If you work in tech or health in California, you saw the headlines. A federal jury said Apple infringed Masimo’s patents and awarded $634 million in damages. At the same time, the fight over the Apple Watch blood oxygen feature keeps moving. Customs allowed Apple to bring the feature back after a redesign. Masimo sued Customs to stop that approval. The legal story continues on two tracks at once.
What the verdict says and what it does not
A jury verdict is a big moment, but it is not the last word. The jury found that Apple infringed certain Masimo patents tied to light‑based pulse oximetry. The award is large. Apple has said it will appeal. Appeals can take months, sometimes longer. Money does not move until the court enters judgment and post‑trial motions are resolved. Even then, an appeal can pause payment.
The verdict is separate from the import fight at the U.S. International Trade Commission. That is important. The jury speaks to damages and liability in district court. The ITC controls whether certain products can be imported. Both forums matter for a company that builds and ships hardware.
The backstory
– Masimo developed and patented technology for measuring blood oxygen with light.
– Apple launched watches that included a blood oxygen feature. Masimo said Apple used its patented methods without a license and filed complaints in court and at the ITC.
– In late 2023, the ITC issued a limited exclusion order. That is an import ban for certain Apple Watches with the blood oxygen feature enabled. Apple paused sales, then shipped units in the United States with the feature disabled.
– In 2024 and 2025, Customs approved a redesign that let Apple restore the feature for U.S. buyers. Masimo sued Customs and asked the court to block that approval. The district court verdict then arrived in November 2025.
Two tracks you should know about
Track one is district court litigation. That is where the jury sits, hears evidence, and decides infringement and damages. The court can enter injunctions, but the focus is often money. The case also goes through pretrial steps like claim construction and expert discovery. After the verdict, the judge can reduce or alter the award. The losing party can appeal to the Federal Circuit.
Track two is Section 337 at the ITC. It moves faster and targets imports. If the commission finds a violation of a valid U.S. patent, it can issue an exclusion order. That order tells Customs to stop covered products at the border. The President can review the order, but that rarely changes the outcome. The respondent can still redesign. Customs can approve a workaround that falls outside the order. Disputes over workarounds can trigger fresh agency reviews and separate lawsuits.
In Masimo v. Apple, both tracks have been active. The verdict came from district court. The import limits came from the ITC. Customs is now the gatekeeper for Apple’s redesign.
Why this case matters to California businesses
This dispute is not only about two brands. It is a live lesson in how patent law touches product roadmaps.
Features can drive risk.
The blood oxygen sensor is one feature inside a larger device. But that single feature changed sales, imports, and updates. A careful feature‑by‑feature risk review is not a luxury. It is part of launch planning.
Redesigns are real.
Apple shipped with the feature turned off in the United States, then shifted processing paths and turned it back on. Courts and agencies accept legitimate design‑arounds. A redesign can keep units shipping while a case plays out.
Timing affects leverage.
An ITC order can change behavior fast. A jury verdict can change settlement talks. A Federal Circuit appeal can reset both. Business plans need room for these swings.
Masimo v. Apple Timeline
- 2023: ITC finds infringement of Masimo patents. Issues a limited exclusion order against certain Apple Watch models with blood oxygen enabled.
- Late 2023 to early 2024: Apple pauses U.S. sales, then resumes with the feature disabled for U.S. buyers.
- January 2024: U.S. Customs and Border Protection approves an Apple redesign for import.
- 2025: Apple restores the blood oxygen feature for newer watches in the United States after Customs approval. Masimo sues Customs to challenge that approval.
- November 2025: A California jury awards Masimo $634 million in a separate district court lawsuit. Apple says it will appeal. Both sides continue to press their positions in the ITC and Customs matters.
What the verdict could mean next
The district court judge will handle post‑trial motions. Apple will likely ask the judge to reduce the award or order a new trial on damages. The judge can adjust numbers or uphold the verdict. The court will then enter final judgment. Apple can appeal to the Federal Circuit. Masimo can also appeal if it believes the court limited its case in error.
Appeals often focus on legal standards. For example, the Federal Circuit may review how the district court interpreted the claims. This is claim construction. The court may review whether the damages model matched the evidence. The court may also check whether the jury had enough proof on infringement or whether the judge’s rulings kept out important evidence.
At the same time, Customs will face the Masimo challenge to its redesign approval. That case tests whether Customs properly applied the ITC order to Apple’s new approach. If the court blocks the Customs ruling, Apple may need to change course again. If the court allows the ruling to stand, Apple’s restored feature will likely stay on while appeals continue.
What small and mid‑size companies can learn
- You do not need Apple’s scale to use the playbook.
- Treat a feature like a project with its own legal plan. If one feature drives demand, invest in clearance for that feature. If there is an obvious conflict with a competitor’s patent, plan a design‑around before launch.
- Keep clean records. If you change a feature to avoid infringement, save code diffs, technical notes, and validation tests. Clear paperwork helps you prove the redesign is outside the patent claims.
