modem patents.
I think Apple will just patiently wait the 3 years or if Masimo just makes a good deal that Apple could not refuse.
As of March 30, 2024, Apple had $162.3 billion in cash, while I don't think Apple would buy them, they have the cash to do it.
Okay. So here’s the thing, if you have it imported where are you buying it from? That sale is an import and illegal. Now if you travel to a country where they sell it, sure buy yourself one. The point is your solution is no solution at all. 99% of people aren’t going to travel from USA to another country just to buy an Apple Watch. That’s absurd.
I think this comes down poor advertising of patent “renewal” services. But it’s just maintenance. Patents generally expire in about 20 years.
I think you’re describing the probability of getting caught by customs as a single person, ordering a single device. Its practically unenforceable against single people, but it is still legally enforceable.
Right, ~20 years depending on how it’s originally filed.
You’re missing a zero on your ‘best’ patent lawyer estimated hourly rate, and about $1,400 too low for the top tier litigators of these patent disputes.
Edit, I should probably clarify “you” were quoting the $100 estimate from someone else. And patent lawyers most often charge flat-rate, their hourly rate is opaque.
Last edited:
Did I say that Apple is getting “something”?
i was suggesting that they should resolve their patent conflict…