Masimo Sues US Customs Over Apple Watch Blood Oxygen Workaround (9to5mac.com)
(Wednesday August 20, 2025 @11:30PM (BeauHD)
from the never-ending-litigation dept.)
- Reference: 0178794350
- News link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/25/08/20/2222249/masimo-sues-us-customs-over-apple-watch-blood-oxygen-workaround
- Source link: https://9to5mac.com/2025/08/20/masimo-sues-us-customs-over-apple-watch-blood-oxygen-workaround/
Last week, following a recent U.S. Customs ruling, Apple reintroduced blood oxygen monitoring to certain Apple Watch models in the U.S., sidestepping an ITC import ban stemming from its legal dispute with medical device maker Masimo. Today, Masimo [1]fired back with a new lawsuit against the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 9to5Mac reports:
> The company [2]says US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) overstepped its authority and violated due process when it reversed its earlier decision on August 1 and allowed Apple to restore the feature. Moreover, Masimo says it found out about the decision when Apple publicly announced the return of the feature: "It has now come to light that CBP thereafter reversed itself without any meaningful justification, without any material change in circumstances, and without any notice to Masimo, let alone an opportunity for Masimo to be heard. CBP changed its position on Apple's watch-plus-iPhone redesign through an ex parte proceeding. Specifically, on August 1, 2025, CBP issued an 3 ex parte ruling permitting Apple to import devices that, when used with iPhones already in the United States, perform the same functionality that the ITC found to infringe Masimo's patents. Masimo only discovered this ruling on Thursday, August 14, 2025, when Apple publicly announced it would be reintroducing the pulse oximetry functionality through a software update."
>
> The company is now asking the court for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to block the CBP's decision, and reinstate the original ruling that "determined that Apple's redesigned watches could be imported only to the extent the infringing functionality was completely disabled." As reported by Bloomberg Law, Masimo says the following in its supporting brief: "Each passing day that this unlawful ruling remains in effect irreparably deprives Masimo of its right to be free from unfair trade practices and to preserve its competitive standing in the U.S. marketplace." Masimo further argues that CBP's move "effectively nullified" the ITC's exclusion order against Apple. Apple's appeal of that ban is still pending before the Federal Circuit.
[1] https://9to5mac.com/2025/08/20/masimo-sues-us-customs-over-apple-watch-blood-oxygen-workaround/
[2] https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/MASIMOCORPORATIONvUNITEDSTATESCUSTOMSANDBORDERPROTECTIONetalDocke?doc_id=X7CR5AGJN19VIQVF66HVETLJRF
> The company [2]says US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) overstepped its authority and violated due process when it reversed its earlier decision on August 1 and allowed Apple to restore the feature. Moreover, Masimo says it found out about the decision when Apple publicly announced the return of the feature: "It has now come to light that CBP thereafter reversed itself without any meaningful justification, without any material change in circumstances, and without any notice to Masimo, let alone an opportunity for Masimo to be heard. CBP changed its position on Apple's watch-plus-iPhone redesign through an ex parte proceeding. Specifically, on August 1, 2025, CBP issued an 3 ex parte ruling permitting Apple to import devices that, when used with iPhones already in the United States, perform the same functionality that the ITC found to infringe Masimo's patents. Masimo only discovered this ruling on Thursday, August 14, 2025, when Apple publicly announced it would be reintroducing the pulse oximetry functionality through a software update."
>
> The company is now asking the court for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to block the CBP's decision, and reinstate the original ruling that "determined that Apple's redesigned watches could be imported only to the extent the infringing functionality was completely disabled." As reported by Bloomberg Law, Masimo says the following in its supporting brief: "Each passing day that this unlawful ruling remains in effect irreparably deprives Masimo of its right to be free from unfair trade practices and to preserve its competitive standing in the U.S. marketplace." Masimo further argues that CBP's move "effectively nullified" the ITC's exclusion order against Apple. Apple's appeal of that ban is still pending before the Federal Circuit.
[1] https://9to5mac.com/2025/08/20/masimo-sues-us-customs-over-apple-watch-blood-oxygen-workaround/
[2] https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/MASIMOCORPORATIONvUNITEDSTATESCUSTOMSANDBORDERPROTECTIONetalDocke?doc_id=X7CR5AGJN19VIQVF66HVETLJRF
Another case of spurious litigation? (Score:1)
by Bodrius ( 191265 )
I mean what do you mean there was no material change of circumstances? There was a statue made of gold and corning glass - those are *two* materials
Gold Masimo gold (Score:1)
by stabiesoft ( 733417 )
Maybe up Tim's game with platinum? [1]https://www.msn.com/en-in/food... [msn.com]
If Masimo has any doubts, CBP reports to donnie.
[1] https://www.msn.com/en-in/foodanddrink/other/made-in-us-a-24-k-gold-gift-for-trump-a-tariff-relief-for-apple-watch/ar-AA1K3yzn?apiversion=v2&noservercache=1&domshim=1&renderwebcomponents=1&wcseo=1&batchservertelemetry=1&noservertelemetry=1
Which patents are involved? (Score:2)
by jonwil ( 467024 )
Massimo claims that Apple violated their patents. Lots of news articles about the lawsuit out there but I can't find any information about which patents Apple is accused of violating...
Re:All this? For an..oximeter?? (Score:4, Interesting)
Masimo's ITC judgement wasn't for blood oximetry. It cited two specific claims. One was for bevelled corners. I don't remember what the other was, but it was similar.
> I know there’s a reason we measure blood O2.
Well, if you knew what those reasons were it would probably answer your question. Blood oxygenation is pretty stable for healthy people but that's not necessarily the case for people with things like heart and lung conditions. It's also useful for detecting sleep apnea and estimating how severe it is.
Re: (Score:2)
The situation is stupid, but I'll give you the brief version that I remember.
Masimo complains to ITC that Apple is infringing on its pulse oximetry patents. ITC says, "you have no complaint unless you have a domestic product."
Masimo concocts a plan for a watch real quick-like that includes their oximetry tech, complaint now passes muster, and Apple is found infringing, and imports are banned.
Apple then complains to ITC that Masimo's watch-that-really-isn't infringes on Apple's design patents... and wins
Re: (Score:2)
> It appears this “new” technology that needs to be defended so voraciously, is basically an oximeter. As in that thing you can buy anywhere for 20 bucks.
There's pulse oximetry, and there's pulse oximetry.
Masimo's is stupid advanced, and patented to all fucking hell. They use LEDs of 2 or 3 different wavelengths, can't remember.
Apple hired a former engineer of theirs and implemented some of their patented goodies.
Masimo oximeters go for a little more than $20.
> But more to the point, of ALL the measurements and readings that have ever been taken from my body signals, blood oxygen was the most consistent. Which basically made it the most pointless.
You.... think your SpO2 represents that of all humans?
> Sure. I know there’s a reason we measure blood O2. But every day? On command with your watch? Someone please explain the demand here, because all I see is a feature scheme targeting hypochondriacs.
I think maybe you actually don't know what we measure SpO2.
Some people aren't hypochondriacs. They have actual medical disorders that require mo