Why did Apple get $250 in its patent case against Masimo?

A federal jury ruled in favour of Apple , determining that earlier versions of Masimo’s smartwatches infringed on two of Apple ’s design patents. The case, part of a larger intellectual property dispute between the tech giant and the health monitoring company, centred on Masimo’s W1 and Freedom models. The jury awarded Apple a mere $250 in damages, the statutory minimum for infringement in the United States. Despite this minimal financial compensation, Apple 's legal team argued that the primary goal of the lawsuit was to secure an injunction against the sales of Masimo’s smartwatches.

In a significant twist, the jury found that Masimo’s current smartwatch models did not infringe on Apple’s patents, which Apple had claimed were copied. Masimo responded positively to the jury’s verdict, noting that it favoured them on "nearly all issues" and emphasised that the ruling pertained only to a "discontinued module and charger."

Masimo’s statement underscored that the jury's decision was a win for them, particularly regarding the injunction against their current products, which Apple sought. Apple, in turn, expressed satisfaction with the jury's ruling, asserting that it would help protect the innovations developed for their customers. The ongoing conflict has roots in accusations from Masimo that Apple poached its employees and misappropriated its pulse oximetry technology during discussions of a potential partnership. Last year, Masimo succeeded in convincing the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) to block imports of Apple’s Series 9 and Ultra 2 smartwatches, citing infringement of Masimo’s blood oxygen level reading technology.
Apple has since appealed that ITC decision and resumed sales of its smartwatches after removing the contested technology. In a countersuit filed in 2022, Apple alleged that Masimo had copied features from its Apple Watch for use in its own devices, and claimed that Masimo was using litigation as a strategy to clear the way for its products. Masimo characterised Apple's lawsuit as "retaliatory" and an attempt to circumvent the ongoing litigation process.