- Watch the ITC and Customs rules. If a rival wins at the ITC, you want to know what Customs will look for in a redesign. Get advice early so your workaround matches the order.
- Stay flexible on settlement. A verdict can change expectations. An appeal can swing risk back. Use decision points like a post‑trial ruling or a Customs decision to revisit license options.
- Coordinate your messaging. Customers want to know if a feature will ship and stay on. Communicate clearly and avoid promises that are at risk if an order changes.
Answers to questions
Can Apple still sell the Apple Watch in the United States?
Yes. The ITC order targeted watches with the blood oxygen feature enabled. Apple disabled the feature for the U.S. market, resumed sales, and later won a Customs approval for a redesign that let the feature return. A court could still change the Customs outcome, and Apple’s appeal of the ITC ruling is ongoing. But sales continue today.
Does the verdict force Apple to pay now?
Not yet. The court must handle post‑trial motions and enter judgment. Apple can appeal. Payment would come after these steps, unless the parties settle.
Could the verdict be reduced or overturned?
Yes. Judges often review damages for legal errors and evidentiary support. The Federal Circuit may agree with the verdict, reduce the amount, or order a new trial on damages. It will depend on the legal issues raised on appeal.
What if Customs loses the challenge from Masimo?
If the court sets aside the Customs approval, Apple may need to turn the feature off again or present a different redesign. Customs and the ITC could also revisit the scope of permitted imports. Timing matters. Emergency motions can lead to quick, temporary orders.
Is a license still possible?
Yes. Many patent disputes end with a license. A verdict often changes the price and terms. An appeal that looks strong can give the accused company new leverage. A finding that a redesign avoids infringement can also push the parties toward a deal.
A guide to key patent law terms in this story
- Patent infringement: Using a patented invention without permission. The jury found Apple infringed certain Masimo claims.
- Damages: Money to compensate for infringement. The jury set damages at $634 million. The number can change on post‑trial motions or appeal.
- Injunction: A court order to stop certain actions. District courts can issue injunctions. The ITC issues exclusion orders, which block imports.
- ITC exclusion order: A special remedy that instructs Customs to stop covered products at the border. It is fast and powerful.
- Redesign: A product change meant to avoid the scope of asserted claims. Customs can approve redesigned imports that fall outside an exclusion order.
- Inter partes review: A Patent Office process that can cancel patent claims. This case has focused more on the ITC and district court, but PTAB outcomes can change leverage too.
- Federal Circuit: The appeals court for patent cases. It reviews district court judgments and some ITC decisions.
How to track what happens next
You do not need to read every filing. Watch for these decision points.
- The district court’s post‑trial order. This will address Apple’s motions and may change the damages number.
- The notice of appeal and the issues on appeal. This tells you whether the fight will center on claim scope, damages models, or trial procedure.
- The court’s rulings in the Customs challenge. Look for any temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, then a final decision on Customs’ approval.
- Any new agency action at the ITC. A new complaint or a review of redesigned units can restart parts of the import process.
How Yang Law Offices can help
We help California companies turn patent headlines into clear steps. Our focus is practical advice you can use this quarter, not legal theory.
- Patent litigation. We handle infringement and validity issues, damages models, and appeals.
- Pre‑launch freedom to operate. We map risk to features, propose design‑arounds, and prepare simple documentation to support imports.
- Licensing and settlement. We build negotiation ranges that reflect verdict risk, appeal timing, and the strength of any workaround.
- Plain‑English updates. We brief your executive team on what changed, what it means for the roadmap, and what to do next.
If your roadmap includes new health features, sensors, or AI‑driven analysis, schedule a short call. We can review one priority feature, give you a clear risk picture, and outline a backup plan that your engineers can implement.
Disclaimer
This post is for information only and is not legal advice. Results depend on facts and law that can change. If you need advice for your situation, please contact counsel.
Sources
- Jury verdict and company statements: U.S. jury awards $634 million to Masimo; Masimo’s press release on the verdict. (reuters.com)
- Coverage of the verdict and Apple response: MacRumors and TechCrunch roundups. (macrumors.com)
- ITC exclusion order and timeline: Masimo press releases and Section 337 analysis from Wolf Greenfield. (masimo.com)
- Apple’s late‑2023 sales pause tied to the ITC order: MacRumors. (macrumors.com)
- Customs approval in January 2024 and follow‑on court updates: CNBC and The Guardian. (cnbc.com)
- Federal Circuit activity on the ITC appeal, July 7, 2025: Reuters and MacRumors. (reuters.com)
- Apple restores blood oxygen in 2025 after a new Customs ruling: Ars Technica and The Verge. (arstechnica.com)
- Masimo sues Customs over the 2025 approval: Reuters, CNBC, and The Verge. (reuters.com)
- New ITC investigation of Apple’s redesign, November 2025: Reuters. (reuters.com)
- Background on Customs authority and the ITC investigation number 337‑TA‑1276: Irwin IP client alert. (irwinip.com)
