A federal jury in California delivered a $634 million verdict against Apple on November 14 2025, finding that the company infringed Masimo’s patent (No. 10,433,776) that protects low‑power pulse‑oximetry technology used in the Apple Watch’s workout mode and heart‑rate notifications.
The patent, which expired in 2022, covers systems that optimize energy consumption while maintaining accurate blood‑oxygen readings. Apple’s inclusion of the feature in its watches was challenged on the basis that the device did not meet the legal definition of a “patient monitor,” a point that the jury ultimately rejected.
The verdict follows a long‑standing dispute that began with a U.S. International Trade Commission ruling in 2023 that barred Apple from importing Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 models with the blood‑oxygen feature. Apple removed the feature to comply, later reintroducing a redesigned version that processes data on the iPhone and has faced further legal scrutiny from Masimo and U.S. Customs.
Masimo’s stock surged roughly 22 % in the weeks after the verdict, reflecting investor confidence that the judgment validates the company’s intellectual‑property portfolio and could deter future infringements. The award also strengthens Masimo’s bargaining power with partners and competitors in the medical‑device market.
Apple has announced it will appeal the decision, indicating that the company views the verdict as a significant setback to its smartwatch product line. The appeal could delay any financial impact on Apple’s revenue streams from the Apple Watch, but the current judgment already imposes a large liability on the tech giant.
Masimo’s CEO said the verdict is a “significant win” that underscores the company’s commitment to protecting its innovations. The company highlighted the importance of its IP rights for developing technology that benefits patients and emphasized its readiness to defend those rights in future litigation.
Apple’s spokesperson acknowledged the outcome but reiterated the company’s disagreement and intention to appeal. Apple also noted that the patent in question expired in 2022 and that the technology it covers is specific to older patient‑monitoring methods, framing the verdict as a challenge to its current product strategy.
The broader context of the dispute includes allegations of employee poaching and trade‑secret theft, a mistrial in a 2023 trade‑secret case, and a $250 million verdict against Masimo in Delaware over design patents. These legal battles illustrate the high stakes of intellectual‑property protection in the wearable‑technology industry.
The content on BeyondSPX is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as financial or investment advice. We are not financial advisors. Consult with a qualified professional before making any investment decisions. Any actions you take based on information from this site are solely at your own risk.